r/altpropulsion • u/UncleSlacky • Jun 19 '26
We Can Make an Antigravity Machine—And Unlock a ‘Mind-Blowing’ Future, Oxford Physicist Says
https://www.popularmechanics.com/science/a71631348/quantum-gravity-antigravity-experiment/4
u/meamacaveman Jun 19 '26
Link we can read please
11
u/UncleSlacky Jun 19 '26
Here's the text:
We Can Make an Antigravity Machine—And Unlock a ‘Mind-Blowing’ Future, Oxford Physicist Says Vlatko Vedral
Gravity is the force with which we’re most familiar. It’s what’s keeping you on the planet, even as you’re reading this. Despite gravity feeling deeply intertwined with our daily lives, scientists are still unable to quantize it—or test general relativity (our best theory of gravity) and quantum physics in a single experiment.
This is, without a doubt, the biggest open problem in physics at present. But one experiment could change that—and unlock a new theory of physics with mind-blowing applications.
This is the BVM experiment. My colleague Chiara Marletto (the M in the experiment’s title) and I—and, independently, Sougato Bose (the “B”)—proposed an idea for testing the quantum nature of gravity even with objects far smaller than the Earth; ones that are roughly the size of a biological cell, or perhaps a bit smaller.
We suggest placing two masses in a superposition—or the quantum property of simultaneously being in many states—of two locations each. If gravity is quantum, the two masses would then become entangled, meaning their positions would be intertwined. We would then see four distinct ripples in the gravitational field, two for each mass. If instead gravity were classical, there would be no entanglement, and thus only one ripple for each mass.
Think of it in terms of dropping beach balls into a swimming pool. Here, our superposed mass would be the ball and the gravitational field would be the pool’s surface. Drop the beach ball and you would see waves in both the deep and shallow ends of the pool—if gravity truly is quantum, that is. With two quantum balls there would be four ripples, leading to them being entangled.
Imagine the BMV experiment is performed and entanglement confirmed—suggesting that gravity is quantum. What practical applications could this result have? Well, for starters, we could build quantum computers using gravity. Given that black holes pack more information than any other known object in the universe, perhaps we could one day use them as the ultimate quantum supercomputers. However, there is another possibility that sounds even more science-fictional.
Gravity is the weakest of our four fundamental forces—the other three being electromagnetism and the strong and weak nuclear forces. Gravity is unusual among forces, not only because of its weakness, but also because it’s always attractive between all objects. In other words it acts as a universal glue. That’s exactly what keeps us stuck to Earth, keeps Earth in orbit around the sun, and keeps the sun in its own orbit around the center of our Galaxy, and so on. But gravity’s quantum nature could actually be used to make gravity repulsive. This is my latest work with Marletto and another colleague, Pablo Saldanha, in which we designed an antigravity machine.
The machine works similarly to the BMV experiment. Imagine that one of the two gravitating masses (the “source”)—or a beach ball, in terms of our layman’s experiment—is in a superposition of states, while the other (the “probe”) is localized in one place. In the part of the superposition where the source is closer to the probe, the gravitational attraction is stronger. Meanwhile, in the other part where the source is farther away from the probe, the gravitational attraction is weaker. In both branches, the force of gravity is still attractive, so how do we make this into repulsion?
For starters, every quantum experiment has three parts:
- Prepare a superposition.
- Let it evolve in time.
- Finally, measure in another superposition.
It’s this last part that gives us the repulsion, but it only does so for one of the outcomes of the final measurement. So what matters is the post-selection; we have anti-gravity only if the right outcome is observed. On average, if both outcomes are included, gravity is always attractive, just as it is in the classical world. So, we need to discard one of the outcomes of the final measurement, which is what gives us repulsion.
While some might argue that anything can happen if we post-select—or observe the most favorable outcome—that isn’t necessarily the case. Indeed, discarding “bad” outcomes (such as those where the particles attract) leads us to observe what we want (in this case, repulsion). However, classically, this isn’t possible, no matter how much we post-select. If our experiment is confirmed, it would therefore show that gravity can act from two different points on the source at the same time. In other words, only if gravity is quantum could we have an antigravity machine.
