On the essence of gravitational interaction and attraction. Does antigravity exist? Antigravity: more likely than not Antigravity from the ether

Will it not be a secret and a sacramental revelation for you that all modern science came out of science fiction? Cellular and global networks, holography and military satellites, as well as much more, first appeared in a hot imagination, and only then were converted into material equivalents. The more interesting for us are the long-described and known phenomena, which, nevertheless, modern science does not consider practically achievable. We are talking about anti-gravity or the so-called zero gravity. In the 20th century, they began to talk about such a phenomenon quite seriously, when the quantum world was discovered. Newtonian physics seemed wretched and imperfect compared to the world of elementary particles, where teleportation and antigravity were the same familiar phenomena as the fall of a body to the ground in our world of macro parameters. However, the use of previously unknown properties on more large facilities than positrons and electrons, the question was not even raised.

In general, to understand what gravity is, many have tried in different ways. In the 19th century, theories of gravity were created based on the concept of the ether - a universal medium that fills all space. Ether particles hit from all sides evenly, but from the side of the Earth some of them are delayed, and therefore we are pushed towards the Earth by particles from other directions. This theory is very illustrative, but leads to an unsolvable problem within its framework with the explanation of the lack of heating of the planets due to bombardment by ether particles. Nevertheless, the ether theory is still alive in some circles far from academic science.

In the 20th century, Einstein tried to give a deeper explanation of gravity by replacing the concept of a gravitational field with the concept of the curvature of space near a massive body. In a curved space, natural motion is also curved, uneven, the bodies seem to naturally roll into a spatial pit, and no fields need to be introduced. This idea has created fertile ground for the mind games of theoretical physicists who study the stars and the universe, and they have been playing them with passion for almost a hundred years. These games have benefited astronomy by initiating a number of discoveries, the most interesting of which are black holes, which can be tunnels in space-time leading to other worlds. Some observable astronomical objects are indeed similar to black holes in a number of ways, but it is not yet possible to prove this directly. However, for earthly practitioners, this theory did not give anything new, in comparison with Newton's ideas, either in calculations or in explanations, since there are no other possibilities to bend space, except with the help of very large masses, in Einstein's theory.

About a few years ago, there were reports of a possible violation of the law of gravity on the scale of the solar system, when data were received on inexplicable changes in the nature of the movement of 4 space probes that reached the edges of the solar system. NASA researchers have found that the speed of the probes is decreasing faster than Newton's law suggests, suggesting a force of unknown origin. One of the probes is Pioneer 10, which was launched to the outer planets of the solar system in 1972, is now behind Jupiter, but is still available for radio communication with the Earth. By studying the Doppler frequency shift of the radio signal coming from the probe, the scientists were able to calculate how fast the ship was moving through space. Its trajectory has been carefully monitored since 1980. It turned out that "Pioneer-10" slows down much faster than it should. Initially, it was thought that this could be due to the force generated by small gas leaks, or that the ship deviated from the course under the influence of the gravity of an invisible body located in the solar system.

Then analysis of the trajectory of another spacecraft, Pioneer 11, launched in 1973, showed that this probe was also under the influence of the same mysterious force. It was then that it became clear that scientists were faced with the influence of some unknown force to science: after all, Pioneer-11 was at the opposite end of the solar system from Pioneer-10 and therefore the same unknown body could not influence it. In addition, there is an assumption that the same force acted on the Galileo ship on its way to Jupiter and on the Ulysses probe when it flew around the Sun. The probe can change its speed only due to the emission of matter, for example, due to the evaporation of something from it. However, taking into account possible phenomena of this kind did not give a satisfactory quantitative explanation of the effect, and the only explanation remains a change in the force of attraction. Opponents object that the change in gravity should have an effect on the motion of distant planets, which is clearly not observed.

Data on the quantitative values ​​of deviations from Newton's law were not reported in the general press, but, most likely, we can talk about small amendments to the law of gravity, so this is unlikely to have an impact on the problem of antigravity on Earth. Direct measurements of the forces of attraction between massive balls under normal terrestrial conditions have been carried out repeatedly, and Newton's formula has been confirmed with high accuracy.
Some time ago, attempts were reported to detect antigravity on the scale of galaxies (megaworld). The fact is that astronomers have long established the fact of the recession of galaxies from each other. According to the Big Bang hypothesis, based on Einstein's theory, such a recession is due to the inflation of space-time, which began from the moment the Universe was formed. It is like a condom with a pattern: it is inflated and the details of the pattern scatter. But there is also a more physical hypothesis, based on the assumption that there is energy in space that causes antigravity. Regions with such energy should be located between galaxies and are not directly observed, but should have a repulsive effect on galaxies and cause curvature of the paths of light passing nearby.
Confirmation of the existence of antigravity in space would, of course, be a great scientific discovery, although it is problematic to talk about its impact on terrestrial technology, since the scale of distances on Earth is completely different.

So, it seems that the existing physics of gravity puts an end to attempts to develop any ideas of antigravity. It is no coincidence that in reputable academic scientific communities, antigravity projects still belong to the same category as projects to create perpetual motion machines. This analogy is not accidental. Indeed, if by simple means it was possible to learn how to turn gravity on and off, then it is easy to build a generator that receives energy simply from the gravitational field of the Earth: we take a massive load connected by a rod to the axis of the electric generator, turn off gravity, raise the load to a great height and turn on gravity, load falls and turns the generator rotor, then the cycle repeats. Since the gravitational field is determined only by the mass of the Earth and cannot change, an inexhaustible energy resource is clearly visible here. And nothing inexhaustible in nature, as experience teaches, does not happen. This means that the assumption of the possibility of a simple control of gravity contradicts the law of conservation of energy, which is the cornerstone of science. So it is impossible to control gravity for free. But there are individuals who are trying to refute it.

In the second half of the 20th century, inventors switched to experiments with rotating electromagnetic fields. Of the reports that have appeared in the press on this topic, three works can be singled out: John Searle, Yuri Baurov and Evgeny Podkletnov, because, firstly, they got into serious scientific journals and, secondly, these works continue to this day, despite to scandals and harsh criticism.

In 1946, John Searle announced his discovery of the fundamental nature of magnetism. He discovered that the addition of a small radio frequency (~10 MHz) alternating current component during the manufacture of permanent ferrite magnets gave them new and unexpected properties, namely, when such magnets interacted, strange forces arose, leading to unusual movements of the magnet system. Searle developed a generator from these magnets and started experimenting with it. The generator has been tested for outdoors and driven by a small motor. It produced an unusually high electrostatic potential of the order of a million volts (according to him), which manifested itself through electrostatic discharges near the generator.
One day the unexpected happened. The generator continued to spin, began to rise up, separated from the engine and soared to a height of about 50 feet. Here it hovered a little, its rotation speed began to increase, and it began to emit a pinkish glow around itself, indicating the ionization of the air. The radio receiver located next to the researcher turned on spontaneously, apparently due to powerful discharges. Eventually the generator accelerated to high speed and disappeared from view, probably heading into space. In any case, his fall was not found.
Since 1952, Searle and a group of employees have manufactured and tested more than 10 generators, the largest of which was disc-shaped and reached 10 m in diameter. Searle refused to publish his research in scientific publications, but agreed to cooperate with the Japanese professor Seiko Shinichi and provided him with a description of the main points of magnet manufacturing technology. In 1984, Searle's work was reported by the German popular science magazine Raum & Zait. Searle is currently retired and does not appear to be involved in any projects.

Searle's ideas attracted enthusiasts in different countries, including in Russia, where they are being developed privately by several research groups, although official science refrains from commenting. Therefore, the appearance in 2000 in the reputable scientific physics journal “Letters to ZhTF” of V.V. Roshchina, S.M. Godina from the institute high temperatures RAS, Moscow, under the title “Experimental study of physical effects in a dynamic magnetic system”. They described the version of the Searle generator they developed and the unusual results and strange effects obtained on it. One result was a 35% reduction in the weight of the plant, which weighs 350 kg. Later, the authors published a book with detailed description experiments and his own theory of the phenomenon. No information on the continuation of this work could be found.

Another direction of research in the field of overcoming gravity is associated with Yu.A. Baurov. More than 20 years ago, while analyzing astronomical data, he put forward a hypothesis about the existence of a fundamental vector potential in our galaxy. As is known from physics, the vector potential is an unobservable directly physical quantity, whose gradient (that is, spatial inhomogeneity) manifests itself as a magnetic field. Using magnetic systems that create a large intrinsic vector potential and orienting it relative to the potential of the Universe, one can obtain large forces and use them to overcome gravity. According to this hypothesis, a preferred direction should exist in space, and the maximum force effects should be observed in this direction. Baurov set up several experiments to confirm his theory, which he described in 1998 in his book “The Structure of Physical Space and new way getting energy." Apparently, this is the only one of all areas of research in which a sound idea is used that does not contradict scientific provisions. Nothing is known about the continuation of these studies.

The last of the works on antigravity, which became sensational, is associated with the name of the Russian physicist Yevgeny Podkletny, who left for Finland in the 1990s. He studied the properties of superconductors and in 1992 experimented with a setup that used a disk of superconducting ceramic cooled with liquid nitrogen and spun to a speed of five thousand revolutions per minute. In one of the experiments, Podkletnov noticed that the plume of smoke from his colleague's cigarette rose unexpectedly more sharply to the ceiling above the disk. Subsequent measurements recorded a 2% reduction in weight for any item placed over the disc. Screening of gravity was detected even on the next floor of the laboratory. Unfortunately, all subsequent attempts to repeat Podkletnov's experiments failed. The scandal that arose around an unexpected sensation cost Podkletnov his scientific career, and his numerous followers - a lot of money thrown to the wind. NASA spent $600,000 building its own facility, but in the end, its experts said the Russian scientist's methodology was flawed from the start.

Nevertheless, enthusiasts of this direction of antigravity remain. According to the BBC, with reference to the almanac Jane's Defense Weekly, the American company Boeing came to grips with the work of Podkletnov in order to independently decide how much one can believe in various rumors and newspaper ducks. The fact is that the Podkletny effect has some theoretical justification. Back in 1989, the American researcher Dr. Ning Li, who works at the Space Flight Center. Marshall, theoretically predicted that a well-spun superconductor placed in a powerful magnetic field could become a source of a gravitational field, and the strength of this field would be sufficient for measurements in the laboratory. In 1997, Ning Li began developing what would be the world's largest anti-gravity generator. The disk in its unit will have a diameter of at least 33 cm and a thickness of 12.7 mm. Podkletnov himself, according to the German newspaper Sueddeutsche Zeitung, is working on a new device that does not shield, but reflects gravity, and does it in a pulsed mode. In his opinion, the impulse generator of gravity will soon "be able to overturn a book at a distance of one kilometer." He predicts the emergence of a new type of small aircraft. In general, the story with Podkletnov continues.

Carefully examining historical data, one can assume that antigravity in nature rather exists than vice versa, but its mechanism is still completely unclear. The state of affairs with experiments to control the weight of objects is by no means satisfactory. It is also rather surprising that, despite the numerous cases of evidence of levitation, apparently no one has been able to fully study this phenomenon, which allows skeptics to reasonably doubt the reality of the existence of this phenomenon. But this can be given the following analogy with ball lightning. Even 50 years ago, scientists were skeptical about eyewitness accounts, believing that these were some kind of visual phenomena that occur during a thunderstorm. Now the number of observations has crossed a certain threshold, and no one doubts the existence of the phenomenon. But this did not change anything - there is still no explanation of the nature of the phenomenon, and no one has been able to conduct a rigorous experimental study of it! Professor Kapitsa tried to simulate ball lightning in the laboratory, and even at the beginning he obtained plausible plasma balls, but this work was not continued, and the mystery of natural ball lightning remains unsolved.

Comrade! If you are interested similar articles - leave

Gravity and antigravity.

