You are part way there. A micro singularity could be magnetically suspended and not affect anything except what you want to.

We are also not talking about pulling these galaxies towards you, but instead warping space/time to bring them towards you without you having to physically travel to it - kind of like folding up the carpet in ripples, and then laying it out again after you step to the other side of it.

Getting the picture now? With gravity, you can do this.

-S

As an academic and a professional researcher, I always stub my eye on the word "Proven".

I am not aware of any proof of anti-gravity. That does not mean that the proof is not out there though. Anyone got a citation of this proof?
I would be most interested in reading it.

I call bull$hit.

How can you fold nothing?

And the carpet analogy is a poor one. If you lay the carpet out, you are still moving yourself to stay at the end of it while you straghten it again.
Space-time is not a carpet that can be distorted at will.
Please tell me that I do not have to explain the special theory of relativity using the "beam of light orbiting the earth and reflecting bewixt two mirrors" example.

My argument is that gravity may be faster than light. After all, how long does it take the Moon's orbit to affect Earth's tides? None at all. Instant transmission of gravitic effect.

Naturally, we do not understand the reasons for such an instantaneous effect. Prhaps it is beyond our reach, or perhaps not.

Still, I would bet that we can harness gravity before we ever master the ability to bend "nothing"

At the last, I posit this; Lex Parsimoniae.

I know there are points of gravity neutrality which are known as Lagrange Points. And in a black hole, if gravity is so massive, does it fold over on itself and become anti-gravity? Just a thought.

-S

PS. There is a Lagrange point between the Earth and the moon at some point. Around 160,000 miles if I am not mistaken.

PPS. It is at 199,703 miles. I was close.

I guess it depends on the definition of anti-gravity.

Do we mean free from gravity?
or do we mean an opposing force (gravity-like) in an opposing vector?

But Lagrange Points have nothing to do with anti-gravity if the meaning of anti-gravity means no gravity. Lagrange Points deal with equalizing gravity in a theoretical three-body problem space (which incidentally does not exist in nature) where two of the bodies exercise forces upon the third body to the perceived (observed) effect that the third body is not being affected (observed in a vector quantity) by any one of the two bodies.

This is not anti-gravity but gravity from opposing vectors with the congruent resultant of no relative observed movement on the vector as defined by the two foci.

For there to be anti-gravity, we would be restricted to a two body problem space (which also does not exist in nature) where one body is, at the same time, attracting the second body (gravity) and repelling the second body (anti-gravity) with the observed result of the second body having no gravity effects (null gravity).

Gravity technicly moves at the speed of light (299,792,458 metres per second). It takes light about 9 minutes to reach us from the sun so if the sun suddenly dissapeared, the Earth wouldn't go flying away till about 9 minutes later.

Another fun fact about the speed of light (In extreme conditions): Black holes shoot out particles in jets at their poles due to their massive magnetic fields. Some of these particles are ejected faster than the speed of light and even travel backward in time as they go.

Give me links to sources that support these ideas and I will add you to the list of "smartest people I have ever not met".
Seriously.

It would resolve some questions that have been bugging me for a decade if the source is credible.

Please, plz plzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzz post links. With a cherry on top.

Okay... Here is a well done video that illustrates how it works really well. Go to the video called "A New Picture of Gravity" and watch it for the first several minutes. It illustrates what gravity is and how it works as well as the fact that the effects of gravity travels at the speed of light. Nice animations are done to show how everything works.
http://www.pbs.org/wgbh/nova/elegant/program.html

This whole program is up on this page and is very interesting if you're interested in string theory. It's about three hours and well worth watching. I'm not an advocate of string theory, but it does include some interesting ideas.

As for the particles flying out of the black holes traveling faster than the speed of light and backwards in time, that may take some more work as I read that in various books (Possibly Stephen Hawking's books and several others). I'll try to find a link describing it.

THANK YOU!

I'm setting tommorrow aside solely for watching this stuff. Unfortunately, I have to go to work soon, so I'll get back to you later via PM if that's ok.
Thanks again!:up:

That's okay. I read a LOT of books on this stuff.
If you want to research the particle/black hole thing, it deals with the theory of Hawking Radiation (Which we don't have the technology to actually detect yet). It involves the part of the theory where particle pairs are created near the event horizon. One regular particle and one anti-particle. One of them falls into the black hole and the other flies out. I've found a lot of articles about Hawking Radiation online, but none of them have gone into detail about the particles traveleing backward through time. I know I've read it in several of my books, but the maker knows which ones and I have a LOT. :doh:

This stuff about being able to travel faster than light and warping and twisting time, it fascinates me no end but by god it does my head in!:doh:

There's a college professor, Ronald Mallett in my state who believes that he has a formula for a working time machine that would actually be buildable and testable involving rotating beams of light in a ring lazer. Right now, the only thing that could be sent back in time this way would be a single particle and nothing can travel back to before the machine is turned on. He's aquireing funding to build the machine in order to test it.
He's written a really good book (kind of his autobiography combined with how he ultimately got the idea for the equasions for this method of time travel). Spike Lee aparently read the book and is now going to make a movie from it.

Video:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=EWnoMaSgYPY

This is a link to Ronald Malletts' website:
http://www.physics.uconn.edu/~mallett/main/main.htm

This is an article that was written several years ago about Malletts' theory:
http://www.spacedaily.com/news/timetravel-01a.html

And for those who understand theoretical physics equasions, this is the actual paper Mallett published about his theory:
http://www.physics.uconn.edu/~mallett/Mallett2003.pdf

Yeah... I read as much of this stuff as I can. It fascinates me... and yes.. it makes my head spin. :D

I'm not full of BS! But I will not argue since you are wrong.

Research the project Ligo for the warp in space time caused by gravity. If it were BS, gravity waves from a Super Nova would hit the Earth at the same time precisely. Problem is, and Einstein theorized this, they don't. Ligo has now proved it.

So go fathom my carpet idea. It is real. :D Might make your head hurt though! :p Poke poke!

-S

PS. Let me help you on your journey! http://www.ligo.caltech.edu/

PPS. If your head doesn't explode, we can then move on to String Theory. Then it will. Be sure to keep a cam on it. I want to see the after effects!! :p :D:D:D

PPPS. I will even post some relevant information for you:

Damn. Doublepost.

According to their site and related articles, Advanced LIGO isn't even operational yet, and initial LIGO has yet to detect a gravity wave. Neither they nor any other installation have detected one yet. I don't know enough to really disagree with you, but LIGO certainly doesn't prove or disprove anything at this point.

I'm trying to. I'll have to get through the links Blacklight gave me and get back to you. Head is hurting already:damn:



We'll see;)