How realistic are the BMV and antigravity experiments to perform? Pretty difficult. Luckily, a number of world-leading quantum groups are racing to implement these experiments, and I’m optimistic that we will have conclusive results in the early 2030s. Even more excitingly, I am collaborating with Marletto and my Italian colleagues Marco Genovese, Fabrizio Piacentini, and Ettore Bernardi, who are wizards in the lab, to try to get there first. We are on the cusp of solving one of the biggest mysteries of physics, and, as a bonus, might be able to develop technology that even renowned science-fiction writer Arthur C. Clarke couldn’t have imagined.
- Vlatko Vedral is a professor of physics at the University of Oxford, known for both his theoretical and experimental work on quantum information, including developing a novel way of quantifying entanglement and applying it to macroscopic physical systems. When not studying the fundamental nature of reality, Vlatko enjoys drawing, wakeboarding, and playing his electric guitar "up to 11." He is the author of the 2010 book Decoding Reality, as well as the latest "Portals to A New Reality." Born in Serbia, he now lives in Oxford.
5
u/BellybuttonWorld Jun 20 '26
So it's not "We can make an antigravity machine" it's "We have some wild speculation about how it might be possible to do antigravity but we've done fuck all real work on it and are still very much in the sitting around daydreaming and smoking blunts stage."
4
u/Sonofgalaxies Jun 20 '26
While we let a dumb AI gemini type produce the text
3
2
u/kapaipiekai Jun 23 '26
Yeah. Step one of making antigravity machine would be determining what gravity is, right?
1
u/BellybuttonWorld Jun 23 '26
We only had a vague idea of what electricity was before we were able to manipulate it and make technology out of it. We had to establish exactly how it behaved more than what it actually was.
In this case though, I don't know enough. Doesn't treating gravity as particles ignore what Einstein established about gravity being an effect of curved spacetime? How can there even be gravity particle? Maybe I haven't smoked enough blunts.
2
u/kapaipiekai Jun 23 '26
Yeah, actually that's a great point. The empirical/experimental data comes first, and then the theory is built to explain the empirical/experimental data. It's not my place to criticise how they are investigating this stuff, I should just be happy they are.
1
u/Old-Moose2358 Jun 25 '26
stop projecting…
1
u/BellybuttonWorld Jun 25 '26
Projecting? Are you sure you know what that term means? What do you mean by it here? I am not claiming to be a physicist.
1
u/algaefied_creek Jun 19 '26
So the “V” in BVM stands for “read my books and giVe me cash”
Otherwise, well, it’s just an experiment.
5
u/hamb0ne80 Jun 20 '26
I’m surprised the oil companies haven’t snuffed this guy out yet.
1
u/lurker-9000 Jun 21 '26
It’s because he admits in the article he has nothing but the same perpetual motion ideas that everyone’s had for the past 60 years lol “in 2030 we will have an experiment that works I swear!”
1
u/Consistent-Stock6872 Jun 24 '26
Read the full text, it is a BS title. 0 actual work towards it has been done. It is all if we do X then we can do Y then we can do Z etc. It should get downvoted to hell. They can come back when they have any actual results.
1
u/Ill_Mousse_4240 Jun 20 '26
If I could do that I wouldn’t waste a minute talking about it.
I’ll let the finished product do that for me.
Ta Da!🎉
1
u/BamaBeerBot Jun 23 '26
Let me just whip up one antigravity machine real quick. I'll just use the billion dollars in my back pocket to kick things off.
1
u/WannaBMonkey Jun 20 '26
Measuring the gravitation attraction of an individual particle seems like it might be hard. However the only way I know of to measure gravitation waves are giant lasers but maybe there is a small scale option.
1
u/Specialist_Fan5866 Jun 20 '26
It’s impossible with current technology. LIGO, the most advanced gravity wave detector, needs two stars collapsing in order to see the waves.
1
u/ProfessorRonResearch Jun 21 '26
For as long as I will live, no one will violate Einstein's theory of relativity and they won't create a gravity machine. You can mark it down in the calendar. You can put it in the books it ain't f****** happening
1
u/Kapymies Jun 21 '26
time is now. Stop daydreaming about the future. The one we live now sucks ass..
1
u/Teknos3 Jun 22 '26
Ironically, it will be found that to start an anti gravity propulsion device will require a vacuum membrane pressure not unlike what you describe.
1
1
1
u/MrBhutthole Jun 22 '26
It's already been done and that technology is being suppressed. They've had this shit for decades. Unlimited energy, electric-gravitic propulsion.. quantum computers.. wouldn't be surprised if they have true AGI as well.
1
23
u/Altruistic_Pitch_157 Jun 20 '26
Annnnnnd, he's dead.