Levitating and Manipulating Objects With Sound

[ROEL]

"Since the mid-1970s, researchers have been able to levitate small objects using focused beams of high-frequency sound that bounce off a flat surface and create a wave of pressure that pushes the object into the air. "

This subject is also discussed in a book by José Alvarez López, an Argentine archaeologist, in his book El Enigma de las Pirámides (1965) where he submits that the huge blocks of stone used to build the pyramids in Egypt were possibly moved by using sound waves.

 

[Palinurus]

Having a computer program that can produce graphs of functions would probably help me with these questions...

You could try the website WolframAlpha to let them make those for you.

Here's a simple example of what it would look like.

Got the suggestion from here where you can find other solutions as well.

Hope this helps a bit. :)

 

[ziggystarlust]

A short visual of spinning magnets that the scientifically inspired crowd might find interesting, as they levitate. I searched "spinning magnets" on the forum and there were a few links, mainly about Coral Castle and hypothetical propulsion systems. Not for me to discuss...lol...

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=tzub4xt3Ie8#t=65

 

[Archaea]

If an asymmetric voltage pulse is what causes the effect, then what are the superconductor and coil for?

I don't know... I guess superconductors would be useful whenever electricity is involved, because they're so cool. and a coil could be the apparatus within which the pulse exists... maybe? I'm having some trouble trying to understand this stuff, as I will try to explain.

Having a computer program that can produce graphs of functions would probably help me with these questions...

You could try the website WolframAlpha to let them make those for you.

Here's a simple example of what it would look like.

Got the suggestion from here where you can find other solutions as well.

Hope this helps a bit. :)

Very cool, thanks Palinurus.

Using Wolfram I found an asymmetric function which I liked:

y = x3 - 2x2 - 5x + 10, where x = -2.5 to 2.5

but I couldn't figure out what the electromagnetic wave of that would be, I think it might have something to do with vector potential and scalar potential, but I never could understand what they were, so I don't know.

I found this though which has the equation for the electric field of an electromagnetic wave:

and gives the solution as:

But there seems to be another solution with just plain old exponentials without imaginary numbers.

If we plug in:

E = eax + bt = eaxebt

Then we get (assuming I haven't made a mistake :)):

d2E/dx2 = a2eaxebt

and:

d2E/dt2 = eaxb2ebt

Which from the original equation gives:

a2 = (b/c)2
(ac)2 = b2

So:

E = eax + act

Which is just a plain exponential equation and the electric field increases exponentially as both the time and position coordinates increase.

So maybe this is related to the electric pulse somehow, or maybe I'm just trying to mesh incompatible ideas. In either case I still don't know how things decrease.

 

[monotonic]

If an asymmetric voltage pulse is what causes the effect, then what are the superconductor and coil for?

I don't know... I guess superconductors would be useful whenever electricity is involved, because they're so cool. and a coil could be the apparatus within which the pulse exists... maybe? I'm having some trouble trying to understand this stuff, as I will try to explain.

A superconductor produces an opposing magnetic field which locally cancels the magnetic field it is in. A discharge at the surface of a superconductor would occur in an absence of magnetic field, EVEN the field that the discharge itself would produce, as long as it did not overwhelm the superconductor. As I understand, this drastically lowers the characteristic impedance of free space near the superconductor, greatly increasing the potential speed of discharge and maximum discharge current.

The YBCO device seems to use a type 2 superconductor, which explains the coil, which is needed to produce a static magnetic field which brings the superconductor into its superconducting region of operation.

As I understand, this changes many of the assumptions that are used to simplify the equations you're looking at.

 

[Archaea]

If an asymmetric voltage pulse is what causes the effect, then what are the superconductor and coil for?

I don't know... I guess superconductors would be useful whenever electricity is involved, because they're so cool. and a coil could be the apparatus within which the pulse exists... maybe? I'm having some trouble trying to understand this stuff, as I will try to explain.

A superconductor produces an opposing magnetic field which locally cancels the magnetic field it is in. A discharge at the surface of a superconductor would occur in an absence of magnetic field, EVEN the field that the discharge itself would produce, as long as it did not overwhelm the superconductor. As I understand, this drastically lowers the characteristic impedance of free space near the superconductor, greatly increasing the potential speed of discharge and maximum discharge current.

The YBCO device seems to use a type 2 superconductor, which explains the coil, which is needed to produce a static magnetic field which brings the superconductor into its superconducting region of operation.

As I understand, this changes many of the assumptions that are used to simplify the equations you're looking at.

I think I kind of understand... I'm not completely clear about the theory of electromagnetism, but I think you could be right. My understanding of superconductivity is that it was discovered by experiment, and then a theory was developed using quantum mechanics, although I might be mistaken. This makes me think that superconductivity could lead to a better theory of electromagnetism.

The C's also said that a cycling magnetic pulse creates a kind of gravity vacuum in the superconductor which allows the electrons to flow more freely. So that might be a clue... Also I don't know what a YBCO device is.


A little bit of thought yielded the insight that the answer to the question of the asymmetric function was in front of face the whole time. If we take the electric field of an electromagnetic wave which is being stretched or compressed so that it's frequency isn't constant, then over a single wavelength we get an asymmetric function. So maybe the function would like something like:

E = EM sin (kx + jxω0t)

Where ω = jxω0, and is the frequency at the point x, and ω0 is the initial frequency. So the frequency of the wave changes as the wave moves. I'm not sure if this is a solution to the differential equation for the electric field of an electromagnetic wave, however, I just made it up.

Just for the sake of visualization I've attached a picture of the function y = sin (2x * x). In the picture the frequency increases as the x value increases.

 

[monotonic]

I read about a device that was vaguely referred to as "the YBCO" or something like that. The internet informs that YBCO is actually a class of superconductor materials:

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Yttrium_barium_copper_oxide

I can't find the thing I was originally talking about, but it isn't really that important.

A magnetic pulse circulating in the superconductor. This lines up with my understanding of the nature of oscillation. If I'm right, then the circulating pulse is created by a combination of extropic and entropic behavior in the superconductor that finds balance as an oscillation, being extropic at resting state so that the energy grows until it reaches a threshold and becomes extropic. The energy gained during extropy is lost during entropy and after a full cycle the balance is completely zero.

The remarkable thing about this is that when the two states interact this way (entropy and extropy balanced through a resonator's oscillation), they result in a complete balance. So conductance is not positive or negative, but infinite, hence superconductivity. There is one caveat, and that is that at non-integer divisions or multiples of the oscillation period, the balance is not complete.

So the question is, has this circulating pulse ever been measured? And where exactly is the quote from the C's you were talking about?

Maybe it is possible that the circulating pulse could be some of the energy which was used to form the superconductor chemical bonds and is trapped in the substance unable to find equilibrium any other way. This suggests that if the extropic energy were used as a power source, the chemical would decompose, like a battery.

 

[Archaea]

So the question is, has this circulating pulse ever been measured? And where exactly is the quote from the C's you were talking about?

This is the bit where the C's talk about super-conductivity (Session 15 March 1997)

Q: Electrical energy will be present in everything. But in some particular substances, such as those things we call conductors, the electrical energy is, as you said, collected, trapped and channeled, which then is a useful activity because it creates light and runs machines and so forth...

A: Primitive.

Q: Okay. It is primitive. We understand that. When electricity moves in what would be considered a superconductor, how is it different from an ordinary conductor, such as a copper wire?

A: Accelerates flow, thus separating electrons, thus "exciting" process.

Q: What qualities does the superconductor have that contributes to this accelerating of flow?

A: Cycling magnetic pulse.

Q: What creates a cycling magnetic pulse?

A: Matter within gravity vacuum.

Q: How do you create a gravity vacuum?

A: In this case, it is created unintentionally as a byproduct of superconductivity.

Q: You said that a superconductor separates the electrons, thus exciting the flow. What do you mean by separating?

A: From each other.

Q: How is that different from a normal electric flow?

A: Not as widely separated.

Q: Is this separation of electrons a key to this process?

A: Yes.

Q: What additional conditions or qualities contribute to the separating of electrons?

A: Ask yourself now, what conditions define a superconductor?

Q: (L) What defines a superconductor? (A) Zero resistance. (V) Is that without gravity? (A) No heat. (L) How does one achieve zero resistance?

A: Artificial construct.

Q: Do you mean that it is an artificial idea, or that the only thing that would have zero resistance would be something that is artificially constructed.

A: Both.

Q: So, there is no actual possibility for a true superconductor with absolutely zero resistance? But that the resistance can be reduced to a very low level.

A: Close.

Q: Does cold necessarily have something to do with superconductivity?

A: What conditions exist in outer space?

Q: Well it is VERY cold... (A) It is almost a vacuum. (L) No gravity. (A) No, there is gravity, but only that. What I think we must ask is what is the relation between superconductivity and gravity. There was something mentioned... what was that about aether?

A: Nonmaterial realm of existence.

Q: (L) In other words, consciousness. Okay, you mentioned a cycling magnetic pulse that was an unintentional byproduct of superconductivity, and something about matter within a gravity vacuum... Could you define a cycling magnetic pulse?

A: Self explanatory.

Q: You said it was derived from matter within a gravity vacuum. Does that mean that superconductivity creates a gravity vacuum?

A: Yes.

Q: (A) Where? Within the superconductor or outside?

A: Within.

Q: (A) According to what we know, it also creates an electromagnetic vacuum. Is it correct that there is no magnetic field within the superconductor?

A: We have stated before that these two properties are interwoven.

Q: (L) Electromagnetism and gravity. So, if there is no gravity, there is no electromagnetism. But then where is the magnetic pulse?

A: Pulse exists outside of gravity vacuum, but within superconductor. Picture a tube structure.

Q: Is the superconducting state within the gravity vacuum or within the EM pulse?

A: All inclusive. Normal structure for channeling electron flow within a conductor is a solid "tube," within superconductor, it is a "hollow" tube structure, thus evidence of vacuum.

Q: Does this hollow tube structure have any bearing on what you described as the separating of electrons?

A: It is a manifestation of same.

Q: So, in order to have a superconductor, one ought to have a temperature similar to the temperature in space, as well as possibly a chemical construction that is similar to the ambient properties of space, only greatly condensed, would that be it?

A: Close.

Q: (A) Do they mean there is zero gravity without superconductor? They say a vacuum which means what? No gravity?

A: Within.

Q: (A) No gravity within.

A: Not "no," just far less, and fragmented in nature.

There has been some weird magnetic phenomenon measured around superconductors, but I can't remember what it's called off the top of my head.

Also, what does extropic mean, I tried to find a definition using google, but it wasn't helpful.

 

[monotonic]

Extropic is just the opposite of entropic. An electrical resistor converts electrical power into heat, an entropic process. Whenever electricity passes through a resistor, power is lost. The extropic form of this would be a negative resistor, which always adds power when electricity passes through it. I guess very few people have used it in a physics context.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Extropy

Based on the C's session, it sounds like the gravity vaccuum causes a negative resistance characteristic, which causes an excitation that grows until it pushes the electrons to the outer edge of the gravity vaccuum, where they find balance between the entropic and extropic regions.

It seems like the region in the gravity vaccuum is extropic in nature. Does this tie in with the 5th option stuff Laura talked about in Barcelona? Do the extropic energetic forces that power the gravitic world (stars, planets...) originate from areas of weak gravity in "empty" space?

 

[monotonic]

There seems to be a logic loop here:

Q: What qualities does the superconductor have that contributes to this accelerating of flow?

A: Cycling magnetic pulse.

Q: What creates a cycling magnetic pulse?

A: Matter within gravity vacuum.

Q: How do you create a gravity vacuum?

A: In this case, it is created unintentionally as a byproduct of superconductivity.

If the gravity vacuum is a byproduct of superconductivity, then without superconductivity there can be no gravity vacuum. But without a gravity vacuum in the first place, there can be no cycling magnetic pulse to result in superconductivity.

The only way out of this loop I can see is that if a magnetic pulse is induced into the material in the right way, it might create a gravity vacuum sufficient to start the cycle. This suggests that a gravity vaccuum can be created inside other conductors if the right magnetic signal is induced. In this case, the cycling magnetic field produced by the excitation of my theoretical "extropic region" is what maintains the gravity vacuum.

If so then there is a feedback process; the cycle grows when the magnetic cycle is the right shape to result in a gravity vaccuum. This suggests a close mathematical relationship between the cycle and the gravity vacuum that could possibly be extrapolated by someone familiar with the math.

 

[Archaea]

There seems to be a logic loop here:

Q: What qualities does the superconductor have that contributes to this accelerating of flow?

A: Cycling magnetic pulse.

Q: What creates a cycling magnetic pulse?

A: Matter within gravity vacuum.

Q: How do you create a gravity vacuum?

A: In this case, it is created unintentionally as a byproduct of superconductivity.

If the gravity vacuum is a byproduct of superconductivity, then without superconductivity there can be no gravity vacuum. But without a gravity vacuum in the first place, there can be no cycling magnetic pulse to result in superconductivity.

The only way out of this loop I can see is that if a magnetic pulse is induced into the material in the right way, it might create a gravity vacuum sufficient to start the cycle. This suggests that a gravity vaccuum can be created inside other conductors if the right magnetic signal is induced. In this case, the cycling magnetic field produced by the excitation of my theoretical "extropic region" is what maintains the gravity vacuum.

If so then there is a feedback process; the cycle grows when the magnetic cycle is the right shape to result in a gravity vaccuum. This suggests a close mathematical relationship between the cycle and the gravity vacuum that could possibly be extrapolated by someone familiar with the math.

I think that's interesting... Well spotted. :)

 

[MusicMan]

All this talk about gravity and vacuums, and spirals and electrons..
Inside radar sets exists a device called a magnetron or a cyclotron.
It's actually a (resonant) cavity which is excited by inserting electrons.
This in turn generates an electromagnetic [E-H] wave which travels along a waveguide and a horn into the atmosphere and well, you know the rest.
The returning pulses are detected by a device called a travelling wave tube.

