Another anti gravity question:?

Question

I have read that anti gravity would violate the law of conservation of energy. I don't understand though, if you had to put in as much energy to generate a (hypothetical of course) anti gravity field as gravity needs to pull the object down in the first place, would the law still be violated? If so, can you explain why in laymans terms? I've also read that matter generating anti gravity would counterintuitively still accelerate towards the Earth like normal matter. If true, would there still be any use for antigravity?

Answer 1

Okay, anti-gravity doens't NECESSARILY violate the law of conservation of energy, just some ideas of an anti-gravity device may. For example, let's say that I have an anti-grav platform, in which I put a weight on it, and I flip a switch, so that it becomes weightless. I then raise it to a great height with litlte work, because it's weightless. Then I push it off the platform, and it comes crashing down to the ground, releasing energy. Where did this energy come from? So, this idea won't work.

However, the idea of a creating an anti-gravity field in the same way electromagnetic fields can be created doesn't necessarily violate conservation of energy, because you do put in energy into creating such a field in order to lift an object. The idea of creating a anti-gravity field isn't as far-fetched as many think. Check out this link.

Answer 2

If you move a mass up some distance against the pull of gravity, you have done work proportional to the mass and distance. For example, moving 2 kilograms up 1 meter does twice as much work as moving 1 kilogram up 1 meter. But turn on your anti gravity machine and it takes no work to raise either mass. Your anti gravity machine has erased the energy different between two masses. Conservation of energy says you can't just erase energy. Now you turn off the anti gravity while the masses are up high. Those masses now have potential energy. You created that energy by turning off your anti gravity field. Conservation of energy says you can't just create energy.

The whole reason people want anti gravity is to avoid having to use all that rocket power to raise mass against the pull of gravity. But doing so places a mass in a high potential energy position, which is to say at a high height, without using any energy. You didn't change rocket energy into energy of height (potential energy), you just got it for free, violating conservation of energy.

Answer 3

Wow, you really tried to cover all the bases didn't you.

You can offset gravity by exerting a force equal to and in
the opposite direction as gravity acts.

This is not general anti-gravity in the classical sense. It is
application of force. The force you apply must consume
energy.

As far as any use for anti-gravity. . . I am just not sure. I can
almost see stuff in the near vicinity jumping up off of the
ground and flying off somewhere.

Answer 4

that's hilarious! for sure you may want to continuously attempt the idea and easily strap a slice of toasted bread butter part up onto a cat's decrease back yet i might want to wager something the cat is going to land on that's ft inspite of the buttered toast. Why? The cat's mass is a few distance more desirable than the buttered toast. Now discover something of an identical mass because the buttered toast,connect them at the same time and now you in elementary words might want to have created an anti-gravity gadget!

Answer 5

Gravity is a manifestation of space associated with matter.
Anti-gravity is likely a science fiction sort of thing.
If you consider anti-matter and apply it to anti-gravity,it might work but not in this universe.

Answer 6

Hmm... Try asking a professor, and if that doesn't work, Just get some pot and watch some nova... Seems to do the trick for me ;)