Gravitational Expulsion Of Plasma - Antigravity?

Aug 2018
54
2
Neural Network of the Universe
Hello once again! As you probably noticed already, I'm rather a sceptic when it comes to Special Relativity. Luckily, General Relativity seems to be slightly more reasonable to me. In the difference to relative velocity, rest mass is a definitive property of an object - so the idea, that time might be flowing at a different rate near a dense distribution of mass, doesn't hurt my brain so much, as the idea of time dilation due to relative velocity. However I don't think, that GR gives us the entire image, when it comes to gravity - and I want to show you, why...

Let's start from a publication called: Expulsion of Plasma in A Gravitational Field. This short paper was published just 4 years ago (2016), so many of you probably don't know too much about it. Generally speaking, it deals with a simple experiment which proves that plasma in a vacuum chamber is being "pushed away" from the source of a gravitational field:

Although it might seem pretty obvious for common people, modern physics can't explain such behavior of plasma. As for today, such effect is being explained with the force of buoyancy, according to which an upward lift is caused by density/pressure differential in a medium. Science tells us, that on the Earth's surface a flame is directed upward, due to the same process, which allows a hot-air baloon to fly (or rather float). In shortcut: because the density of atmosphere decreases with the increase of altitude, everything what is less dense, than air at the surface level, will be "pushed up" by the atmospheric pressure.



This is, what is being told by physicists: "I just want to make it clear that gravity does attract everything, including the hot gases in a flame. If those gases were enclosed in a very thin balloon of negligible weight, but strong enough to hold them, and there were no air, it would fall in the direction of gravity". However, as it is proven by the experiments involving a vacuum chamber, such statement seems to be incorrect for matter in the state of plasma, as it still experiences an upward lift, despite the lack of density differential in the medium.

But let me now make use of this one-in-lifitime chance, which theoretical physics gives to those, who know, that 2+2*2=6, even if a calculator shows, that it equals 8. Since there's still no one, who would claim any official right to the invention of plasma-powered antigravity drive, I want to let you know, that those rights have been claimed by a guy named Bartłomiej Staszewski, who's a physicist for fun... But it's not my intention, to convince you to some unproven theory - I'm here to speak about observable facts, which science preferred to ignore up until today. This is why I wouldn't make any controversial claim without having some actual evidence, to support it. And here it is: a real-life homemade prototype of an antigravity plasma propulsion system...


All you need, is to apply enough energy and this owen will fly to space... Of course, as for today it might look like some stupid joke for professional physicists, but such impression will most likely change in the near future - when recent discoveries in this field of physics will be at last accepted by the scientific community. As for now, all you need, is an open mind and the ability to question things, that are being presented as scientific facts. For example: don't you think, that the density of air won't differ too much at the bottom and at the top of a microwave owen, if we consider, that it's interior is separated from the rest of Earth's atmosphere? Or: wouldn't we observe the upward lift of plasma in the microwave on the moon's surface, where's no atmospheric pressure?

Anyway, I have as well my own theoretical model of gravity, which uses so called "cheerios effect", as a way to explain the gravitational expulsion of plasma - but I want to discuss this subject in a separate thread...
 
Apr 2015
1,081
245
Somerset, England
If the plasma is in a vacuum, what holds it together and stops it spreading out?
 
Aug 2018
54
2
Neural Network of the Universe
If the plasma is in a vacuum, what holds it together and stops it spreading out?
I guess, that it's the electric field (differential of opposite electric charges) - plasma particles travel along field lines, which connect the electrodes. Of course, a flame which makes the plasma ball in microwave requires oxygen to burn, so there's no way, to get the same result with vacuum inside the owen...
 
Apr 2015
1,081
245
Somerset, England
You shouldn't guess, you should know.
And you should also know that in vacuum tubes the plasma spreads out over the inside of of the tube.
This is called the Child-Langmuir Law.
 
  • Like
Reactions: topsquark
Aug 2018
54
2
Neural Network of the Universe
You shouldn't guess, you should know.
And you should also know that in vacuum tubes the plasma spreads out over the inside of of the tube.
This is called the Child-Langmuir Law.
I don't feel to be in position to always know the right answer - sometimes I just use simple logic to guess it...

I didn't know about the Child-Langmuir Law - thanks! I think, that in this case, I can make another guess and say, that behavior of plasma depends here most likely on the shape and size of electrodes. Plasma current will behave differently if the electric potentials will be concentrated in a point-like sources or if they will be distributed over a bigger area.


And after watching some movies on YT, my second guess is, that in the difference to gravitational attraction, strenght of plasma expulsion depends most likely on it's energy density - the higher is the energy concentration in plasma, the stronger gravitational expulsion it experiences...

Sadly, mainstream science doesn't help too much in this case, so I can't know for sure, if my guesses are correct...
 
Apr 2015
1,081
245
Somerset, England
This still doesn't answer the question of why the plasma doesn't spread out,
Nor does it answer the question of where the plasma comes from in the first place, given that there is supposed to be a vacuum ?
 
Aug 2018
54
2
Neural Network of the Universe
This still doesn't answer the question of why the plasma doesn't spread out,
Well, I've answered you already, that in this case:

it''s the electric field, which holds the shape of plasma arcs and that in the case of plasma ball in microwave, there's no vacuum inside.
However this made me wonder, what would happen with the plasma ball, if we would use somekind of special flame, that burns in a vacuum - I admit, that I have no clue, if the plasma would still be a ball or if it would be dispersed over the interior volume. I wonder if you know the right answer... :)

Nor does it answer the question of where the plasma comes from in the first place, given that there is supposed to be a vacuum ?
Electrons are being emitted from the electrode due to increasing electric potential - I thought, that's something rather obvious...
 
Apr 2015
1,081
245
Somerset, England
But plasma is made of ions not electrons.
 
  • Like
Reactions: topsquark
Apr 2015
1,081
245
Somerset, England
A quote from your link

a plasma containing ions
Plasma is the fourth state of matter.
It can be created by sufficiently energetic particles colliding with the residual gas in an evacuated chamber or in the case you mention gas being generated in the chamber by atoms and ions being (thermally)stripped off the solid parts. Specially fabricated electrodes facilitate this. Thorium is a common doping element for this purpose.
But then there is not a perfect vacuum in the chamber.
Of course electrons will come off first as they are much lighter and so require less thermal energy to achieve the necessary kinetic energy to leave the solid.

Years ago, before transistors etc, they used to teach an experiment in Physics observing what happens to the 'glow' as the pressure is reduced in an evacuated tube.

 
Last edited: