Thread: An Inquiry in Electromagnetism

I notice that electrical strength are measured relative to its weakest detection, at least mathematically it vectorisation (introducting positive and negative) allow one to theorise the interaction between "poled material" and the electrical flow up to certainty. Thus, should not the same theory allow the accessible application of nature to which most of its energy primary focus on certain 3-dimensional-analus through the distribution of material types in the wires or the likes via an observation to strongly gravitised "poled material." Indeed, if such interaction exist then "Gauss Law" regarding it realisation should be restated. Even at an elementary level, I can still construct such a magnet with layered strength such that the observation through "heavy poled material" infuse kinetic interaction that artifically mimic what is posted above beside it magnetisized field interaction. Thus, it is arguable in measure-science that magnetic field is in actuality the mathematical vectorisation of measurable interaction of the concerned.
It is rather a system that is important in it application, and it vectorisation allow such accessibility but it place a limit on it mathematical prediction as well as it alinement with observations, hence it mathematical "pressured-bubblisation" is more sensible since it is a natural failure in such study as it is the case of measurement relative to the weakest detection seem like an impossible bypass, without risking simpleton, to quantisation. Indeed, there exist two such techniqued applications to such conception one is purely mathematical and the other is purely applies nature and theirs interaction gives access to precision engineering. Thus it is plausible that one can refine such undertaking for to construct a "anti-gravity" vechile?

I believe so. BTW, excuse my English.

Originally Posted by MyNameIsVu

I believe so. BTW, excuse my English.

That's not a problem!
Others are better qualified to decide whether we can excuse your "science".
Still, it's always good to hear from another fan of "pressured bubblisation".

Originally Posted by MyNameIsVu

I notice that electrical strength are measured relative to its weakest detection, at least mathematically it vectorisation (introducting positive and negative) allow one to theorise the interaction between "poled material" and the electrical flow up to certainty. Thus, should not the same theory allow the accessible application of nature to which most of its energy primary focus on certain 3-dimensional-analus through the distribution of material types in the wires or the likes via an observation to strongly gravitised "poled material." Indeed, if such interaction exist then "Gauss Law" regarding it realisation should be restated. Even at an elementary level, I can still construct such a magnet with layered strength such that the observation through "heavy poled material" infuse kinetic interaction that artifically mimic what is posted above beside it magnetisized field interaction. Thus, it is arguable in measure-science that magnetic field is in actuality the mathematical vectorisation of measurable interaction of the concerned.
It is rather a system that is important in it application, and it vectorisation allow such accessibility but it place a limit on it mathematical prediction as well as it alinement with observations, hence it mathematical "pressured-bubblisation" is more sensible since it is a natural failure in such study as it is the case of measurement relative to the weakest detection seem like an impossible bypass, without risking simpleton, to quantisation. Indeed, there exist two such techniqued applications to such conception one is purely mathematical and the other is purely applies nature and theirs interaction gives access to precision engineering. Thus it is plausible that one can refine such undertaking for to construct a "anti-gravity" vechile?

I believe so. BTW, excuse my English.

I doubt that this would make sense in any language. It certainly does not reflect physics.

There is no established connection between gravity and electromagnetism and nor basis whatever for "anti-gravity".

I think a lot of people would really like to find a connection between them, however (between gravitation and magnetism).

The trick with "anti-gravity" is that the energy required to create it would have to be accounted for in a way that explains how it can lift you to a higher orbital distance from the Earth. (To uphold conservation of energy).

Some people have reported that superconductor loops can sometimes levitate when they've got enough electricity flowing through them, but you'd have to be sure there was no metal in the building to be certain it isn't a magnetic effect. (A loop with lots of current going through it is going to be highly magnetic) I'm not sure if any genuinely credible sources have made this claim, however.

Originally Posted by kojax

I think a lot of people would really like to find a connection between them, however (between gravitation and magnetism).

The trick with "anti-gravity" is that the energy required to create it would have to be accounted for in a way that explains how it can lift you to a higher orbital distance from the Earth. (To uphold conservation of energy).

Some people have reported that superconductor loops can sometimes levitate when they've got enough electricity flowing through them, but you'd have to be sure there was no metal in the building to be certain it isn't a magnetic effect. (A loop with lots of current going through it is going to be highly magnetic) I'm not sure if any genuinely credible sources have made this claim, however.

The "levitation" with superconductors is well known, and it is a magnetic effect.

It has nothing to do with "anti'gravity".
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Z4XEQ...eature=related

that would be from an intensely strong magnetic field that just overcomes gravity, wouldn't it?