This topic is interesting and most importantly, the discussion begins in the middle. That is, there is universal gravitation, and laws are derived on the basis of this phenomenon. But the laws and formulas have already been deduced for the phenomenon, and the essence of the phenomenon of universal gravitation itself remains in assumptions and hypotheses. BUT after all, formulas are the final result, the translation of physical laws into the language of mathematical formulas. And in mathematics, formulas can be transformed indefinitely, almost every new formula can be used to make a dissertation. NO, I do not at all belittle the leading role of mathematics in understanding the world, but this world is in formulas. And the formula describes the phenomenon, but the principle of the phenomenon is described by physics and chemistry.
So Gravity - translated from Latin - heaviness. Therefore, no matter how we twist the question is about the force of attraction. Therefore, the title can be rewritten as "Attraction and Anti-Attraction". That is, we return to the law of universal gravitation, according to which all bodies move due to this very gravitation, interacting with each other (roughly). Everything would be fine if it weren't for gravity. That is, briefly, as a result of the interaction of gravitational forces (attraction), gravity arises. Let's read it differently - as a result of the interaction of gravitational forces (attraction), gravity (gravity) arises. Absurd, we prescribe the same force twice, only on different languages. Moreover, we are beginning to deduce laws for it. Instead of studying the phenomenon itself. So I dare to propose to your court an assumption (hypothesis) about the emergence of attractive forces and their physical basis ..
Why do planets, galaxies, star systems rotate, I suggested in my hypothesis “El. magnetic structure of the Universe”, I don’t want to repeat myself again, there is a hypothesis on the forum. And that is why the force of attraction arises, I will try to express my vision of this phenomenon below.
Let's start with the fact that everything in this endless world consists of atoms, including you and me. Atoms revolve around the nucleus (I will not go into the deep labyrinths of physics in detail, for simplicity and brevity. I hope you will forgive me.) But the rotation excites an electromagnetic field in them, but this field has several components. The first is the electromagnetic field of our galaxy, which arises from the interaction of black holes (see the El. Magnetic Hypothesis of the Structure of the Universe). The second component is the electromagnetic field of the Sun. The third is the electromagnetic field of the Earth, which arises as a result of the rotation of the Earth's core (see ibid.).
Therefore, all objects, I repeat all objects without exception, have an electromagnetic field (their own) since they consist of atoms. Therefore, each substance, in addition to the atomic weight and electric charge of the atom, has an electromagnetic charge of the atom (I generalize). So the sum of the atomic electromagnetic charge of a substance is equal to the sum of the forces of attraction, that is, the force of gravity. I will try to explain with a rough example - my weight is 70 kg, therefore the electromagnetic force of the atoms of my body is equal to the sum of the interaction of all electromagnetic forces at a given point in space. The main and largest force of interaction is the electromagnetic field of the Earth and the total atomic El. magnetic charge of all the atoms of my body. This is if we take for example two magnets, at a great distance the interaction of forces will be zero (roughly), as the forces of attraction approach, they will increase. Moreover, the more powerful one of the magnets, the greater the total field. That is why, when moving away from the Earth, the force of attraction decreases due to a decrease in the total Electromagnetic force of interaction.
The question arises why we do not attract other objects to ourselves. And because the main magnetic field is the magnetic field of the earth. As a result of the vector addition of forces, our attraction vector is directed almost perpendicularly straight down. Thus, we can calculate the atomic total El.magnetic component only outside the limit of the Earth's magnetic field. Of course, it can also be derived by the analytical method, but this is a separate material.
But the question arises - why, outside the strong influence of the Earth's magnetic field, we do not attract objects. After all, the speed of rotation of electrons (I will build examples only on them, so as not to go deeper) around the nucleus remains the same, therefore, the charge according to the formula e \u003d ms2 remains the same as on Earth, and therefore El. the magnetic component has not disappeared anywhere. Yes, it has not disappeared anywhere, the magnetic component now acts between the atomic lattice, doing its main purpose, forming the forces of interatomic interaction, therefore we do not fall apart, but only under a certain pressure created artificially. And this is a consequence of the atoms of what substance we consist of. Let me explain using the example of gases and metals.
In gases, oxygen, carbon, hydrogen, etc., in the atomic structure, the charge of the nucleus is small and therefore it is balanced by one or two electrons. For hydrogen, in this way, the total magnetic charge (component) will be proportional to the electronic e \u003d ms2, for oxygen, e \u003d 2 (ms2), well, etc. Depending on the number of electrons, the multiplier will also change. The magnetic field of gases is close to constant, so their bonds are weak. When heated, the speed of rotation of electrons around the nucleus increases, therefore, the electronic charge increases and El increases proportionally. magnetic component (field). Two magnetic fields of the same name El repel each other and the gases begin to move upward, since the resulting El magnetic component of the atom at the macrolevel exceeds the magnetic component of the Earth. This phenomenon is especially pronounced in ball lightning, where the speed of rotation of electrons is equal to the speed of light (but this is a separate issue). From the above example, it follows that the lift force of the gas depends on temperature (not to be confused with aerodynamics).
For solid objects, for example, let's take metals, El has a variable magnetic component (field). This is also directly related to the structure of the atom. The more electrons revolve around the nucleus, the higher the frequency of the variable magnetic component (field). An alternating field is obtained as a result of rotation in different orbits and in different planes of electrons, as a result, the addition or subtraction of the magnetic components of different planes on the traverses of the intersection of the electron orbits is obtained. It is the variable magnetic component of atoms that makes bonds in solids stronger, but it also increases the El. magnetic interaction with the Earth's magnetic field, increasing weight and attraction. But here the picture is somewhat different when heated. When a certain temperature is reached, the speed of rotation of electrons around the nucleus increases and the alternating magnetic field becomes close to constant, the atomic lattice loses bonds based on the alternating magnetic field, instead of adding the magnetic forces of the atoms, they begin to repel each other as the same name. And the metal with strong heating begins to crumble into sparks.
It is the interaction of the electronic components of the atoms of matter that explains some changes in properties outside the zone (relatively) of the action of the Earth's magnetic field.
Some conclusions can be drawn from the hypothesis of the physical basis of the Law of Universal Gravitation proposed by me.
First, the force of attraction can only be in rotating bodies, it cannot be one because it appears as a result of the interaction of several components.
The second is the force of attraction, this is the total electromagnetic atomic component of matter.
Third, the speed of its occurrence is equal to the speed of light, this is due to its origin and interaction.
Fourth, this force is present at any point on Earth, even in an artificial vacuum. The same is true for all objects in the universe.
Fifth - it is absent only in space, but not due to balance. And due to the fact that space consists of matter (matter), which is based only on the nucleus and it is neutral (see El.mag. hypothesis of the structure of the Universe), i.e. the atom consists only of the nucleus. Therefore, it (matter) has a chaotic structure and atoms can only have rectilinear motion.

Tsvetkov Igor
Arkhangelsk

David PrattPart 1

1. Gravity and mass

Gravity and antigravity. It is said to have been the sight of an apple falling from a tree, which gave Isaac Newton the idea around 1665 that the force that pulls the apple to the earth is the same as the force that keeps the moon in its orbit around the earth. The reason the Moon doesn't fall to earth is because of the counteracting effect of its orbital motion. If the Moon were to stop its orbital motion and fall to Earth, the acceleration due to gravity it would experience on the Earth's surface would be 9.8 m/s² - the same as an apple or any other object in free fall would experience. .

Newton's universal law of gravity states that the gravitational force between two bodies is proportional to the product of their masses and inversely proportional to the square of the distance between them. To calculate the gravitational force (F), their masses (m1 and m2) and the gravitational constant (G) are multiplied together and the result is divided by the square of the distance (r) between them: F = Gm1m2 / r².

According to Newtonian theory, the gravitational force between two or more bodies depends on their mass. However, the gravitational acceleration of an attracted body is independent of its mass: when falling off the tower at the same time and ignoring air resistance, the tennis ball and the cannonball fall to the ground at the same time. This is explained using Newton's second law of motion, which states that the force applied to a body is equal to the body's mass times its acceleration (F = ma); this means that gravity pulls larger masses more strongly.

If we combine the two equations of Newton's force (F = ma = Gm1m2 / r²), we can conclude that in order to balance the equation, the gravitational constant (G) must have rather curious dimensions m³ / kg.s² (volume divided by mass times the square of time) .

Complex Newton

In his book "The Gravitational Force of the Sun" 1 Pari Spolter criticizes the orthodox theory that gravity is proportional to the amount or density of inertial mass. She goes so far as to say that there is no reason to include any term for mass in any of the force equations.

She points out that in order to deduce from the Earth-Moon system that gravity obeys the inverse square law (that is, that its strength decreases by the square of the distance from the attracting body), Newton did not need to know or estimate the masses of the earth and moon.

He only needed to know the acceleration caused by gravity on the surface of the Earth, the radius of the Earth, the orbital speed of the Moon, and the distance between the Earth and the Moon. And, as already mentioned, the gravitational acceleration of a body in free fall does not depend on its mass, which has been verified with a high degree of accuracy. 2

Spolter dismisses Newton's second law (F = ma) as an arbitrary definition or convention, and argues that it is not a force, which equals mass times acceleration, but weight. Her equation for a "linear" force is F = ad (acceleration distance). Its equation for the "circular" force (including gravity) is F = aA, where a is the acceleration and A is the area of ​​a circle with a radius equal to the average distance of the orbiting body from the central body.

She believes that the acceleration of gravity decreases per square of distance, but the gravitational force of the sun, earth, etc. is constant for any body orbiting it. In the Newtonian theory, on the contrary, it varies both depending on the mass of the orbiting body and on its distance from the central body.

Spolter's theory contains several shortcomings. First, her attempt to deny any connection between force and mass is unconvincing. It does not call into question the equation for the momentum of a body (momentum = mass-velocity), but momentum with a repetition rate represents a force, which therefore cannot be independent of mass. Moreover, weight is a type of force, not a separate phenomenon.

Secondly, Spolter would have us believe that there are two types of force and energy - one linear and one circular - with different dimensions: it gives a "linear" force of measurement in square meters per second squared, while "circular" force sets the dimensions of meters cube per second squared. But there is no justification for inventing two forms of force and energy and for abandoning homogeneous dimensions in this way.

Third, defining a "circular" force in such a way that the gravitational force of a star or planet remains the same, no matter how far we are from it, is illogical, if not absurd. Also, Spolter disingenuously says that her equation implies that acceleration is inversely proportional to the square of distance.

If it were true that a = F / A, with force (F) proportional to r 3 (see below) and area (A = πr 2) proportional to r 2 , the acceleration would in fact be directly proportional to r 3 / r 2 = g!

spolter believes that her equation of gravity solves the riddle of Kepler's third law of planetary motion: this law states that the ratio of the cube of the average distance (r) of each planet from the Sun to the square of its period of rotation (T) is always the same number (r³ / T² = constant ). Its gravity equation can be rewritten: F = 22π 3 r 3 / T 2 . As explained elsewhere, the 22π3 factor is completely arbitrary, and Spolter simply concealed the real value of Kepler's constant. 3

Gravity does not involve the acceleration of some (average) area around the Sun, as Spolter's equation suggests. Rather, it involves the relationship between the mass-energy of the Sun and the planets, as well as the associated massless gravitational energy. And he does not act through empty space, but through the energy ether - something that is so lacking in Spolter's physics, and in orthodox physics (see Section 3).

As shown in the following sections, the net gravitational force need not be directly proportional to inert mass, since characteristics such as rotation and charge can change the gravitational properties of the body.

Spolter proposes that it is the rotation of a star, planet, etc. that somehow generates the gravitational force and causes other bodies to revolve around it - an idea put forward by a 17th century astronomer Johannes Kepler . 4 But she doesn't offer a mechanism to explain how it might work, or what makes a celestial body spin in the first place.

It shows that the average distance of successive planetary orbits from the center of the Sun or successive lunar orbits from the center of the planet is not random, but follows an exponential law, indicating that gravity is quantized at the macro level, just as electron orbits in an atom are quantized at the micro scale. . There is no generally accepted theory to explain this key fact.

Devil's Dictionary defines gravity as:

"The tendency of all bodies to approach each other with a force proportional to the amount of matter they contain - the amount of matter they contain is determined by the strength of their desire to approach each other." 5

Such is the seemingly circular logic underlying the standard theory of gravity. The figures given for the masses and densities of all planets, stars, etc. are purely theoretical; no one has ever put one on the scales and weighed! However, it should be kept in mind that weight is always a relative measure, since one mass can only be weighed in relation to some other mass.

The fact that the observed speeds of the artificial satellite match the predictions is usually taken as evidence that the foundations of Newtonian theory must be correct.

The masses of celestial bodies can be calculated from the so-called Newton's form of Kepler's third law, which assumes that Kepler's constant ratio r³ / T² is equal to the body's inertial mass times the gravitational constant divided by 4π² (GM = 4π²r³ / T² = v²r [if we replace 2πr / v on T]). Using this method, the average density of the earth is found to be 5.5 g/cm3.

Since the average density of the Earth's outer crust is 2.75 g/cm3, scientists have concluded that the density of the Earth's inner layers must increase substantially with depth. However, there are good reasons to question the standard earth model.
6

Gravitational anomalies

gravitational anomalies. The official CODATA (1998) value for the gravitational constant (G) is 6.673 +/- 0.010 x 10 -11 m3 kg -1 s -2 . While the values ​​of many "fundamental constants" are known to eight decimal places, the experimental values ​​of G often diverge only after three, and sometimes do not even agree about the first; this is considered an embarrassment in the age of precision. 1

Assuming the correctness of Newton's gravitational equation, G can be determined in Cavendish-type experiments by measuring a very small angle of deviation of the torsion balance from which large and small metal spheres are suspended, or a very small change in the oscillation period. Such experiments are extremely sensitive and difficult to perform.

For example, electrostatic attraction between metal spheres can affect the results: in one experiment in which a small mass of platinum was coated with a thin layer of lacquer, consistently lower G values ​​were obtained. 2 Note that changes in experimental G values ​​do not necessarily mean that G itself changes; they probably mean that the local manifestation of G, or terrestrial gravity (g), varies with environmental conditions.

Scientists have sometimes speculated about whether G is indeed constant over very long periods of time, but no conclusive evidence has been found of a gradual increase or decrease. 3

In 1981, a paper was published showing that measurements of G in deep mines, wells, and underwater gave values ​​about 1% higher than those currently accepted.4 In addition, the deeper the experiment, the greater the discrepancy. However, no one paid much attention to these results until 1986, when E. Fischbach and colleagues reanalyzed data from a series of experiments by Atvos in the 1920s that were supposed to show that gravitational acceleration is independent of mass or composition. attracted body.

Fischbach et al. discovered that there was a persistent anomaly hidden in the data, which was dismissed as a random error. Based on these laboratory results and observations in the mines, they announced that they had found evidence of a near-field, composition-dependent "fifth force." Their work caused a lot of controversy and caused a storm of experimental activity in physics laboratories around the world. 5

Most of the experiments did not find any evidence of composition dependence; one or two, but this is usually due to experimental error. Several earlier experimenters found anomalies inconsistent with Newtonian theory, but the results have long since been forgotten.

For example, Charles Brush did very precise experiments, showing that metals with very high atomic mass and density tend to fall very slightly faster than elements with lower atomic mass and density, even if the same mass of each metal is used.

He also reported that the constant mass or amount of certain metals could be greatly altered in weight by changing their physical state. 6 His work was not taken seriously by the scientific community, and the very precise spark photography technique he used in his free-fall experiments was never used by other researchers.

Experiments by Victor Crémier have shown that the gravity measured in water on the surface of the Earth seems to be one-tenth greater than that calculated by Newtonian theory.
7

Unexpected anomalies keep appearing. Mikhail Gershtein showed that "G" varies by at least 0.054% depending on the orientation of the two test masses relative to the fixed stars. 8

Gary Vezzoli found that the strength of gravitational interactions varies from 0.04 to 0.05% depending on the temperature, shape and phase of the object. 9 Donald Kelly demonstrated that if the absorptive power of a body is reduced by magnetization or electrical stress, it is attracted to the earth at a speed less than g. 10

Physicists usually measure g in a controlled manner, which includes not changing the absorptive capacity of bodies from their normal state. A team of Japanese scientists found that a right-spinning gyroscope falls slightly faster than when it's not spinning. 11 Bruce DePalma discovered that rotating objects falling in a magnetic field accelerate faster than g. 12

As mentioned above, gravity measurements under earth's surface consistently higher than predicted on the basis of Newton's theory. Skeptics simply assume that hidden stones of unusually high density must be present.

However, measurements in mines, where the densities are very well known, gave the same anomalous results as measurements at a depth of 1673 meters in a uniform ice sheet in Greenland, well above the underlying rock. Harold Aspden notes that in some of these experiments Faraday cage-type enclosures are placed around two metal spheres for electrical shielding purposes.

He claims that this can cause an electrical charge to be induced and held onto the spheres, which in turn can cause the "vacuum" (or rather aether) to rotate, causing an influx of aether energy that is lost as excess heat. , resulting in errors of 1 or 2% in G measurements.

All freely falling bodies - individual atoms as well as macroscopic objects - experience a gravitational acceleration (g) of about 9.8 m/s² near the Earth's surface.

