Anti-Gravity Airplanes & Airships, 1920s to 1950s

I wish I could buy into that.
Look up “Pushing Metavehicles powered by nothing but light” at phys.org
https://phys.org/news/2021-09-microscopic-metavehicles-powered.html
Now…if you have a lot of energy beamed from all sides—-don’t put anything in a vehicle except the ability to polarize facets—-maybe you could get an agile “cursor” that could dart back and forth….in microgravity. It it has several beams…it kinda pantographs its way around…maybe no light delay. The next step for the Myrabo light craft approach.

Maybe the laws of physics will allow that.

Me? I just want HLLVs to get larger and larger until we have rockets the size of the Chrysler Building.
 
Last edited:
With the Dyson effect, even a vacuum cleaner can fly...
(I'll get my coat)
 
Utter crankery / misunderstood tech aside (*)...

IMHO, the infamous Nazty 'Bell', with its eponymous blue glow, heavy power lines and 'dancing' was surely a Calutron...
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Calutron
IIRC, there's a plausible 'take' on gravity called 'Teleparallel Gravity' which Einstein toyed with but lacked the math to hack. It's since developed, seen off a bunch of other notions, come down to but two mutually incompatible approaches, both 'String' theories.
snark:
Well, better two flavours than prior two-zillion....
/
As I remember it from a 'New Scientist' article --which only makes sense for about 30 secs after reading-- twisting space/time this way gives EM stuff, that way gives gravity.

Sadly, there is not even the vaguest clue to how latter might be implemented...
:( :( :( :( :(

*) Disclosure: Some years ago, I was banned from a 'hobby electronics' site for politely suggesting their 'Over Unity' guru connect a simple resistive load, aka filament bulb, instead of arcane extrapolation from his zoo of meters. ( IMHO, it was evident he had no awareness of power factors, wave-form, resonance, RMS etc etc etc, but I didn't say that... )
Proposing such a simple sanity-check drew the guru's ire, and that of his clique.
As they were site sponsors, the Moderator apologised, but cut me off...
 
If there is anything to any of this-materials research may be key. One of the words I have been seeing a lot of at phys.org is 'non reciprocal' effects. What ever happened to Larry Smalley and Ning Li?
 
Dynoman said:
The Navy is interested in Gravitational Wave Generators. Fontana believes HFGW generators could be used as a source of space propulsion. Included is Navy patent.
Click to expand...
I'm kinda doubt they could pump much thrust from gravity waves... Gravity is a weak force; much weaker than electromagnetic. Any "gravity drive" would most likely be orders of magnitude less efficient, than photon drive of the same power (and considering that photon drive required circa 300 megawatt per 1 Newton of thrust...)
 
Um, warily extrapolating from EM stuff, the key could be 'resonance', where voltages x currents = power circulating in a tuned circuit may be many, many times greater than you'd expect. Think 'microwave oven' magnetrons, near-fractal cell-phone antennae, Tesla coils for the 'Gee-Whizz' win...

Yes, yes, real Q-Stuff... ;)

IMHO, the nearest any-one's come to generating gravitational waves may be the team who spun a big dumbell / dumb-bell around its centre. This was, IIRC, in the era when Weber reckoned he could spot gravitational waves by the 'singing' of a massive metal bar. Sadly, orders of magnitude short on sensitivity, beset by 'false positives'...
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Weber_barhttps://arxiv.org/ftp/arxiv/papers/1609/1609.09400.pdf
 

Attachments

  • Mont-2.jpg
    Mont-2.jpg
    50.3 KB · Views: 33
If there ever is an anti-gravity machine---it would probably have to be built in space where you have microgravity anyway, and it would only work for a mass less than a thimble ;)

This is about as good as it gets
https://news.harvard.edu/gazette/story/2024/04/how-did-you-get-that-frog-to-float

Maybe-maybe-maybe?
View: https://m.youtube.com/watch?v=bZELRhrzaOg&pp=ugUHEgVlbi1HQg%3D%3D
Larry Smalley worked with Ning Li.

Watch your six'!
https://www.al.com/news/2026/04/dea...investigation-of-missing-dead-scientists.html

A guy from Jacobs/Sverdrup did some work on the side.

Hmm...
https://www.sciencedaily.com/releases/2026/04/260424233214.htm

If nothing else, maybe a way to not be more massive with NAFAL velocities.

The Ozempic Drive:)

More
https://apps.dtic.mil/sti/tr/pdf/ADA426465.pdf
https://www.key.aero/forum/commercial-aviation/27732-whatever-happened-to-boeing-s-project-grasp
 
Last edited:
Sonething iv been curious about for a number of years, id love to know what (if any) damage to the frogs insides from such a strong em field
I recall a Glasgow University project which tried to replicate the result which was stopped for 'ethical' reasons
 
Last edited:
The Government's been (quietly) working on this sort of technology for a long time:

"Decades-old questions about the potential existence of fantastical anti-gravity propulsion
technologies have resurfaced following the Navy’s own disclosure of encounters with
unidentified aerial phenomena and our own original reporting on a series of bizarre
patents assigned to the U.S. Navy that seem to defy our current understanding of physics
and aerospace propulsion. While the discussion continues over whether any such
technologies are feasible, the truth is that the theoretical concepts behind them are
anything but new. In fact, the U.S. military and the federal government have been formally
researching these radical concepts since the 1950s, and according to our own research,
those efforts have continued on to this very day."

See:

https://www.twz.com/30499/the-truth...-researching-anti-gravity-for-nearly-70-years
 
Last edited:
From Popular Mechanics 1929.
 

Attachments

  • 1.png
    1.png
    533.7 KB · Views: 16

Similar threads

Back
Top Bottom