The United States Patent and Trademark Office has approved a patent for a space vehicle that is propelled by a superconducting shield that can change the curvature of space-time outside the craft in a way that counteracts gravity.
See US 6,960,975 to Volfson, entitled “Space vehicle propelled by the pressure of inflationary vacuum state” issued 1 November 2006
Antigravity devices defy the laws of physics demonstrated empirically by Galileo and formulated by Newton. “This is not the first such patent to be granted, but it shows that patent examiners are being duped by false science,” Robert Park of the American Physical Society in Washington DC said in a report on the matter in Nature magazine.
Although having a Ph.D. in Physics myself, I would be wary of dismissing something merely because it appears to contradict the laws of Physics. One is reminded of the famous remark of Lord Kelvin, president of the Royal Society, that “Heavier-than-air flying machines are impossible.” 1895
Anyway, the invention claims “A space vehicle propelled by the pressure of inflationary vacuum state is claimed comprising: a hollow superconductive shield, an inner shield, the inner shield disposed inside said hollow superconductive shield, said inner shield comprising an upper shell and a lower shell, a support structure, the support structure disposed between said hollow superconductive shield and said inner shield concentrically to said hollow superconductive shield, said support structure comprised of an upper rotating element and a lower rotating element, upper means for generating an electromagnetic field, the upper means for generating an electromagnetic field disposed between said hollow superconductive shield and said upper shell, affixed to said upper rotating element at an electromagnetic field-penetrable distance to said hollow superconductive shield, lower means for generating an electromagnetic field, the lower means for generating an electromagnetic field disposed between said hollow superconductive shield and said lower shell, affixed to said lower rotating element at an electromagnetic field-penetrable distance to said hollow superconductive shield, electric motors, the electric motors disposed inside said hollow superconductive shield along the central axis of said hollow superconductive shield, power source, the power source disposed inside said hollow superconductive shield, said power source electrically connected with said upper means for generating an electromagnetic field, said lower means for generating an electromagnetic field, and said electric motors, life-support equipment, the life-support equipment disposed inside said inner shield, a flux modulation controller, the flux modulation controller disposed inside said inner shield, said flux modulation controller in communication with said upper means for generating an electromagnetic field, said lower means for generating an electromagnetic field, said power source, and said electric motors, and a crew, the crew disposed inside said inner shield accessibly to said life-support and said flux modulation controller.” From a patenting perspective, I fail to see the logic in claiming the crew, since this is presumably not an intrinsic part of the device, and would not be sold by competitors. In the (unlikely) event that the technology is implemented in the lifetime of the patent, the patentee will have to resort to the doctrine of contributory infringement. Ah well… From a patenting perspective, I fail to see the logic in claiming the crew, since this is presumably not an intrinsic part of the device, and would not be sold by competitors. In the (unlikely) event that the technology is implemented in the lifetime of the patent, the patentee will have to resort to the doctrine of contributory infringement. Ah well…
From a patenting perspective, I fail to see the logic in claiming the crew, since this is presumably not an intrinsic part of the device, and would not be sold by competitors. In the (unlikely) event that the technology is implemented in the lifetime of the patent, the patentee will have to resort to the doctrine of contributory infringement. Ah well…
the application of electron spin has surprise the classic theory groups, nature has been doing this for years, but classic theory based on limited math has hindered much needed progress. the use of finite elements could be of great help. after all, theory, science, math are just tools, not the answer.
Consider this argument
Electrons have gravitational mass
electrons are effected by electro-magnetic fields
The photoelectric effect allows conversion of electrons to photons, which are not effected by gravity
super fluids and superconductors could allow the modulation of mass effects by altering the gravitational interaction of particles within an asymmetric closed loop.
If gravity is a particle or string, it will interact probabilistically with matter. What does it mean for an object to have momentum? What about motion is self perpetuating? To me it suggests a freewheeling nature to spacetime. Is the inertia of an object stored in the object itself or in the surrounding environment? It seems to make sense that inertia itself will be tied to valance bands within the atom corresponding to their energy.
[...] to defying gravity, for a less mundane approach, see: Anti-gravity Patent: the United States Patent Office Looking Patently Foolish Possibly related posts: (automatically generated)Michael Jackson Update…Obituary: Michael [...]