Anyway, this reminded me of the researches of a bloke named Grebbenikov, who was investigating levitation, and using the nests of a certain type of wasp, which were built (by the wasps) and incorporated by him into a platform he made to house them, and with which he flew fairly long distances.

As an aside, I noted the reference to the spiral.
It is said that light acts as both a particle and as a wave.
If light is a spiral then it can satisfy both these conditions, as a spiral viewed from the end is a particle, and viewed from the side is a wave.
The observer is the key. Light just is.
It travels at 'the speed of light', but the frequency or colour, is determined by how tight the spiral is 'wrapped'.

 

[HowToBe]

There seems to be a logic loop here:

Q: What qualities does the superconductor have that contributes to this accelerating of flow?

A: Cycling magnetic pulse.

Q: What creates a cycling magnetic pulse?

A: Matter within gravity vacuum.

Q: How do you create a gravity vacuum?

A: In this case, it is created unintentionally as a byproduct of superconductivity.

If the gravity vacuum is a byproduct of superconductivity, then without superconductivity there can be no gravity vacuum. But without a gravity vacuum in the first place, there can be no cycling magnetic pulse to result in superconductivity.

Only if superconductivity and "accelerating the flow of electrons" are the same thing, right? It seems like one is a property of a material, and the other describes the behavior of electrons within that material.

Here's the logic breakdown as far as I can tell:

Superconductivity (a property of a material)
|
| creates as byproduct:
V
Gravity Vacuum (less, and fragmented, gravity within material)
|
| matter within creates:
V
Cycling Magnetic Pulse (occurs within a "shell" or "tube" surrounding Gravity Vacuum - also where electrons flow)
|
| causes:
V
Accellerated flow, "thus separating electrons, thus "exciting" process."
=
= Which is...
=
the way in which electrons move differently in a superconductor compared to an ordinary conductor

I've attached a diagram of what they seem to be describing. I'm guessing that they mention a "tube" shape partly because a comparison to a copper wire was requested.

Thoughts that arise for me:

1. Electrons do not flow within the gravity vacuum (or hardly flow there). Have electrons migrated toward the outside or do they remain in the middle without moving?

2. The manner in which the magnetic pulse cycles is not explained (self explanatory, they say). My first thought is of a pulse traveling cyclically around the conductive outer "tube". That would be perpendicular to the direction of electron flow, which seems to make sense because that's how magnetic fields work, right? This pulse somehow accelerates and "organizes" the electrons, so to speak.

3. The comparisons to space make me wonder: are they implying that outer space is also a "gravity vacuum"? Is the environment of space superconductive, actively cancelling gravity? Interestingly, if so, that would also suggest that electrons would more readily flow where there is gravity (ie. around matter, on/in planets and other objects, away from the "vacuum"). I'm not sure whether that sounds elementary or not.

4. Electrons clearly have something to do with gravity according to this model. Knowing whether electrons were remaining within the "gravity vacuum" or evacuating/avoiding it might help understand how.

5. Cow can all this be tested? If there is a gravity vacuum inside the material, does that mean it effects less gravity on objects around it also, or just less internal gravity between its particles? Is such a weak variation in gravitation measurable? If you can cancel the magnetic pulse, the superconductivity should break down, right?

6. Is the presence of electrons and protons together a requirement for matter to exhibit gravitational effects? This question would be helped along by answering question 1.

FWIW.

 

[trendsetter37]

There seems to be a logic loop here:

Q: What qualities does the superconductor have that contributes to this accelerating of flow?

A: Cycling magnetic pulse.

Q: What creates a cycling magnetic pulse?

A: Matter within gravity vacuum.

Q: How do you create a gravity vacuum?

A: In this case, it is created unintentionally as a byproduct of superconductivity.

If the gravity vacuum is a byproduct of superconductivity, then without superconductivity there can be no gravity vacuum. But without a gravity vacuum in the first place, there can be no cycling magnetic pulse to result in superconductivity.

I thought what they were saying in this instance was that this specific scenario was one way of creating a gravity vacuum but not the only way. Ergo the creation of a gravity vacuum can happen with superconductivity but also the phenomenon may not be exclusive to superconductivity alone. I think it would only be a logic loop if each of those events (leading to the next) was the only way gravity vacuum could arise.

You can boil water by inputting heat energy or lowering atmospheric pressure. Both methods are linked obviously but are still separate mechanisms for causing the same result.

If this indeed is not the case then I agree it does seem like a closed logic loop / chicken and the egg problem here and the only way out of that would be to assume that this would not be the only way a GV is created.