The value of g varies little across the Earth due to its deviation from the ideal sphere (i.e. equatorial bulge and local topography) and - in the traditional theory - to local changes in the density of the crust and upper mantle. It is believed that these "gravitational anomalies" are fully explainable in the context of Newtonian theory.

However, the net gravitational force is not necessarily proportional to the inertial mass. Section 2 will present evidence for gravitational shielding, gravity abolition, and antigravity.

Based on Newtonian gravity, one would expect the gravitational pull over continents and especially mountains to be higher than over oceans. In reality, gravity on top of large mountains is less than expected based on their apparent mass, while over the ocean surface it is unexpectedly high.

To explain this, the concept of isostasy was developed: it was postulated that low-density rock exists 30–100 km below the mountains, which supports them, while denser rock exists 30–100 km below the ocean floor. However, this hypothesis is far from proven. Physicist Maurice Allais commented: “There is an excess of gravity over the ocean and a shortage over the continents. The theory of isostasis only provided a pseudo explanation for this.”

The standard simplified theory of isostasy contradicts the fact that in areas of tectonic activity, vertical movements often amplify gravitational anomalies rather than restore isostatic equilibrium. For example, the Greater Caucasus has a positive gravity anomaly (usually interpreted to mean that it is overloaded with excess mass), but it is rising rather than falling.

Newton's theory of gravity is being questioned by various aspects of the behavior of the planets in our solar system. The rings of Saturn, for example, present a big problem. 16

There are tens of thousands of rings and curls, separated by the same number of gaps, in which the substance is either less dense or practically absent. The complex, dynamic nature of the rings seems to defy Newtonian mechanics. The gaps in the asteroid belt present a similar puzzle.

Another anomaly concerns deviations in the orbits of the outer planets (Jupiter, Saturn, Uranus and Neptune). "Planet X" beyond Pluto has been hypothesized; it should be two to five times more massive than Earth and 50 to 100 times farther from the Sun than Earth (currently Pluto is 30 times farther from the Sun than Earth).

The largest object outside Pluto discovered thus far (July 2005), known as Xena, is about 30% larger than Pluto (which is only two-thirds of the Moon). It has a highly elongated orbit and is currently three times farther from the Sun than Pluto. Two other minor planets about 70% the size of Pluto were seen at about the same distance as Xena. Whether there is enough mass beyond Pluto to account for all the orbital deviations remains to be seen.

1. Pari Spolter, The Gravitational Force of the Sun, Granada Hills, CA: Orb Publishing, 1993.
2. Ibid, p. 39-40, 141-147; "Equivalence principle passes atomic test", physicsweb.org/articles/news/8/11/8/1.
3. "Etometry and Gravity: An Introduction", section 10, davidpratt.info.
4. Johannes Kepler, "The Epitomy of Copernican Astronomy" (1618–21), in The Great Books of the Western World, Chicago: Encyclopaedia Britannica, Inc., 1952, vol. 16, p. 895-905.
5. Quoted in Meta Research Bulletin, 5:3, 1996, p. 41.
6. See Secrets of the Inner Earth, davidpratt.info.

Gravitational anomalies

1. D. Kestenbaum, "The Legend of G.", "The New Scientist", January 17, 1998, pp. 39–42; Vincent Kiernan, "The Gravitational Constant in Air," New Scientist, April 26, 1995, p. 18.
2. Spolter, The Gravitational Force of the Sun, p. 117; Pari Spolter, "Problems with the Gravitational Constant", Infinite Energy, 10:59, 2005, p. 39.
3. Rupert Sheldrake, Seven Experiments That Could Change the World, London: The Fourth Estate, 1994, p. 176-178.
4. F. D. Stacy and G. J. Tuck, "Geophysical Evidence for Non-Newtonian Gravity", Nature, v. 292, 1981, pp. 230-232.
5. Seven experiments that could change the world, p. 174-176; Gravitational force of the Sun, s. 146-147.
6. Charles F. Brush, "Some New Experiments in Gravity," Proceedings of the American Philosophical Society, vol. 63, 1924, p. 57-61.
7. Victor Cremier, "The Study of Gravity", Comptes Rendus de l'académie des Sciences, December 1906, pp. 887-889; Victor Kremier, "The Problem of Gravity", prof. Pur. et Appl., v. 18, 1907, pp. 7-13.
8. Mikhail L. Gershtein, Lev I. Gershtein, Arkady Gershtein and Oleg V. Karagioz, "Experimental Evidence that the Gravitational Constant Changes with Orientation", Infinite Energy, 10:55, 2004, p. 26-28.
9. G. K. Vezzoli, “Properties of water materials associated with electrical and gravitational interactions”, Infinite Energy, 8:44, 2002, p. 58-63.
10. Stephen Mooney, From the Cause of Gravity to the Revolution of Science, Apeiron, 6:1-2, 1999, p. 138-141; Josef Hassleberger, "Comments on Gravity Drop Tests Performed by Donald A. Kelly," Nexus, December 1994-January 1995, pp. 48–49.
11. H. Hayasaka et al., “The possibility of antigravity: Evidence from a free-fall experiment using a spinning gyroscope,” Speculations in Science and Technology, v. 20, 1997, pp. 173-181; keelynet.com/gravity/gyroag.htm.
12. S. C. Holding and G. J. Tuck, "Newtonian Gravitational Constant Shaft Redefined," Nature, v. 307, 1984, pp. 714-716; Mark A. Zumberge et al., "Results from Experiment G in Greenland 1987", Eos, v. 69, 1988, p. 1046; R. Poole, "The Fifth Force Update: More Trials Needed", Science, v. 242, 1988, p. 1499; Ian Anderson, "Ice Tests Provide Stronger Evidence for Fifth Force," New Scientist, 11 August 1988, p. 29.
13. Harold Aspden, "Gravity and Its Thermal Anomaly", Infinite Energy, 7:41, 2002, p. 61-65.
14. MFC Allais, "Should the Laws of Gravity Be Revisited?", Part 2, Aero/Space Engineering, v. 18, Oct 1959, p. 52.
15. WR Corliss (Comp.), Moon and Planets, Glen Arm, MD: Digest Project, 1985, p. 282-284.
16. Tom Van Flandern, Dark Matter, Missing Planets & New Comets, Berkeley, CA: North Atlantic Books, 1993, pp. 315-325.
17. Jeff Hecht, "Our solar system even bigger,” New Scientist, August 6, 2005, p. 10-11; "The Tenth Planet," New Scientist, February 4, 2006, p. 20.

2. Shielding, electrogravity, antigravity

Both gravity and electromagnetism obey the inverse square law, that is, their strength decreases by the square of the distance between the interacting systems. In other respects, however, they appear to be very different.

For example, the gravitational force between two electrons is 42 orders of magnitude (10 42) weaker than their electrical repulsion. The reason why electromagnetic forces do not completely suppress gravity in the world around us is that most things are made up of an equal amount of positive and negative electrical charges, the forces of which cancel each other out.

While the electrical and magnetic forces are clearly bipolar, gravity is generally considered to be always attractive, so that similar contractions do not occur.

Another difference is that the presence of a substance can change or shield electrical and magnetic forces and electromagnetic radiation, while the weakening of gravity was supposedly not measured by placing a substance between two bodies, and this is assumed to be true regardless of the thickness of the substance. discussed.

However, some experiments have found evidence that can be interpreted in terms of either gravitational shielding or deviations from the inverse square law.
Gravity shielding

In a long series of very sensitive experiments in the 1920s Kirino Majorana found that placing mercury or lead under a suspended lead sphere acts as a screen and slightly reduces the Earth's gravitational pull. No attempt has been made to reproduce his results using the same experimental techniques.

Other researchers, based on other data, have concluded that if gravitational absorption exists, it must be at least five orders of magnitude smaller than Majorana's experiments suggest. 1

Tom Van Flandern argued that anomalies in the movement of some artificial satellites Earth during eclipse seasons can be caused by shielding the Sun's gravity. 2

Some researchers have found gravitational anomalies that are inconsistent with Newtonian and Einsteinian models of gravity during solar eclipses, but others have found no such anomalies. During solar eclipses in 1954 and 1959, the physicist Maurice Allais(who received Nobel Prize in economics in 1988) discovered perturbations in the direction of swing of a paraconical pendulum (that is, one suspended on a ball). 3

Erwin Sacks And Mildred Allen confirmed the effect Allais when they measured significant changes in the period of a torsion pendulum during a solar eclipse in 1970. One interpretation is that such anomalies are due to the moon pulling on the Sun's gravity, resulting in a slight increase in Earth's gravity. Allais and Saxl also found unexpected daily and seasonal swings in the pendulum. 4

A similar gravity anomaly was measured using a dual pendulum system during the formation of the Earth-Sun-Jupiter-Saturn line in May 2001. 5 During a total solar eclipse in 1997, a Chinese team took measurements with a high-precision gravimeter. However, unlike the Allais effect, they found a decrease in the Earth's gravity.

Moreover, the effect occurred immediately before and after the eclipse, but not at its height. 6 In the course of observations carried out since 1987, Shu-wen Zhou and his collaborators confirmed the occurrence of an anomalous force of horizontal oscillations when the Sun, Moon and Earth are aligned, and showed that this affects the nature of the graininess in crystals - the spectral wavelengths of atoms and molecules and the speed of atomic clocks. 7

Various conventional explanations have been proposed to explain gravitational anomalies during eclipses, such as instrument errors, gravitational effects of denser air due to cooling of the upper atmosphere, seismic disturbances caused by observers moving to and from a location where the eclipse is visible, and the tilt of the earth. due to cooling.

In a recent review (2004), the physicist Chris Duif argued that none of them is convincing. He believes that gravitational shielding cannot explain the results either, as it would be too weak (if it exists at all). Independent Researcher Thomas Goody plans to conduct a series of rigorous eclipse experiments over the next few years in the hope of shedding more light on the subject. 8

Possible evidence for gravity is provided by experiments reported by Evgeny Podkletnov and his colleagues in 1992 and 1995.

When a ceramic superconductor was magnetically lifted and rotated at high speed in the presence of an external magnetic field, objects placed above the spinning disc changed weight. * A weight reduction of 0.3-0.5% was achieved, and when the rotation speed was slowly reduced from 5000 rpm to 3500, the maximum weight loss was about 2% within about 30 seconds. recorded, although not with the same frequency.

* The weight of a body is equal to its mass multiplied by the acceleration due to gravity (W = mg). Strictly speaking, an object with a mass of 1 kg weighs 9.8 newtons on the ground. However, weights are usually given in kilograms, and a gravitational acceleration of 9.8 m/s² at the earth's surface is taken for granted. If the force of gravity acting on a body decreases, its weight also decreases, but its mass (in the sense of "amount of matter") remains the same.

Note that the apparent weight of a body will change if it is accelerated by non-gravitational forces that either counteract or reinforce the local gravitational field; for example, an electrodynamic force can be used to suppress gravity.

Other researchers have found that Podkletnov's experiment is extremely difficult to fully reproduce in full (Podkletnov did not disclose the exact recipe for making his superconductors), but stripped-down versions produced small effects (on the order of one part in 104). 10

From 1995 to 2002, NASA's Marshall Space Flight Center attempted a full experimental replication of the Podkletnov configuration, but ran out of resources. A privately funded replication was completed in 2003 but showed no signs of gravity. NASA concluded that this approach was not a viable candidate for a breakthrough. 11

Gravity and electromagnetism

Various experimental results point to a connection between electromagnetism and gravity.

For example, Erwin Saxl found that when the torsion pendulum was positively charged, it took longer to complete its arc than when it was negatively charged. Maurice Allais conducted experiments in 1953 to investigate the effect of a magnetic field on the motion of a glass pendulum oscillating inside a solenoid and concluded that there was a relationship between electromagnetism and gravity. 1

Bruce DePalma conducted numerous experiments showing that rotation and rotating magnetic fields can have anomalous gravitational and inertial effects. 2 Podkletnov's experiments seem to confirm this.

A controversial researcher of electrogravity is John Searle , English technician electronics. 2 In 1949, he discovered that a small voltage (or electromotive force) was induced in rotating metal objects. The negative charge was outside and the positive charge was around the center of rotation. He reasoned that free electrons were ejected centrifugal force leaving a positive charge at the center.

In 1952, he built a generator about three feet in diameter based on this principle. When tested outdoors, it reportedly produced a powerful electrostatic effect on nearby objects, accompanied by crackling sounds and the smell of ozone.

The generator then lifted off the ground, continuing to accelerate, and rose to a height of about 50 feet, breaking communication with the engine. He briefly hovered at that altitude, still accelerating. A pink halo appeared around him, indicating the ionization of the surrounding atmosphere. It also made the local radios work on their own.

Finally, it reached another critical rotational speed, quickly gained altitude and disappeared from view.

Rice. 2.1. Searl disk.

Searle said that he and his colleagues subsequently created over 50 versions of their "frivolity disc" in various sizes and learned how to manage them. He claims that the authorities harassed him, resulting in wrongful imprisonment and the destruction of much of his work, so he had to start over.

His claim that one of his ships circled the world several times in the early 1970s without being detected does nothing to enhance his credibility.

Although Searl was fired as scammer, there are indications that the "Searl effect" may involve a real anomaly. Two Russian scientists V.V. Roshchin And CM. Godin, conducted an experiment with a Searle-type generator and observed a 35% weight reduction, a glow, an ozone smell, anomalous magnetic field effects, and a drop in temperature. They concluded that orthodox physics without aether could not explain these results. 4 However, separating genuine gravitational anomalies from electrodynamic artifacts in such experiments is not an easy task.

In the 1980s, an electrical engineer Floyd Sweet developed a device consisting of a set of specially prepared magnets wrapped in wires, known as a vacuum triode amplifier (VTA), which is designed to excite oscillations in magnetic fields. He could give out much more energy than he consumed, capturing energy from the "vacuum" (that is, the energy of the ether).

In one experiment, he lost 90% of his original weight before the experiment was stopped for safety reasons. Later, Sweet managed to get the VTA to hover and accelerate upwards, with the device tethered. He became very paranoid after the alleged assassination attempt and died without revealing the full secrets of his invention. 5

The "Hutchison effect" refers to a set of phenomena discovered by accident by inventor John Hutchison in 1979. Electromagnetic effects caused by a combination of power equipment, including Tesla coils, have caused heavy objects to levitate (including the canonical 60-pound ball), melting of dissimilar materials such as metal and wood, abnormal heating of metals without burning adjacent materials, spontaneous destruction of metals, and changes in the crystal structure and physical properties of metals.

