What exactly are electrogravitics?

  • Context: High School 
  • Thread starter Thread starter IndustriaL
  • Start date Start date
Click For Summary
SUMMARY

Electrogravitics refers to a theoretical concept related to anti-gravity devices, primarily associated with the work of Thomas Townsend Brown. The discussion highlights that electrogravitics employs electrostatics to repel charged objects from a high-tension supply. Critics argue that the concept lacks empirical support, citing NASA's inadequate replication of Brown's experiments involving dual-layer Yttrium barium copper oxide disks, which reportedly achieved only a 2.1% reduction in gravitational effects. The consensus is that electrogravitics remains a largely unproven hypothesis.

PREREQUISITES
  • Understanding of electrostatics and its applications
  • Familiarity with Thomas Townsend Brown's experiments
  • Knowledge of Yttrium barium copper oxide properties
  • Awareness of NASA's experimental methodologies
NEXT STEPS
  • Research the principles of electrostatics in depth
  • Study Thomas Townsend Brown's original experiments and findings
  • Investigate the properties and applications of Yttrium barium copper oxide
  • Examine NASA's experimental protocols and their implications for replication studies
USEFUL FOR

Researchers, physicists, and enthusiasts interested in theoretical physics, anti-gravity technologies, and the historical context of electrogravitics.

IndustriaL
Messages
13
Reaction score
0
what exactly are electrogravitics?
 
Physics news on Phys.org
A new word.
 
Oo, oo, my go!

What exactly is quantasmutation?
 
masudr said:
A new word.


hardly!

______
 
Did a quick websearch. It seems 'electrogravitics' is a general term applied to 'anti-gravity' devices (they probably proove GM wrong or something). Anywho, it's clear to see they just employ electrostatics to essentially repel a charged object from a high tension supply of some description.
 
IndustriaL said:
what exactly are electrogravitics?


don't pay any attention to such words...it is rubbish that has never been proven...i am sure this is another Podkletnov-invention

marlon
 
IndustriaL, do you want to defy gravity? Just stand up. It's amazing how your head doesn't fall under the influence of gravity.
 
I thought that podkletnov got at most a 2.1% reduction in 'gravity', No?

He had used a dual layer Yttrium barium copper oxide for the disk...From what I understood the two different layers (crystal structures) formed because of how quickly the one side of the disk was cooled. When NASA replicated his experiment they just generally assumed that since there is a very large conductive difference between the two layers, that they could use an entirely different element for one of the layers...for costs sake.

I am not as knowledgeable as some people on this forum I am sure, that aside I found NASA's review of his work to be piss-poor, and their saying that they found nothing is nearly worthless. I would have liked to see someone who took it seriously review it, not to discredit the hard working folks over @ NASA, but after reading through their review I came to the conclusion that should have tried to get ahold of the original disk in the first place...I am assuming that it is/was the property of Moscow U? Failing that if they could not fabricate it at least out of the same elements, then they should NOT have done the experiment at all! IMO they discredited his work with a setup that was destined to fail from the beginning.
 


As per an alternate thread.

FlexGunship said:
"Electrogravitic" already has a definition: Electrogravitics is a failed hypothesis proposed by Thomas Townsend Brown and Brown's subsequent extensive experimentation and demonstrations of the effect.
 
  • #10


Six year old thread, does not meet our current standards. Necroposts deleted, left flex's explanation in response to necroposts.
 
Last edited:

Similar threads

  • · Replies 0 ·
Replies
0
Views
469
  • · Replies 11 ·
Replies
11
Views
3K
  • · Replies 12 ·
Replies
12
Views
575
  • · Replies 5 ·
Replies
5
Views
21K
  • · Replies 1 ·
Replies
1
Views
3K
  • · Replies 16 ·
Replies
16
Views
3K
  • · Replies 5 ·
Replies
5
Views
2K
  • · Replies 3 ·
Replies
3
Views
3K
  • · Replies 40 ·
2
Replies
40
Views
7K
  • · Replies 5 ·
Replies
5
Views
2K