Dividers to the right, please.

Anti Gravity Drive

This week's New Scientist runs a story about an obscure German scientist Burkhard Heim, who developed a unified theory in the 50's that predicts the possibility of an anti-gravity faster than light drive. No shit.

The American Institute of Aeronautics and Astronautics,
rewarded a price for this proposed drive:

http://pdf.aiaa.org/preview/CDReadyMJPC2004_946/PV2004_3700.pdf

Heim's theory, according to The New Scientist, can accurately predict the masses of all the elementary particles, but there are few physicists who know the theory or understand it.

http://www.heim-theory.com/
Permalink Erik Springelkamp 
January 8th, 2006
My favorite part is how a lot of the detractors of the theory argue it's invalid because they can't understand it.

Not because they can point to specific errors, but that the physics is simply beyond them.

Makes me wonder how many of Einstein's colleagues dismissed the theory of relativity because they couldn't grok it...

Philo
Permalink Philo 
January 8th, 2006
"Makes me wonder how many of Einstein's colleagues dismissed the theory of relativity because they couldn't grok it..."


A long ton of them. Essentially most of Einstein's generation of physicists.
Permalink ping? 
January 8th, 2006
The following would be of special interest to Chris McKinstry:

"According to Heim, the mass spectrum is only describable within a world of six dimensions. Therefore, also we men must live in a world with three real and three imaginary dimensions. The two additional dimensions are not - like in Kalzua-Klein theories - curled up in small areas, but they are principally verifiable domains of values of the world. But they are not measurable by physical instruments and have an informational character, since they describe qualitative aspects (meanings) of material organisations. That is the reason why Heim in the last years of his life developed an extended formal logic, in order to describe quantitative as well as qualitative aspects uniformly. Only in this way it was possible to formalise biological and psychological processes (like consciousness) in a 6-dimensional manifold, and therefore also non-physical events; this will have exceptionally far-reaching consequences for all fields of science"
Permalink Erik Springelkamp 
January 8th, 2006
http://www.newscientist.com/channel/fundamentals/mg18925331.200

"The majority of physicists have never heard of Heim theory, and most of those contacted by New Scientist said they couldn't make sense of Dröscher and Häuser's description of the theory behind their proposed experiment."

"The general consensus seems to be that Dröscher and Häuser's theory is incomplete at best, and certainly extremely difficult to follow. And it has not passed any normal form of peer review..."

That's just a *little* bit different fron Philo's take on what happened. Scientists don't understand it because Heim never published it and retreated to his home in Germany to invent a new logic (!?) that could be used to describe it. And then his theory was picked up and expanded on, and it's this guy's description they can't grok.

The one guy thinks there may be some validity to it is someone who operates a giant electro-magnet that can be used in experiments to prove a hyperdrive could exist, but he wants something more tangible before he goes to bat for it. I suspect he's just keeping is research grant options open.

Also, Heim formulated 4 extra dimensions (for a total of 8), but disregarded 2 of them (for a total of six). Dröscher - the guy who's picking up the ball and running with it, conveniently, added two more dimensions - anti-gravity (who knows why the other dimensions don't have anti-dimensions is beyond me), "And the other might be used to accelerate a spacecraft without any rocket fuel."

How convenient.

The main reason anyone is taking any of this seriously is that Heim came up with a formula that could accurately predict the mass of elemenetary particles in a computer simulation. Maybe it's because his model of physics is correct, maybe not. How well Dröscher understands, or properly added to, this theory is an interesting variable. I suspect Dröscher is a crackpot retired patent clerk and enjoying a little bit of crackpot celebrity by taking some obscure work (the more obscure the better) and making wild claims based on it.

etc. http://news.google.com/news?q=Burkhard%20Heim
Permalink MarkTAW 
January 8th, 2006
The math is valid. Years before I ever heard of Heim, I built a Helmian warp coil prototype and successfully tested it. I do not know if they can do much with it beyond sending messages to other times and universes, but the theory is quite solid as far as I am concerned.
Permalink Scott 
January 8th, 2006
I built a Hellman's salami coil last week. It was yummy.
Permalink MarkTAW 
January 8th, 2006
BZZZZZZZZT. We have received and dewarped your message.

Great Scott! We are willing to trade interesting warm gases for petrol. Our dominant SUV life form is facing extinction.
Permalink trollop 
January 9th, 2006
"That's just a *little* bit different fron Philo's take on what happened."

Mine is WAY more entertaining.

Philo
Permalink Philo 
January 9th, 2006
I'm going to start calling yours the McKinstry Defense. "Chebacca is a Wookie. Wookie are 5 dimensional beings. It just don't make sense."
Permalink MarkTAW 
January 9th, 2006
Shouldn't you be approving posts?
Permalink Philo 
January 9th, 2006
Wookies are six feet tall. Our minds are seven-dimensional. It just don't make sense.
Permalink MarkTAW 
January 9th, 2006
Look at the little monkey! Look at the little monkey!
Permalink Ward Bush 
January 9th, 2006
> the physics is simply beyond them

Pretty standard anyway. I happen to know quite a nzmber of physicists, and they all say that one of them is as far beyond them as they are George Bush (which is quite a way, believe me).
Permalink  
January 9th, 2006

This topic was orginally posted to the off-topic forum of the
Joel on Software discussion board.

Other topics: January, 2006 Other topics: January, 2006 Recent topics Recent topics