The effects have been well documented on film and videotape and have been witnessed numerous times by chartered scientists and engineers, but are difficult to reproduce consistently. 6

Team Pentagon spent several months investigating the Hutchison effect in 1983. Four investigators ran away, which is real, while the fifth simply dismissed everything that happened as "smoke and mirrors". Many phenomena were noted: a heavy-duty molybdenum rod was bent into an S-shape, as if it were soft metal; a piece of high-carbon steel ground at one end and reduced to lead at the other; a piece of PVC plastic vanished into thin air; pieces of steel wood are inserted in the middle of pieces of aluminum; and all sorts of objects levitated.

Two aerospace companies (Boeing and McDonnell Douglas) have also investigated the Hutchison effect. The problem is its randomness and unpredictability. Indeed, some researchers believe that this is at least partly due to Hutchison's own unconscious psychokinetic abilities. 7

Podkletnov says that a 2% weight loss was achieved with his superconducting device, which is about 10 billion times more than is allowed in general relativity. Unknown, Podkletnov claimed that if superconductors spin 5-10 times faster than normal around 5000 rpm, the disc experiences so much weight loss that it takes off. 8

Joe Parr And Dan Davidson they say they have measured weight losses of up to 50% in a "gravity wheel" - a small wheel with copper triangles around the circumference, which is rotated on a shaft by a high-speed motor between permanent magnets. installed on both sides. 9

Aether scientists Paulo and Alexandra Correa have also demonstrated that gravity can be controlled by electromagnetic means. In one experiment, a piece of gold weighing 43 milligrams suspended from a bracket wooden beam coupled with a sensitive electronic balance (far away) was quickly reduced in weight by 70%.

This was achieved by superimposing an electrical frequency adjusted to match that of the golden anti-graviton (as it is called in Correas etherometry models). This method is able to provide 100% weight reduction for objects of known composition in the range of 100 milligrams.

It is estimated that between 2,000 and 3,000 experimenters worldwide are conducting unorthodox research on technologies that go beyond currently accepted scientific paradigms, including gravity control devices and "free energy". 11 Correas are known for their rigorous, experimental approach.

They say they observed weight loss with their PAGD (Pulsed Abnormal Glow Discharge) reactors, but the fact that the observations were difficult to reproduce led them to believe that they did not adequately shield the experiments from electrodynamic artifacts found in the input wires or in the arrangement of liquid conductors. Not all alternative researchers are as cautious and self-critical as this one, and the standard of research is not the same.
Biefeld-Brown effect

Region electrogravity was first developed by physicist and inventor Thomas Townsend Brown (1905-1985) starting in the mid-1920s. He discovered that if an electrical capacitor* using a heavy dielectric material with a high charge storage between its plates is charged between 75,000 and 300,000 volts, it will move towards its positive pole - this later became known as Biefeld-Brown effect ,

He found that the thrust grew exponentially with increasing voltage, and that the greater the mass of dielectric material between the plates, the greater the effect. He attributed this force to an electrostatically induced artificial gravitational field acting between the capacitor's plates. He received several patents for his devices, and some of his results have been replicated by other researchers. 1

Capacitors are devices that store electrical charge in the space between two separate, oppositely charged electrodes. Their ability to store electrical energy can be greatly increased by introducing a solid dielectric material into the space separating the electrodes. Dielectrics are materials that conduct electricity poorly (such as ceramics).

Brown's work aroused the interest of the US military. In 1952, an Air Force Major General witnessed a demonstration in which Brown operated a pair of 18-inch disc profiles suspended at opposite ends of a rotating arm. With electricity of 50,000 volts, they traveled at a speed of 12 miles per hour.

However, in the same year, a Naval Administration researcher wrote a report concluding that the disks were driven by the pressure of negative ions hitting the positive electrode (ionic wind) rather than by changing gravity.

Rice. 2.1 Installing Brown's Electrokinetic Flying Disc.
Patent No. 2,949,550 August 16, 1960

Paul LaViolette considers Brown's discovery to support his theory that negative charges such as electrons generate an anti-gravity field (see Section 3). He's writing:

Brown's disks were charged with a high positive voltage on a wire running along their leading edge and a high negative voltage on a wire running along their trailing edge. When the wires ionized the air around them, a dense cloud of positive ions would form in front of the ship, and a corresponding cloud of negative ions would form behind the ship.

Brown's research showed that, like the charged plates of his capacitors, these ion clouds induced a gravitational force from minus to plus.

As the disk moved forward in response to its self-generated gravitational field, it carried clouds of positive and negative ions with it, with a corresponding electrogravity gradient. Hence, the discs will ride their advancing gravity wave like surfers ride an ocean wave. 2

Rice. 2.2 Side view of one of Brown's circular flying discs showing the location of its ionic charges and induced gravitational field - from LaViolette data.

At the end of 1954 Brown operated a set of 3-foot-diameter saucers for military officials and representatives of a number of major aviation companies. When 150,000 volts were applied, the disks rotated around a course of 50 feet in diameter so rapidly that the object was immediately classified. Later Interavia magazine reported that the speed of the disk reached several hundred miles per hour at a voltage of several hundred thousand volts.

A declassified aviation industry intelligence report indicates that by September 1954 years Pentagon began a secret government program to develop a manned anti-gravity craft of the type that Brown had proposed two years earlier.

However, Brown was not officially involved in this project. In 1955 and the following years, he conducted tests in a vacuum chamber that proved that his devices continued to experience thrust even in the absence of ionic wind. By 1958, he had succeeded in developing a 15-inch-diameter domed saucer that, when energized between 50,000 and 250,000 volts, rose and hung in the air, supporting an additional mass equal to 10% of its mass. weight.

Rice. 2.3 Brown's setup to test a device capable of withstanding levitation.

In the mid-1950s, more than ten major aviation companies were actively involved in electrogravity research.

Since then, there has been no information about any anti-gravity work done by the US military. LaViolette suggests that covertly developed electrogravity technology was applied to a bomber- invisible B-2 to provide an auxiliary driving mode. His opinion is based on the disclosure of the fact that B-2 electrostatically charges both the leading edge of its wing-shaped body and the jet exhaust stream to high voltage.

Positive ions emitted from its wing leading edge will create a positively charged parabolic ion canopy ahead of the craft, while negative ions injected into its exhaust stream will form a trailing negative space charge with a potential difference in excess of 15 million volts. . [This] will create an artificial gravitational field that will induce a non-reactive force on the aircraft in the direction of the positive pole.

An electrogravity drive of this type could allow the B-2 to operate at greater than unity thrust efficiency when cruising at supersonic speeds. 4

Rice. 2.4 B-2 stealth bomber.
Each plane costs more than two billion dollars.

Rice. 2.5 Side view of the B-2 showing the shape of its electrically charged Mach-2 supersonic shock wave and exhaust flow. Solid arrows show the direction of the ion flow; dashed arrows show the direction of the gravity gradient induced around the ship - according to LaViolette.

B-2 pilots and engineers openly ridiculed LaViolette's assumptions. The official explanation is that encasing the B-2 in a static electricity shield is designed to reduce its radar and thermal signature and make it ultra-stealthy. Some authors claim that this also reduces air resistance and thereby improves its lift, but this is achieved aerodynamically rather than electrogravitationally. 5

Nature effect Biefeld-Brown

Thomas Bader And Chris Fasi

Biefeld-Brown(BB) continues to cause controversy. According to the classical BB effect, the greatest force on an asymmetric capacitor (that is, a force in which the two electrodes are of different sizes) is in the direction from the negative (larger) electrode to the positive (smaller) electrode.

Thomas Bader And Chris Fasi from the US Army Research Laboratory confirmed that when a high voltage of about 30,000 volts is applied to an asymmetrical capacitor (in the form of a "lifter"), the capacitor experiences a net force towards the smaller electrode, but they found that the force is independent of the polarity of the applied voltage.

They calculate that the contribution of the ion wind is at least three orders of magnitude too small to explain the entire effect, and say that more experimental and theoretical work is needed to find an explanation.

They do not believe that the BB effect has anything to do with anti-gravity or that it demonstrates an interaction between gravity and electromagnetism. 6 Bader suspects that the asymmetric electric fields created by an asymmetric capacitor cause the charge of ions to flow around the capacitor, and the force of the back reaction "propels" it forward.

In 1996, a research group at the Honda Research and Development Institute in Japan conducted experiments that confirmed the BB effect. Here, too, an upward force was created (so that the capacitor seemed to lose weight) regardless of the polarity of the applied voltage.

Takaaki Musha believes that the effect may involve the creation of a new gravitational field within the atom by a high potential electric field due to an interaction between electricity and gravity, the mechanism of which is not yet understood. 7

The BB effect is said to be exhibited by cheap, lightweight devices known as "hoists" made of aluminum foil, balsa wood, and thin wire, and powered by a ground-based high-voltage power source. 8 Hundreds of independent researchers around the world are experimenting with these devices. The lower and larger electrode is a strip of aluminum foil stretched between balsa wood spacers.

The smaller electrode is a thin strip of wire set about one inch above the aluminum foil. When a charge of 30,000 volts is applied, a hissing noise is heard, and the athlete rises into the air to the level at which his cable reaches. Pull also occurs when the lifter is oriented horizontally, indicating that the effect is not due to gravity shielding.

The lift works whether the positive or negative lead is connected to the wire (leading electrode), although the thrust is slightly greater if a positive voltage is applied.

Rice. 2.6

NASA argues that the movement of ionized air molecules from one electrode to another explains the explosive effect and excludes it from the search for exotic new propulsion technologies.

So, if the B-2 did use anti-gravity technology based on the BB effect, NASA doesn't seem to know anything about it! However, in 2002 he received a patent for a tubular version of Brown's asymmetric capacitor motor, although he did not mention Brown's name. Such devices certainly create an ionic wind, as the breeze can be felt.

More stringent tests are required to determine to what extent the effect persists in a vacuum, as experiments to date have not been conclusive. An elevator experiment conducted at Purdue University in a vacuum chamber gave positive results, but tests by other researchers have given negative results. 9 It has not yet been proven that the "lifter" phenomenon involves more than electrostatic and electrodynamic effects.

Paulo And Alexandra Correa(see above and section 3), whose experimental and observational skills are clearly demonstrated by the various aether energy technologies they have developed, are planning to publish their own findings on the BB effect in the near future.

They have already made their position clear: experimental work T.T. Brown and his followers is extremely imperfect, since the initial effect of the explosive was confused with anomalous phenomena associated with the emission of electrons and cathodic reaction forces;

Assumptions LaViolette widespread; the charges trapped in ordinary capacitors do not have an anti-gravity effect, but the BB effect masks the true anti-gravity phenomenon associated with repulsion between like charges.

Gyroscopes: Newton in Spin

Rotating flywheels or gyroscopes can cause an "anti-gravity" effect. In 1989, Japanese scientists H. Hayasaka and S. Tackeuchi reported in a major journal that a gyroscope rotating around a vertical axis in vacuum experienced a slight weight loss directly proportional to the rotation speed. The effect was observed only for clockwise rotation (when viewed from above in their laboratory in the northern hemisphere).

The anomaly was buried in an avalanche of hasty criticism and misguided attempts to replicate the experiment. 1 In 1997, Hayasaka's group reported an experiment that confirmed their earlier results: when a gyroscope fell 63 inches in a vacuum between two laser beams, it took more than 1/25,000 of a second to cover that distance while spinning at 18,000 rpm. min clockwise (when viewed from above), which corresponds to a weight loss of 1 part per 7000. 2

If the flywheel or gyroscope is forced to precess* very significant weight loss can occur. Electrical engineering professor Erica Lightwaite (who died in 1997) once gave a demonstration at London's Imperial College of Science and Technology involving an 8-kg flywheel on a 2.7 kg prop shaft, which he could barely lift off the ground with his right hand,

After the flywheel was forced to precess, he was able to lift it easily on his little finger with less than 1kg of force. In another experiment, a young boy was tied to a pole on a turntable and handed a 1-meter rod, at the end of which was a rotating gyroscope weighing 20.4 kg.

When Rotary table accelerated, the gyroscope flew up into the air as easily as if a boy were opening an umbrella, and when it was slowed down, the gyroscope dropped to the ground. In whatever direction the gyroscope moved, the boy could easily support it.

Another remarkable effect is that if a vertical pencil is placed in the path of the precessing flywheel shaft, it can stop the precessional movement of the flywheel without causing a lateral force on the pencil; In other words, the flywheel generates little or no centrifugal force.

"Force pretreated" means that the gyroscope precesses faster than normal gravity. "Precession" means, for example, that while one end of the shaft is held stationary by the hand, the end carrying the rotating flywheel passes in a circle so that the shaft sweeps out the cone.

Rice. 2.7. One of Eric Laithwaite's gyroscope demonstrations. The top rotates at 2000 rpm and rises in a spiral path quite quickly. 3

Because there is no generally accepted theory to explain this phenomenon, most scientists tend to either ignore it or try to discredit it.

Leithweight was ostracized by the scientific establishment, especially after he used a lecture before the Royal Institution in 1974 to demonstrate that a pre-forced gyroscope becomes lighter and produces lift without any counterbalancing reaction force - contrary to Newton's third law of motion.

Royal Institute was not surprised: for the first time in 200 years, a guest lecture was not published, and Leithwaite was denied communication with the Royal Society. He continued to experiment with various complex gyroscopic setups and believed he had discovered an entirely new thrustless thrust system known as "mass transfer" which was covered by two patents.

Several other inventors such as Sandy Kidd And Scott Strahan, have created gyroscopic thrusters that develop reactionless thrust. For a time, Kidd received financial backing from an Australian company (until it went bankrupt) and British Aerospace, and his prototypes showed little anomalous strength under rigorous independent testing. He is still developing his devices and says they can now produce 7kg of thrust. 4

Harold Aspden States that unbalanced the linear force is generated by using the spin energy of the gyroscope, so conservation of energy is preserved. He explains this phenomenon with his model of aether physics: the rotation of the aether separates the flywheel from the flow of aether particles, which usually give it weight. 5

His theory can also explain the amount of lift measured in the Japanese gyroscope experiments. If the theory is correct, it would be more correct to say that gyroscopes can cause degravity or weight neutralization, rather than antigravity in the strict sense of the word.

1. V. Majorana, “On Gravity. Theoretical and experimental studies”, Phil. Mag., Vol. 39, 1920, p. 488-504; Q. Majorana, "Sur l'abissionption de la gravitation," Comptes Rendus de l'académie des Sciences, v. 173, 1921, pp. 478-479; Q. Majorana, "Quelques restores the natural absorption of gravity", "Journal of Physique et le Radium", I, 1930, pp. 314-324; Matthew R. Edwards (ed.), Pushing Gravity: New Perspectives on Le Sage's Theory of Gravity, Montreal, Quebec: Apeiron, 2002, p. 219-238, 259-266.
2. Tom Van Flandern, "Possible new properties of gravity", Astrophysics and Space Science, v. 244, 1996, pp. 249-261.
3. MFC Allais, "Should the Laws of Gravity Be Revisited?", Parts 1 and 2, Aero/Space Engineering, v. 18, Sep. 1959, pp. 46-52, and v. 18, Oct 1959, pp. 51-55 , http://allais.maurice.free.fr/English/media10-1.htm ; http://www.allais.info/allaisdox.htm.
4. EJ Saxl, "The Electrically Charged Torque of a Pendulum", Nature, v. 203, 1964, p. 136-138; E. J. Saxl and M. Allen, "Solar Eclipse of 1970 'as Seen' by a Torsion Pendulum", Physical Review D, v. 3, 1971, pp. 823-825; Magazine scientific research(www.scientificexploration.org), 10:2, p. 269-279, and 10:3, p. 413-416, 1996.
5. Gary C. Vezzoli, "Gravity Data During the May 18, 2001 Syzygy and Related Studies", Infinite Energy (www.infinite-energy.com), 9:53, 2004, p. 18-27.
6. Qian-shen Wang et al., "Accurate measurement of gravity changes during a total solar eclipse", Physical Review D, v. 62, 2000, 041101, http://home.t01.itscom.net/allais/blackprior/wang/wangetal.pdf; Xin-She Yang and Qian-Shen Wang, "A gravitational anomaly during the Mohe total solar eclipse and a new constraint on the gravitational shielding parameter", Astrophysics and Space Science, v. 282, 2002, pp. 245-253, www.eclipse2006.boun.edu.tr/sss/paper02.pdf.
7. Shu-wen Zhou, "Unusual Physical Phenomena Observed in the Alignment of the Sun, Moon, and Earth," Science and Technology of the 21st Century, Fall 1999, p. 55-61.
8. Chris P. Duif, "Review of conventional explanations for anomalous observations during solar eclipses", www.space-time.info/duifhome/duifhome.html; Govert Schilling, "The Shadow Over Gravity," New Scientist, November 27, 2004, p. 28-31; www.allais.info.
9. HER. Podkletnov, "Weak Gravity Shielding Properties of the YBa2Cu3O7-x Composite Bulk Superconductor at Temperatures Below 70 K in an Electromagnetic Field", 1995, www.gravity-society.org/msu.htm ; American Antigravity, americanantigravity.com/podkletnov.html.
10. Edwards, pushing gravity, r. 315.
11. Mark J. Millis, "Prospects for a Breakthrough Movement in Physics", 2004, www.lerc.nasa.gov/WWW/bpp/TM-2004-213082.htm.

Gravity and electromagnetism

1. EJ Saxl, "The Electrically Charged Torque of a Pendulum", Nature, v. 203, 1964, p. 136-138; Maurice Allais, "The action of a magnetic field on the movement of a pendulum", Science and Technology of the 21st Century, Summer 2002, p. 34-40.
   Primal Energy House (Bruce DePalma), www.depalma.pair.com; Gene Manning, The Coming Energy Revolution: The Quest for Free Energy, New York: Avery, 1996, p. 82-86.
2. Ro Sigma (Rolf Schaffranke), Ether-Technology: A Rational Approach to Controlling Gravity, Lakemont, GA: CSA Printing & Bindery, 1977, p. 73-82, 87-88, 108; John Davidson, "The Secret of the Creative Vacuum", Saffron Walden, Essex: Daniel Company, 1989, p. 200-216; Searle effect, www.searleffect.com.
3. V.V. Roshchin, S.M. Godin, "Experimental study of magnetic-gravity effects", www.rexresearch.com/roschin/roschin.htm .
4. The Coming Energy Revolution, p. 74-76; Thomas E. Bearden, Energy from a Vacuum, Santa Barbara, CA: Cheniere Press, 2002, pp. 305-321, 436-468, 455, 459-464, 502-503.
5. Mark A. Solis, "The Hutchison Effect - Explained", www.geocities.com/ResearchTriangle/Thinktank/8863/HEffect1.html .
6. Nick Cook, Zero Point Hunt, London: Arrow, 2002, p. 377-387.
7. Ibid, p. 342.
8. Dan A. Davidson, Free energy, Gravity and Aether", 1997, www.keelynet.com/davidson/npap1.htm ; Dan A.
9. Davidson, Shape Power, Sierra Vista, AR: RIVAS, 1997, p. 98-104.
10. Eugene F. Mullov, "A Matter of Gravity", Infinite Energy, 8:45, 2002, p. 6-8, aetherometry.com/mallove_letter2.html; Massfree Energy Technologies, www.massfree.com (Technologies).
11. Dan A. Davidson, Free Energy, Gravity, and Aether, 1997, www.keelynet.com/davidson/npap1.htm.

Biefeld-Brown effect

1. Paul LaViolette, Subquantum Kinetics: A Systems Approach to Physics and Cosmology, Alexandria, VA: Starlane Publications, 2nd ed., 2003, p. 243-259 (www.etheric.com); Paul LaViolette, "American Anti-Gravity Squadron", Thomas Valone (ed.), "Electrogravity Systems: Papers on a New Propulsion Technique", Washington, DC: Integrity Research Institute, 1999, p. 82-101; Thomas Townsend Brown website, www.soteria.com/brown; Rho-Sigma, Ether-Technology, p. 25-49.
2. US Anti-Gravity Squadron, p. 85.
3. Electrogravity systems, p. 8-44.
4. US Anti-Gravity Squadron, p. 82.
5. Cook, The Hunt for the Zero Point, p. 194-200.
6. Thomas B. Bauder and Chris Fasi, "Force on an Asymmetric Capacitor", Infinite Energy, 9:50, 2003, p. 34-44, http://jlnlabs.imars.com/lifters/arl_fac/index.html.
7. Takaaki Musha, "Possibility of a strong connection between electricity and gravity", Infinite Energy, 9:53, 2004, p. 61-64.
8. Infinite Energy, 8:45, 2002, pp. 6-8, 13-31, www.infinite-energy.com/iemagazine/issue45/thelifterphen.html; Jean-Louis Naudin, http://jnaudin.free.fr/lifters/main.htm; American Antigravity, http://tventura.hypermart.net.
9. Gravitec Inc, foldedspace.com/corporate.html ; Blaze Labs Research, www.blazelabs.com/l-vacuum.asp ; Tim Ventura, "Inertial reversal in lifters", americanantigravity.com.

Gyroscopes: Newton in the back

1. H. Hayasaka and S. Tackeuchi, "Anomalous Weight Loss During Rotation of a Gyroscope on the Ground", Physical Review Letters, 63:25, 1989, pp. 2701-2704; Vezzoli, "Gravity data during the May 18, 2001 syzygy and related studies", p. 18.
2. H. Hayasaka et al., “The possibility of antigravity: Evidence from a free-fall experiment using a spinning gyroscope,” Speculations in Science and Technology, v. 20, 1997, pp. 173-181; keelynet.com/gravity/gyroag.htm.
3. Alex Jones, Electronics & Wireless World, 93, 1987, p. 64.
4. Davidson, The Secret of the Creative Vacuum, p. 258-274; www.gyroscopes.org/propulsion.asp; Sandy Kidd, Per 2001: Revolutionizing the Laws of Physics, London: Sidgwick & Jackson, 1990.
5. H. Aspden, "Antigravity Theory", Physics Essays, 4:1, 1991, p. 13-19, in: Harold Aspden, Aether Science Papers, Southampton: Sabberton Publications, 1996, p. 2., p. 69, paper 13; H. Aspden, "Antigravity Electronics", Electronics & Wireless World, January 1989, p. 29–31.

3. Explaining gravity

Empty space, curved space and ether

Newton's theory of gravity suggests that gravity propagates instantaneously through empty space, meaning it is thought to be a form of action at a distance. However, in a personal letter, Newton himself dismissed the idea:

This gravity must be innate, inherent and essential to matter, so that one body can act upon another at a distance through a vacuum, without the mediation of anything else by which their action and force can be transmitted from one to another. the other is so great absurdity for me that I believe that not a single person who has competent thinking in philosophical questions will ever be able to get into it. 1

Newton periodically toyed with the idea of ​​an all-pervading ether filling his "absolute space" and thought that the cause of gravity must be a spiritual factor, which he understood to mean "God."

The need to postulate the ether emphasizes G. de Puruker :

We must either accept the existence of the ether or ethers, i.e., that extremely rarefied and ethereal substance that fills all space, whether it be interstellar or interplanetary or interatomic and intraatomic, or take action at a distance - action at a distance without the intervention of an intermediary or means transfers; and such action in remote areas is apparently impossible by all known scientific standards. Intelligence, common sense, logic. , to demand the existence of such an all-penetrating medium, whatever name we may call it. , 2

Logically, each type of force must ultimately be produced by the activity of material, though not necessarily physical, agents moving at a finite, though perhaps superluminal, speed.

In 1905, Albert Einstein dismissed the ether as "superfluous". However, he acknowledged that gravitational fields were present in all regions of space, and for a while he spoke of the "gravitational aether", but he turned it into an empty abstraction, denying it any energetic properties.

The fact that space has over 10 different characteristics - permittivity, elastic modulus, magnetic permeability, magnetic susceptibility, conductance modulus, electromagnetic wave impedance, etc. - is a clear indication that it is far from empty. But it is more reasonable to consider space as consisting of energy-matter, and not just "filled" with it.

But while Newton attributed gravitational attraction to the density of matter, Einstein suggested that the same amount of matter ("gravitational mass") somehow deformed the hypothetical four-dimensional "space-time continuum" and that this deformation caused the planets to revolve around the Sun.

In other words, gravity is not seen as a force that propagates, but is ostensibly the result of masses somehow miraculously distorting the "fabric of space-time" in their vicinity. Thus, instead of being pulled by the sun, the Earth is supposed to follow the closest equivalent of a straight line available to it through curved space-time around the Sun.

Relativists attribute the bending of starlight as it passes near the Sun mainly to the curvature of space. At Jupiter's distance, the curvature would be only 0.00078 arcseconds - and we have to believe that this slight "space-time" warp could cause a planet the size of Jupiter to revolve around the Sun! Moreover, "curved spacetime" is just a geometric abstraction - or rather a mathematical monster - and can in no way be considered an explanation for gravity.

While it is commonly claimed that relativity has been confirmed by observational data, there are alternative—and much more reasonable—explanations for all the experiments cited in its rationale.

General relativity states that matter, regardless of its electrical charge, creates only an attractive gravitational force and allows only very slight gravitational shielding or anti-gravity effects.

Also, it does not predict any relationship between electrostatic and gravitational fields. In fact, Townsend Brown's groundbreaking 1929 paper reporting the possible discovery of electrogravity was rejected by Physical Review because it contradicted general relativity.

Fields, strings, branes

According to quantum field theory, the four recognized forces — gravity, electromagnetism, and the weak and strong nuclear forces — arise from particles of matter constantly emitting and absorbing various types of force-bearing "virtual" particles (known as bosons) that are constantly flickering in and out of existence.

It is assumed that the gravitational force is mediated by gravitons - hypothetical massless uncharged infinitesimal particles moving at the speed of light. Since gravitons would presumably be identical to their antiparticles, this theory also seems to rule out antigravity, and also doesn't explain electrogravity.

Experimental support for these particle exchange theories is lacking, and it is not clear how they can explain attractive as well as repulsive forces. It is sometimes said that bosons carry a "message" telling matter particles to approach or move apart - but that doesn't explain anything at all.

Moreover, in the standard model carrying strength particles, such as particles of fundamental matter, are treated as infinitesimal zero-dimensional point particles, which is clearly absurd. As a result of these idealized representations, quantum computing tends to suffer from infinities that must be eliminated through a trick known as "renormalization".

Einstein spent the last 40 years of his life trying to expand the geometric concepts of general relativity to include electromagnetic interactions, and to unify the laws of gravity and the laws of electromagnetism into a unified field theory. Many other mathematicians also worked on this subject, and some of these theories introduced a fourth, folded dimension. None of these attempts have been successful, and the search for a unified theory continues.

Some scientists believe that string (or superstring) theory, which first appeared in the 1970s, is an important step towards a "theory of everything". String theory postulates that all material and force particles, and even space (and time!),

Also arise from vibrating one-dimensional strings, about a billion trillion trillion centimeters (10-33 cm) long, but with zero thickness, inhabiting a ten-dimensional universe in which six extra spatial dimensions are folded so small that they cannot be detected! This theory has no experimental support; indeed, detecting individual strings would require a particle accelerator at least as large as our galaxy.

Moreover, the mathematics of string theory is so complex that no one knows the exact equations, and even approximate equations are so complex that they have only been partially solved so far.

Some scientists believe that outside of string theory lies M-theory, which postulates a universe of 11 dimensions, populated not only by one-dimensional strings, but also by two-dimensional membranes, three-dimensional drops (tribranes), and higher one-dimensional objects, up to nine dimensions (nine bran).

It is even assumed that the fundamental components of the universe can be zero. 2 Such crazy ideas do not contribute to our understanding real world and simply show what surreal purely mathematical speculation can become.

Zero point field

According to quantum theory, electromagnetic fields (and other force fields) are subject to constant, completely random* fluctuations even at the theoretical temperature of absolute zero (-273 °C), when all thermal mixing ceases. As a result, "empty space" is believed to be teeming with zero-temperature energy in the form of fluctuating fields of electromagnetic radiation (zero-point field) and short-lived virtual particles (the "Dirac Sea"). 1

Formally, each point in space must contain an infinite amount of zero point energy. Assuming the minimum wavelength of electromagnetic oscillations, the energy density of the "quantum vacuum" has been reduced to an astronomical figure of 10108 joules per cubic centimeter!

Blavatsky writes:

“It is impossible to imagine anything without a reason; trying to do this makes the mind blank. 2

This implies that there must be a lot of scientists walking around with empty minds!

The reason we don't usually notice this energy is said to be due to its uniform density, and most scientists are happy to ignore it entirely. However, many experiments have been carried out, the results of which are widely regarded as being consistent with the existence of a zero point energy.

The presence of surfaces changes the vacuum energy density and can lead to the emergence of vacuum forces, for example, the Casimir effect - the force of attraction between two parallel conducting plates. However, much more experimental work is needed to test the theory and alternative explanations.

Center for Space Flights. Marshall, NASA is exploring the possibility of using zero-point energy to propel a spacecraft as part of its breakthrough propulsion physics program. 3

While conventional quantum electrodynamics infers a zero point field ( ZPF) - sometimes called "quantum aether" - from quantum theory and suggesting that it is generated by physical matter-energy, there is a competing approach (stochastic electrodynamics) that treats the ZPF as a very real, internal substratum of the universe.

Some scientists suggest that mass, inertia and gravity are related to the fluctuating electromagnetic energy of the ZPF. 4 Inertia (the resistance of a body to a change in its state of motion) is called an acceleration-dependent electromagnetic drag force resulting from the interaction between a charged particle and a ZPF.

ZPF fluctuations are also said to cause charged particles to emit secondary electromagnetic fields, which cause a residual force of attraction, gravity. In this theory, gravity is considered as a manifestation of electromagnetism. It is assumed that by changing the configuration of the ZPF surrounding the body, it is possible to change its inertia or "inertial mass" and control gravity.

Some ZPF researchers suggest that there is no such thing as mass - only charges that interact with the all-pervading electromagnetic field, creating the illusion of matter. 5 However, since they do not present a concrete picture of what they mean by "charge" or "charged particle", this theory does not take us very far.

In the standard model of particle physics, "fundamental" charged particles such as electrons and quarks are modeled as infinitesimal particles with no internal structure, which is clearly a physical impossibility.

pushing gravity
According to the theory of the effect of gravity, created mainly by the 18th century scientist Georges-Louis Le Sage, gravity is caused by physical matter being continuously bombarded with extremely tiny, unobservable particles ("gravitons" - a word for different things in different theories), which travel through space in all directions much faster than the speed of light.

The particles must be so small that they only occasionally hit the material constituents in the bodies they pass through, so that each constituent has an equal chance of hitting.

Any two bodies in space will shadow each other from some graviton impacts, causing them to "pull" (i.e. push) towards each other with a force that obeys the inverse square law. Several competing versions of Le Sage theory are currently being proposed.

They fall into two main groups: those that chase the approach of particles (or corpusculars) and those that replace the sea of ​​gravitons with very high or low frequency electromagnetic radiation that fills all of space.

Collisions between gravitons and matter must be inelastic, otherwise the gravitons will bounce back and forth between the two bodies, thus eliminating the screening effect. A common objection is that inelastic graviton impacts will rapidly heat all material bodies to enormous temperatures. Proponents of the theory simply argue that bodies must somehow radiate as much heat back into space as they absorb. However, there is no clear evidence to support this in the case of the Earth.

In Newtonian theory, gravity is supposed to act instantaneously, while in relativity theory it travels at the speed of light. It is sometimes argued that if the Sun's force propagates at the speed of light, it will greatly accelerate the Earth's orbital speed—something that is not observed.

Tom Van Flandern calculates from binary pulsar data that gravitons must travel at least 20 billion times faster than light! 2 How these gravitons are generated and can accelerate to such incredible speeds is not explained.

Dismissing the impact theory as speculative and untenable, Pari Spolter argues that since the Sun's gravitational force is constantly spreading in all directions and since the Sun's and planets' angular velocities remain constant over long periods of time, then that's what the speed of gravity is. The lag period will be important only at the beginning and at the end of the evolution of the planet. 3

While it is logical to assume that all attractive forces ultimately result from impacts at some level,* impact gravity theory is too simplistic to account for all relevant facts.

Like the conventional theory of gravity, it cannot explain why all the planets revolve around the Sun in planes that form only small angles to the Sun's equatorial plane, or why all the planets revolve around the Sun in the same direction as the Sun's sense of rotation.

Although Le Sage-type theories can explain gravitational shielding (because matter placed between two gravitating bodies will absorb or deflect gravitons), they cannot easily explain anti-gravity and levitation and usually ignore them. No impact theory has been developed to explain bipolar forces such as electricity and magnetism, and the acceptance of gravity impact theory therefore reduces the relationship between gravity and electromagnetism.

If we reason by analogy (both above and below), the microscopic world is a greatly reduced and accelerated version of the macroscopic world (see "Infinite Divisibility of Matter").

On a macroscopic level, it is impossible to find an attractive or pulling force that is not really a push.

For example, a person who is "sucked" out of a pressurized cabin, if the door is opened while the plane is in flight, is actually forced out. big amount molecular bombardments "behind" them.

If an object immersed in an elastic fluid emits condensation and rarefaction waves, other bodies will be attracted or repelled depending on whether the wavelength is very large or very small compared to their size. 4 Thus, in this case, both attractive and repulsive forces are involved, and both eventually come down to pushes, but the underlying processes are much more complex than in the aircraft example.

Dynamic Ether

Dynamic Ether. Researchers in the field of ether physics have developed many models to explain the nature of matter and force. Such theories are already "combined" in the sense that physical matter and forces are derived from the activity of the underlying aether.

Subatomic particles are often modeled as self-sustaining vortices in the ether, continuously emitting and absorbing ether flows. Inertia can be thought of as the drag force exerted by a disturbed ether as a body accelerates through it. Electric charge can be represented as a difference in the concentration of ether, and magnetic forces can be represented as circular flows of ether.

Some researchers such as Dan Davidson, they say that just as electric charge is a gradient in the ether, so is the gravitational force a gradient of electric charge. This means that if the ethereal gradient changes around the atom, the force of gravity will also change. This phenomenon can be enhanced by synchronizing the currents of aether through the nucleus of a given mass, either by rotation or movement or sound stimulation which causes all the atoms to resonate together.

Paul LaViolette developed a theory known as "sub-quantum kinetics" which replaces the 19th century mechanical inert aether concept with that of a continuously transmuting aether. 2

Physical subatomic particles and energy quanta are considered as wave-like schemes of concentration in the ether. It is said that the gravitational and electromagnetic fields of a particle arise as a result of flows various kinds ether particles, or etherons, through their boundaries and emerging ether concentration gradients.

Positively charged particles such as protons generate gravitational pits that attract matter, while, contrary to conventional theory, negatively charged particles such as electrons generate gravitational hills that repel matter. Electrically neutral matter remains gravitationally attractive because the proton's gravity well dominates the electron's gravitational hill.

Most scientists assume that electrons are attracted by gravity, but this has not been experimentally confirmed due to the difficulty of measurement.

LaViolette sees confirmation of his theory that electrons have anti-gravity properties in an experiment conducted by Evgeny Podkletnov And Giovanni Modanese in 2001, who showed that “an axial high-voltage electronic discharge creates a matter-repelling gravitational wave that moves in the direction of the discharge by applying a gravitational force of longitudinal repulsion to a distant test mass3.

While the hypothesis that negative charges create anti-gravity fields explains the classic Biefeld-Brown effect (a thrust from the negative to the positive electrode of a high-voltage capacitor), it poses the problem of explaining why thrust can be generated regardless of whether the leading electrode is positive. or negative.

Building on the work of pioneering scientists such as Nikola Tesla, Louis de Broglie, Wilhelm Reich and Harold Aspden 4, Canadian scientists Paulo and Alexandra Correa have developed the most detailed and quantitative dynamic aether model currently offered, known as etherometry.

They also developed technological applications such as pulsed plasma reactors (PAGDs) that produce more power than is required to run them, their self-sustaining aether drive, and their weight neutralizer and anti-gravitator. 5

At Correas, careful and exhaustive experiments have been carried out with electroscopes, "orgone accumulators" (specially designed metal cases), and Tesla coils, which indicate the existence of both electrical and non-electrical forms of massless (non-physical), non-electromagnetic energy, one component of which (known to chemists and climatologists as "latent heat") has anti-gravity properties. 6

By showing that aether (or "aether" as they prefer to write it) cannot be reduced to electromagnetic energy, they clearly demonstrated the inadequacy of zero-energy models. When massless electrical waves collide with physical matter (such as the earth's atmosphere), they transfer energy to charged particles such as electrons, and as these charges slow down, they radiate that energy in the form of transient, vortex patterns of electromagnetic energy, i.e., photons.

Etherometry suggests that the rotational and translational motions of planets, stars, and galaxies are the result of rotating, whirlwind motions of the aether on several scales.

Electric and non-electric aether waves transmit impulses to the Earth, for example, when they bend towards the planet, and this influx of energy not only moves the Earth, but also creates its gravitational field. When the non-electric energy of the aether interacts with physical or aether charges, it produces either gravitons, which push the particle or body into areas of higher mass density, or anti-gravitons, which move them in the opposite direction.

Gravitational forces are essentially electrodynamic forces that depend on polarity.

Etrometry states that gravity is ultimately the result of an electrodynamic attraction that occurs when matter that is basically neutral (with balanced charges of both polarities) interacts with the Ether grids formed by in-phase mass charges while anti-gravity is ultimately the result of electrodynamic repulsion that occurs when a substance has a total charge and interacts with the same in-phase ambipolar charge lattices. Gravity and antigravity

We all went through the law of universal gravitation in school. But what do we really know about gravity, apart from the information put into our heads by school teachers? Let's refresh our knowledge...

Fact one: Newton did not discover the law of universal gravitation

Everyone knows the famous parable of the apple that fell on Newton's head. But the fact is that Newton did not discover the law of universal gravitation, since this law is simply absent in his book "Mathematical Principles of Natural Philosophy". In this work there is neither a formula nor a formulation, which everyone can see for himself. Moreover, the first mention of the gravitational constant appears only in the 19th century and, accordingly, the formula could not have appeared earlier. By the way, the coefficient G, which reduces the result of calculations by 600 billion times, has no physical meaning, and was introduced to hide contradictions.

Fact Two: Faking the Gravitational Attraction Experiment

It is believed that Cavendish was the first to demonstrate gravitational attraction in laboratory blanks, using a torsion balance - a horizontal rocker with weights at the ends suspended on a thin string. The rocker could turn on a thin wire. According to the official version, Cavendish brought a pair of 158 kg discs to the weights of the rocker from opposite sides and the rocker turned at a small angle. However, the methodology of the experiment was incorrect and the results were falsified, which was convincingly proven by the physicist Andrei Albertovich Grishaev. Cavendish spent a long time reworking and adjusting the installation so that the results fit Newton's average density of the earth. The methodology of the experiment itself provided for the movement of the blanks several times, and the reason for the rotation of the rocker was the microvibrations from the movement of the blanks, which were transmitted to the suspension.

This is confirmed by the fact that such a simple installation of the 18th century for educational purposes should have been, if not in every school, then at least in the physics departments of universities, in order to show students in practice the result of the law of universal gravitation. However, the Cavendish setting is not used in curricula, both schoolchildren and students take their word for it that two discs attract each other.

Fact three: The law of universal gravitation does not work during a solar eclipse

If we substitute reference data for the earth, moon and sun into the formula for the law of universal gravitation, then at the moment when the moon flies between the earth and the sun, for example, at the time of a solar eclipse, the force of attraction between the sun and the moon is more than 2 times higher than between Earth and Moon!

According to the formula, the moon would have to leave the orbit of the earth and begin to revolve around the sun.

Gravitational constant - 6.6725×10−11 m³/(kg s²).
The mass of the moon is 7.3477 × 1022 kg.
The mass of the Sun is 1.9891 × 1030 kg.
The mass of the Earth is 5.9737 × 1024 kg.
The distance between the Earth and the Moon = 380,000,000 m.
Distance between the Moon and the Sun = 149,000,000,000 m.

Earth and Moon:
6.6725×10-11 x 7.3477×1022 x 5.9737×1024 / 3800000002 = 2.028×1020 H
Moon and sun:
6.6725 x 10-11 x 7.3477 x 1022 x 1.9891 x 1030 / 1490000000002 = 4.39 x 1020 H

2.028×1020H<< 4,39×1020 H
The force of attraction between the earth and the moon<< Сила притяжения между Луной и Солнцем

These calculations can be criticized by the fact that the moon is an artificial hollow body and the reference density of this celestial body is most likely not determined correctly.

Indeed, experimental evidence suggests that the Moon is not a solid body, but a thin-walled shell. The authoritative journal Science describes the results of seismic sensors after the third stage of the Apollo 13 rocket hit the surface of the Moon: “The seismic call was detected for more than four hours. On Earth, if a rocket hit at an equivalent distance, the signal would only last a few minutes.”

Seismic vibrations that decay so slowly are typical of a hollow resonator, not a solid body.
But the Moon, among other things, does not show its attractive properties with respect to the Earth - the Earth-Moon pair does not move around a common center of mass, as it would be according to the law of universal gravitation, and the Earth's ellipsoidal orbit, contrary to this law, does not become zigzag.

Moreover, the parameters of the orbit of the Moon itself do not remain constant, the orbit "evolves" in scientific terminology, and it does this contrary to the law of universal gravitation.

Fact four: the absurdity of the theory of ebbs and flows

How is it, some will object, because even schoolchildren know about the ocean tides on Earth, which occur due to the attraction of water to the Sun and Moon.

According to the theory, the gravity of the Moon forms a tidal ellipsoid in the ocean, with two tidal humps, which, due to daily rotation, move along the surface of the Earth.

However, practice shows the absurdity of these theories. After all, according to them, a tidal hump 1 meter high in 6 hours should move through the Drake Strait from the Pacific to the Atlantic. Since water is incompressible, a mass of water would raise the level to a height of about 10 meters, which does not happen in practice. In practice, tidal phenomena occur autonomously in areas of 1000-2000 km.

Laplace was also amazed by the paradox: why in the seaports of France high water sets in sequentially, although, according to the concept of a tidal ellipsoid, it should come there simultaneously.

Fact Five: The Theory of Mass Gravity Doesn't Work

The principle of gravity measurements is simple - gravimeters measure the vertical components, and the deviation of the plumb line shows the horizontal components.

The first attempt to test the theory of mass gravitation was made by the British in the middle of the 18th century on the coast of the Indian Ocean, where, on the one hand, there is the world's highest stone ridge of the Himalayas, and on the other, an ocean bowl filled with much less massive water. But, alas, the plumb line does not deviate towards the Himalayas! Moreover, ultra-sensitive instruments - gravimeters - do not detect a difference in the gravity of a test body at the same height both over massive mountains and over less dense seas of a kilometer depth.

To save the accustomed theory, scientists came up with a support for it: they say the reason for this is “isostasis” - denser rocks are located under the seas, and loose rocks under the mountains, and their density is exactly the same as to adjust everything to the desired value.

It has also been empirically established that gravimeters in deep mines show that gravity does not decrease with depth. It continues to grow, being dependent only on the square of the distance to the center of the earth.

Fact six: gravity is not generated by matter or mass

According to the formula of the law of universal gravitation, Two masses, m1 and m2, whose dimensions can be neglected in comparison with the distances between them, are allegedly attracted to each other by a force directly proportional to the product of these masses and inversely proportional to the square of the distance between them. However, in fact, there is not a single evidence that the substance has a gravitational attraction effect. Practice shows that gravitation is not generated by matter or masses, it is independent of them, and massive bodies only obey gravity.

The independence of gravitation from matter is confirmed by the fact that, with the rarest exception, small bodies of the solar system have no gravitational attraction at all. With the exception of the Moon, more than six dozen satellites of the planets show no signs of their own gravity. This has been proven by both indirect and direct measurements, for example, since 2004, the Cassini probe in the vicinity of Saturn flies close to its satellites from time to time, but no changes in the speed of the probe have been recorded. With the help of the same Cassini, a geyser was discovered on Enceladus, the sixth largest satellite of Saturn.

What physical processes must take place on a cosmic piece of ice in order for steam jets to fly into space?
For the same reason, Titan, Saturn's largest moon, has a gaseous tail as a result of atmospheric sinking.

The satellites predicted by the theory of asteroids have not been found, despite their huge number. And in all reports of double, or paired asteroids, which allegedly revolve around a common center of mass, there was no evidence of the circulation of these pairs. Companions happened to be nearby, moving in quasi-synchronous orbits around the sun.

Attempts to put artificial satellites into orbit of asteroids ended in failure. Examples include the NEAR probe, which was driven to the Eros asteroid by the Americans, or the Hayabusa probe, which the Japanese sent to the Itokawa asteroid.

Fact seven: Saturn's asteroids do not obey the law of universal gravitation

At one time, Lagrange, trying to solve the three-body problem, obtained a stable solution for a particular case. He showed that the third body can move in the orbit of the second, all the time being in one of two points, one of which is ahead of the second body by 60 °, and the second is behind by the same amount.

However, two groups of asteroid companions, found behind and ahead in the orbit of Saturn, and which astronomers joyfully called the Trojans, went out of the predicted areas, and the confirmation of the law of universal gravitation turned into a puncture.

Fact eight: contradiction with the general theory of relativity

According to modern concepts, the speed of light is finite, as a result, we see distant objects not where they are located at the moment, but at the point where the light beam we saw started from. But how fast does gravity travel?

After analyzing the data accumulated by that time, Laplace found that "gravity" propagates faster than light by at least seven orders of magnitude! Modern measurements by receiving pulses from pulsars have pushed the speed of propagation of gravity even further - at least 10 orders of magnitude faster than the speed of light. Thus, experimental studies are in conflict with the general theory of relativity, on which official science still relies, despite its complete failure.

Fact Nine: Gravity Anomalies

There are natural gravity anomalies, which also do not find any intelligible explanation from official science. Here are some examples:

Fact ten: studies of the vibrational nature of antigravity

There are a large number of alternative studies with impressive results in the field of antigravity, which fundamentally refute the theoretical calculations of official science.

Some researchers analyze the vibrational nature of antigravity. This effect is clearly presented in modern experience, where drops hang in the air due to acoustic levitation. Here we see how, with the help of a sound of a certain frequency, it is possible to confidently hold drops of liquid in the air ...

But the effect at first glance is explained by the principle of the gyroscope, but even such a simple experiment for the most part contradicts gravity in its modern sense.

Few people know that Viktor Stepanovich Grebennikov, a Siberian entomologist who studied the effect of cavity structures in insects, described the phenomena of antigravity in insects in his book "My World". Scientists have long known that massive insects, such as the cockchafer, fly against the laws of gravity rather than because of them.

Moreover, based on his research, Grebennikov created an anti-gravity platform.

Viktor Stepanovich died under rather strange circumstances and his achievements were partially lost, however, some part of the prototype of the anti-gravity platform has been preserved and can be seen in the Grebennikov Museum in Novosibirsk.

Another practical application of anti-gravity can be observed in the city of Homestead in Florida, where there is a strange structure of coral monolithic blocks, which the people called the Coral Castle. It was built by a native of Latvia - Edward Lidskalnin in the first half of the 20th century. This man of thin build did not have any tools, did not even have a car and no equipment at all.

It was not used at all by electricity, also due to its absence, and nevertheless somehow descended to the ocean, where it carved multi-ton stone blocks and somehow delivered them to its site, laying them out with perfect accuracy.

After Ed's death, scientists began to carefully study his creation. For the sake of the experiment, a powerful bulldozer was brought in, and an attempt was made to move one of the 30-ton blocks of the coral castle. The bulldozer roared, skidded, but did not move a huge stone.

A strange device was found inside the castle, which scientists called a direct current generator. It was a massive structure with many metal parts. 240 permanent bar magnets were built into the outside of the device. But how Edward Leedskalnin actually made multi-ton blocks move is still a mystery.

The studies of John Searle are known, in whose hands unusual generators came to life, rotated and generated energy; disks with a diameter of half a meter to 10 meters rose into the air and made controlled flights from London to Cornwall and back.

The professor's experiments were repeated in Russia, the USA and Taiwan. In Russia, for example, in 1999, under No. 99122275/09, an application for a patent "device for generating mechanical energy" was registered. Vladimir Vitalievich Roshchin and Sergey Mikhailovich Godin, in fact, reproduced the SEG (Searl Effect Generator) and conducted a series of studies with it. The result was a statement: you can get 7 kW of electricity without spending; the rotating generator lost up to 40% in weight.

Searle's first lab equipment was taken to an unknown destination while he himself was in prison. The installation of Godin and Roshchin simply disappeared; all publications about her, with the exception of the application for an invention, disappeared.

Also known is the Hutchison Effect, named after the Canadian engineer-inventor. The effect is manifested in the levitation of heavy objects, the alloy of dissimilar materials (for example, metal + wood), the anomalous heating of metals in the absence of burning substances near them. Here is a video of these effects:

Whatever gravity really is, it should be recognized that official science is completely incapable of clearly explaining the nature of this phenomenon..

Yaroslav Yargin

We find the answer to this question in ancient Indian sources. So, in the Mahatma Letters it is said that along with gravitational attraction there is also gravitational repulsion. Indeed, everything in nature is arranged in such a way that for every action there is an oppositely directed reaction.

Only thanks to the unity and confrontation of these forces, the stability of existing bodies and systems is ensured.

For example, the presence of forces of electrostatic attraction and repulsion ensures the stability of the existence of atoms and molecules, including the most complex combinations of which the substance consists. The same applies to processes of various natures, such as, for example, the passage of current in an electrical circuit.

It is known that in this case, an oppositely directed self-induction current arises, which reduces the main current in the circuit. In mechanics, this is the principle of inertia, which manifests itself when masses are accelerated, etc. and so on.

The same applies to any processes occurring both in living and inanimate nature.

This conclusion is confirmed by Le Chatelier's principle known from the course of general physics. According to which, if a system in stable equilibrium is acted upon from the outside, changing any of the equilibrium conditions (temperature, pressure, concentration, external electromagnetic field), then the processes aimed at compensating for external influence intensify in the system.

All this fits into the most general philosophical law of the unity and struggle of opposites, or in the view of the ancient thinkers of the East, as the unity and confrontation of the two principles of Yin and Yang.

From this point of view, obviously, gravity is no exception. At present, despite numerous works on the theory of gravity, the question of its nature is still open. The theory of quantum gravity, which has been developed in recent years, including the theory of supersymmetry and the theory of superstrings, cannot yet give a completely adequate answer to the question posed. These theories are based on an abstract mathematical model based on the multidimensionality of space-time on a very small Planck scale. Whether this corresponds to reality, can only be confirmed or refuted by an experiment that cannot yet be carried out using existing technologies.

On the other hand, when considering these theories, for some reason, the fundamental works of P. Ehrenfest are not taken into account, according to which, in a space with a dimension exceeding 3, atomic molecular and more complex structures cannot stably exist. In other words, the existence of matter is possible only in a world with three-dimensional space. As for the abstract multidimensional structures of the Planck scale, when moving to more familiar scales, their multidimensionality should, of course, be reduced to the well-known elementary particle physics, but there are countless ways of such reduction.

At the same time, each of the resulting four-dimensional theories describes its own world. The emerging contradictions, in this case, most likely come from a confusion of the concepts of mathematical and physical multidimensionality. In mathematical multidimensionality there are no selected coordinates - they are all equivalent. In physical multidimensionality, coordinates are endowed with a physical meaning - and this changes things.

The question involuntarily arises: how adequate to physical reality is the approach developed in the above-mentioned works?

On this occasion, it would be appropriate to quote the words of A. Einstein, who said that: "using mathematics, you can prove anything, including an erroneous theory." In other words, the mathematical method in this case is only indirect.

However, let us digress from the multidimensionality involved in the theory of quantum gravity and try to consider the question of the nature of gravity in the framework of visual classical concepts. To do this, we will proceed not only from the duality of forces and interactions acting in nature, but also from the assumption of the duality of space itself and its curvature.

In other words, we represent the space in the form of two (+) and (-) subspaces separated by a boundary plane (a kind of membrane) ОХ (one-dimensional version) (Fig. 1)

At the same time, as a (+) subspace, we will consider our space, which is characterized by positive curvature, as well as positive values ​​of mass, energy and the course of time. In turn, as a (-) subspace we will also consider three-dimensional space, but with negative curvature, negative values ​​of mass, energy and negative time course, respectively.

Proceeding from this, we will try to visualize the mechanism of gravitation by the example of the deflection of the spatial membrane OX, usually used in physics, by an gravitating body.

This deflection is formed in the place where the massive body is located (Fig. 2). In other words, in the area of ​​deflection of the spatial membrane, a gravitational potential "well" is formed. At the same time (as can be seen from the figure), on the other side of the membrane, in the region of the (-) subspace, a gravitational potential “hump” is formed.

The latter means that the potential energy in this area changes its sign to the opposite, creating a kind of instability for the substance of negative mass present in this subspace (Fig. 3).

The principle of dualism tells us that the opposite picture of the mirror-symmetric deflection of the OH spatial membrane into the (+) subspace region can be realized. In this case, the reverse picture will be observed, when the potential, curvature, and the course of time change to opposite in sign.

In the gravitational “pit” (-) of the subspace formed, at the same time, the consolidation of the substance of the negative mass will now take place. At the same time, the gravitational potential "hump" in the (+) subspace, formed by this deflection of the membrane, in turn, creates instability, but already for the substance of positive mass in our subspace (Fig. 4). Thus, the consolidation of one type of matter leads to the degradation of another, or in the language of entropy, the chaos of one type of matter is accompanied by the organization of another.

At the same time, if during the consolidation of a positive mass in the (+) subspace, the energy of the gravitational connection of a substance, as is known, is a negative value, then, in contrast, the energy of the gravitational connection of a substance of a negative mass in the (-) subspace will be a positive value.

The latter leads to the formation of a potential "hump" (Fig. 4) and, accordingly, the emergence of a repulsive potential field (anti-gravity field) in our positive (+) subspace.

It is surprising that such an unstable state of positive matter is accompanied by a stable state of its mirror twin (matter of a negative sign), consolidating in the area under the “hump” indicated in Figure 4, that is, in the area of ​​the potential “pit” (-) of the subspace. Such a difference in states is explained by the difference in the sign of mass, energy and the course of time in both subspaces.

From the foregoing, it follows that gravity is nothing but a dynamic process of replacing one type of matter with another. The reason for such a process is the force of repulsion between the matter of the negative and positive subspaces, as a result of which a rarefaction occurs with its subsequent filling and consolidation of the matter of the corresponding sign.

Rene Descartes (1596-1650) hypothesis of the vortex nature of gravity

In this regard, I would like to draw attention to the hypothesis expressed by Rene Descartes (1596-1650) about the vortex nature of gravity.

“According to my opinion,” Descartes wrote to the mathematician M. Mersenne, “gravity lies in nothing else than the fact that terrestrial bodies are actually pushed towards the center of the Earth by thin matter,” Gravity, according to Descartes, is the result of the movement of particles of fine matter ( the first element), a kind of ether, around the center of the earth; thanks to this movement, the larger and coarser particles of that substance that Descartes called earthy, or the third element, which have a slower movement, are forced (since emptiness is impossible) to fill the place of particles of fine matter receding to the periphery, and this creates the impression that a body consisting of from earthy particles of the third element, tends to the center of the Earth.

According to the author, the hypothesis of R. Descartes, within the framework of the ideas existing at that time, gives the closest picture of gravity to the truth. In this regard, it should only be clarified that, according to the model proposed above, the role indicated by Descartes of fine matter can be played by the matter of the negative subspace, which, being replaced by the matter of a positive sign, leaves the central part of the vortex, moving to its periphery.

In the author's book "Time in the dual picture of the world", based on the analogy of the vortex systems of the Earth and space, it is assumed that such space systems as galaxies are formations that include both types of matter - matter (+) and (- ) subspaces.

These both types of matter determine the structure of galaxies as dual gravitational-vortex systems.

At the same time, negative matter, as the lightest fraction repelled from ordinary, positive matter, is concentrated both on the periphery of the galactic vortex and in its central part, thereby determining the dynamics of the movement of stars, their clusters, gas clouds, and finally, peripheral satellites galaxies. The dynamics of the motion of the latter, as is known, does not obey the Keplerian radial distribution over the velocities of the orbital motion:

V ~ 1/√r, where V is the speed of orbital motion, r is the radius of the orbit. The latter circumstance led to the assumption of the presence in galaxies of the so-called hidden mass, later called dark matter.

According to the author, the role of dark matter in galaxies is played by the matter of the negative subspace. Modern ideas about dark matter are related to the fact that it does not manifest itself either in electromagnetic or nuclear interaction with ordinary matter, but only in gravitational interaction with it.

Currently, there are various assumptions about the type of particles that make up dark matter. In some of them, the absence of electromagnetic interaction with ordinary matter is explained by the absence of a charge in these particles, in others it is assumed that dark matter particles are not elementary particles. Instead, they can be thought of as dark atoms, made up of dark protons and dark electrons, which are held together in the atom by the dark analog of electromagnetism.

The latter is consistent with the idea of ​​these particles as particles of negative matter, which, being a mirror image of ordinary particles of our subspace, have a negative mass, charge and opposite spin direction.

These particles also interact with each other through electromagnetic fields, however, such fields cannot be registered by our conventional devices, since they carry negative energy and participate in processes with a negative course of time.

Thus, the matter of the negative subspace satisfies the main criterion for dark matter - it does not manifest itself in any way in our subspace except in gravitational interaction.

However, considering dark matter as the matter of a subspace that is mirrored to ours, we thereby come into conflict with the currently existing ideas about dark matter as matter with gravitational attraction. Indeed, according to existing ideas, dark matter, like ordinary matter, has the property of gravitational attraction for the ordinary baryonic matter of our subspace, but not repulsion.

As the main argument in this case, it is put forward, confirmed by astronomical observations, the fact of lensing the radiation of distant space objects by objects consisting of dark matter.

However, if we proceed from the fact that dark matter has antigravity for ordinary baryonic matter, in other words, gravity does not collect, but pushes (scatters) ordinary matter, including light, then we can assume that the celestial bodies and systems formed from dark matter are themselves like anti-gravity divergent lenses.

However, as is known from optics, such lenses also create an image, but unlike converging lenses, it is reduced and imaginary.

It is possible that this effect manifests itself in the image of the dark twin of the galaxy. Another argument put forward in favor of the gravitational properties of the attraction of dark matter is the assumption that there is a so-called hidden mass in galaxies, which is responsible for the violation of the Keplerian distribution of the orbital motion velocities of the peripheral satellites of galaxies.

At the same time, various types of exotic particles are considered as a hidden mass, for example, the so-called WIMPs, sterile neutrinos and other hypothetical objects that have not yet been fixed, carrying positive mass and energy. However, even in this case, the effect of violation of the Keplerian velocity distribution of peripheral satellites of galaxies can be explained by the presence of dark negative matter in this region of galaxies, which pushes these satellites, giving them additional speed.

Which of these points of view will turn out to be legitimate, time will tell, but for now we will continue further reasoning on the topic of dark matter and the mechanism of gravity associated with it. To do this, we again turn to the vortex hypothesis of Descartes. In this case, we will proceed from the hydrodynamic analogy of the vortex systems of the Earth and space, since in the vortex systems of any media, including space, some general patterns appear. For comparison, consider, for example, such vortex formations as spiral galaxies and terrestrial atmospheric cyclones.

These formations have not only external similarity, but also structurally similar to each other. However, their similarities do not end there. It turns out that atmospheric cyclones behave in the same way as gravitational space systems. They move as a whole and, when approaching each other, are attracted in accordance with Newton's law, and their central regions, just like in spiral galaxies, rotate with a solid body.

Perhaps the most surprising is the fact that in developed tropical cyclones (hurricanes), when they acquire an axisymmetric structure, the differential rotation of air masses in them, as well as in space systems such as the Solar one, obeys Kepler's third law: V ~ 1/√r, where V is the rotation speed, r is the distance to the center of the vortex, which, as is well known, served as the basis for Newton's discovery of the law of universal gravitation.

The manifestation of such properties suggests that atmospheric cyclones and such cosmic formations as galaxies have a common hydrodynamic nature. The difference lies only in the medium in which the vortex develops.

If we proceed from the consideration of galaxies from the standpoint of a hydrodynamic analogy with atmospheric cyclones, then, obviously, one should not exclude the possibility of the existence of a cosmic analogue of an atmospheric anticyclone. An atmospheric anticyclone is a kind of antipode of a cyclone.

The distribution of pressure and the dynamics of the movement of air masses in it are opposite to those in the cyclone. So, if the pressure in the cyclone decreases as it approaches its center, which, in turn, leads to the inflow of warm, moisture-saturated air along the underlying ground surface into its central part.

The latter leads here to moisture condensation and the formation of rain clouds. In the atmospheric anticyclone, the opposite picture is observed. The pressure in the anticyclone increases towards its center, which leads to the evaporation of moisture and the removal of dried air from the center of the anticyclone to its periphery.

This, in turn, leads to the dissipation of clouds and clear, cloudless weather. Thus, the distribution of pressure, the processes of condensation and evaporation of moisture, as well as the direction of movement of air masses in cyclones and anticyclones, as well as the direction of their rotation, are opposite.

Having these distinctive properties, these formations, however, include their antipode.

So, in the central part of the cyclone, in the area of ​​​​its funnel (eye of the storm), an anticyclonic inflow of dried cold air occurs from the upper layers of the troposphere and lower stratosphere, at the same time, on the periphery of the anticyclone, a cyclonic rise of air occurs, leading here to moisture condensation and the formation of clouds. .

Thus, atmospheric cyclones and anticyclones are dual formations that include two types of processes, condensation and evaporation of moisture. These processes, in turn, are due to the confrontation, on the one hand, of the high pressure of cold, dried air masses, and, on the other hand, of the low pressure of warm, moisture-saturated air masses.

The same, apparently, applies to such space formations as galaxies.

For example, the visual and structural similarity to atmospheric cyclones makes it possible to classify spiral galaxies as cyclonic formations. They also observe a kind of galactic wind flowing from the central regions of galaxies in the form of cosmic dust, gas, high-speed streams of relativistic particles, etc. Similarly, as in atmospheric cyclones, where vortex condensation of rain clouds occurs, in galaxies, in turn, gravitational-vortex condensation of stars, gas and dust clouds, planets and other galactic objects occurs.

And if the formation of rain clouds in atmospheric cyclones is due to the difference in pressure and temperature, interacting cold and warm fronts of air masses, then the gravitational-vortex condensation of cosmic bodies and systems in galaxies, in turn, can be due to the interaction of ordinary and dark matter, which also have different cosmological pressure and temperature.

If we proceed from the hydrodynamic analogy of the vortex systems of the Earth and space, then the so-called black holes formed in the center of galaxies can be attributed to the similarity of the eye of a galactic cyclone storm. Indeed, the latest astronomical observations of the IRAS F11119 galaxy, located in the constellation Ursa Major, showed the birth of a powerful cosmic "wind" in the vicinity of a black hole, blowing at a speed of a quarter of the speed of light.

Thus, it was found that massive black holes located in the center of almost all galaxies generate a high-speed cosmic "wind", heating up and throwing cold clouds of dust and hydrogen out of the galaxy. A similar thing happens in atmospheric cyclones, in which atmospheric wind is observed blowing in the direction from the center to the periphery of the cyclone.

Black holes and dark matter

The emergence of a high-speed cosmic wind that occurs near a black hole can be explained by the fact that dark matter is formed in it, as in a kind of cosmic eye of a storm, which pushes ordinary baryonic matter, giving it a huge acceleration, towards the periphery of the galaxy. The formation and condensation of dark matter within a black hole, in turn, occurs due to the anticyclonic inflow of dispersed dark matter from the halo of the galaxy into its central part (the galactic eye of the storm).

An important conclusion follows from the foregoing, which contradicts the prevailing ideas about black holes. This conclusion is that black holes do not actually absorb baryonic matter, but rather push it out of the galaxy, and the reason for this is the concentration of dark matter in the center of the galaxy.

In this regard, it is of interest to consider such recently discovered cosmic formations as dark galaxies, which, according to some signs, can be attributed to objects of an anticyclonic nature. Indeed, being practically invisible in the electromagnetic range of the spectrum, they manifest themselves in the fact that, like black holes, they push the gas and dust matter contained in them out of the galaxy.

So, for example, astronomical observations of the galaxy UGC 10214 show that there is an outflow of matter from it, as if it were interacting with another galaxy. But this galaxy is invisible, and the flow of matter flows as if to nowhere. Another example is the astronomical object MACSJ0025.4-1222, which is a collision of two massive galaxy clusters.

On the one hand, the presence of dark matter was discovered in it. On the other hand, unusual behavior of gas and dark matter was discovered. Previously, it was believed that in all processes, dark matter should drag gas along with it, but in this object, the behavior of gas and dark matter is diametrically opposed. But perhaps most surprising in this regard is the space object Abell 520, a giant cluster of galaxies that is in the process of colliding with another galaxy cluster - the most massive formation in the universe.

With the combined efforts of the most modern scientific instruments of the largest observatories, a combined image of this space formation was created. The end result of this work surprised astronomers: the dark matter surrounding this object behaves very strangely.

Astronomers were sure that during giant cosmic collisions like this, dark matter and galaxies should be close to each other, even during the most powerful catastrophes, but everything happens differently. Astronomers have found a patch of dark matter in a cluster that contains hot gas, but no galaxies.

For some reason, the galaxies have been removed from the densest part of the clump of invisible matter. Astronomer Dr.Hendrik Hoekstra from the University of Viktoria describes this discovery: “It all looks like the galaxies are simply moving away from the densest (central) part of the dark matter bunch. This is the first time we have seen such behavior of invisible matter, and this is a new puzzle for astronomers.” Everything happens as if a miniature explosion has occurred in this part of the Universe.

The given examples are a clear confirmation that the indicated cosmic objects from dark galaxies to their clusters are anticyclonic systems, in which dark matter is a repulsive rather than a gravitationally attractive factor for visible matter.

Thus, it follows from the above that the processes responsible for the gravitational consolidation and degradation of matter should be considered as processes of confrontation and replacement of one type of matter with another. In this case, obviously, it is more legitimate to speak not about gravity as such, but about cosmological pressure, which has a positive sign for ordinary baryonic matter and a negative sign for dark matter. In this regard, the so-called λ-term, which was introduced into the equations of gravity by A. Einstein, is of interest.

Einstein introduced it into equations for building a model of a stationary universe. The introduction of this value assumed the presence, in addition to the forces of gravitational attraction, also of repulsive forces, which, compensating for the forces of attraction at a certain stage in the development of the Universe, would ensure its stationarity. Einstein suggested that in space, in addition to the usual gravitating substance, there is also some uniformly distributed, stationary antigravitating (repulsive) medium with an unusual equation of state: p = -ρс², where p is pressure, ρ is the density of the antigravitating substance, c is the speed of light. In other words, the substance proposed by Einstein was supposed to create negative pressure in the space of the Universe.

But according to the foregoing, such pressure can be created by dark matter having a negative mass. The confrontation between the pressures created by dark and baryonic matter should have led to the fact that the expansion of the Universe in time was not uniform. It then accelerated, then slowed down, as evidenced by recent astronomical observations.

In the late 1990s, based on astronomical observations of changes in the brightness of type Ia supernovae, it was found that our Universe is expanding with acceleration. Based on these observations, the existence of an unknown type of energy with negative pressure, called "dark energy", was postulated. This energy, according to recent ideas, is the reason for the accelerated expansion of the Universe. At the same time, various models of dark energy were put forward by theorists. At the moment, there are two main models that explain the nature of dark energy - this is the "cosmological constant" and "quintessence".

The first of them is called the energy of the physical vacuum. This is the cosmological constant λ. The cosmological constant has a negative pressure equal to its energy density. At the same time, the negative pressure of the vacuum energy should give rise to repulsion, antigravity, which causes the accelerated expansion of the Universe. However, the most important unresolved problem of modern physics is that most of the quantum field theories, based on the energy of the quantum vacuum, predict the enormous value of the cosmological constant - many orders of magnitude higher than the allowable value according to cosmological concepts.

The second Quintessence model is an alternative to the first. It comes from the assumption that dark energy is a kind of particle-like excitation of some dynamic scalar field called quintessence. The difference from the cosmological constant is that the density of the quintessence can vary in space and time. However, this raises a problem similar to the variant with the cosmological constant. Quintessence theory predicts that scalar fields must acquire a significant mass. However, no evidence of the existence of the quintessence has yet been found.

Thus, the problem related to what is the cause of the accelerated expansion of the Universe is still not fully resolved. In this regard, it is of interest to consider the mechanism of the expansion of the Universe from the above point of view, according to which dark matter is considered as the matter of a mirror space to ours.

This matter creates a repulsive anti-gravity field in our space. At the same time, the manifestation of gravity and antigravity should be considered as a manifestation of cosmological pressure, which has a different sign for two types of matter.

From this point of view, the accelerated expansion of the Universe is due to the predominance of the repulsive (antigravitational) pressure field of dark matter. If we approach this issue from the standpoint of Einstein's general theory of relativity, then dark matter, unlike ordinary matter, creates a negative curvature of space.

Obviously, during the evolution of the Universe, as a result of the confrontation between baryon and dark matter, the curvature of space also changed, which led to the predominance of either the forces of gravitational attraction or antigravitational repulsion.

In this regard, the hypotheses of the fatal scenario of the final stage of the development of the Universe that have appeared recently are not entirely legitimate. Such hypotheses, in essence, are a unified similarity, formulated by R. Clausis in 1865, of the hypothesis of the heat death of the Universe. However, most likely, the Universe is in some kind of dynamic equilibrium and its current expansion will sooner or later be replaced by contraction.

In this regard, we should again turn to the principle of Le Chatelier considered at the beginning of the article. This principle, obviously, is universal not only for the natural processes of the Earth, but also for the cosmos, including the evolution of the Universe.

In this case, the development of the Universe in time can be likened to a kind of oscillation of a physical pendulum, when the Universe, expanding, reaches a state with maximum energy, and then returns to an equilibrium state with minimum energy, after which it again passes to the maximum point, completing the full cycle of its development.

At the same time, when the Universe expands, gaining energy, the opposite process of energy selection comes into force. The expansion of the Universe leads to the rarefaction of space - its cooling. As a result, the Universe, losing energy, begins to contract until its pressure and temperature again prevail. However, during its expansion or contraction, it always, like any physical system, tends to a minimum of energy.

Another question is whether these fluctuations in time are infinite? Yes, if it is closed, but, most likely, like all natural systems, the Universe is also an open system and, therefore, its oscillations will fade over time. The reason for this process is that, like any open system, the Universe exchanges energy and matter with the environment of the surrounding space, or rather, with other spatially separated systems. The latter suggests that it is quite possible that our Universe is not the only one.

From all of the above, it follows that, as the ancient sages of the East believed, antigravity exists, and it is caused by nothing more than dark matter, which devastates dark galaxies from baryonic matter, and is also the cause of the expansion of the Universe.

Taking into account dark matter as a repulsive medium, ideas about black holes are also changing.

In addition, the problem, absurd in its essence, the so-called "singularity" is being solved. Indeed, in the process of gravitational contraction caused by baryonic matter, there is an increase in density and negative pressure contained in the center of a cosmic object of dark matter, which will eventually lead to an explosion and expansion of baryonic matter.

Supernovae can serve as an example of this, and in galactic formations, these are exploding peculiar galaxies. By the way, it is possible that the Universe was also formed as a result of a similar explosion caused by an increase in the negative pressure of dark matter during the previous compression of the Universe.

Thus, taking into account dark matter as a repulsive medium makes it possible to explain the practical absence of baryonic matter in dark galaxies, the absence of galaxies in dark matter clusters, in such a supercluster as Abell 520, as well as the structure of so-called "black holes".

In addition, consideration of the evolution of celestial bodies and systems from the standpoint of the dual structure of space, matter and acting forces allows us to get rid of the singularity paradox.