1

# Does paragravity exist?

Fri 17 Aug, 2007 12:18 pm
Hello. Does paragravity exist? I just read this from an online article:

Paragravity is one of those amazing discoveries that we opened this discussion with. It can not be explained except by the effect that is observed to happen to unit's operating drive fields.

Paragravity is a force related to gravity that is created by a drive field generator. It creates a gravitational field within a spacecraft and adjusts the spacecraft's velocity within the field to the local gravitic 'rest' velocity. This rest velocity is that at which the object will remain at a stable distance relative to the strongest local gravity source, either a star or a planet. Away from any planet, this is the orbital velocity of the star (modified by the local galaxy speed). E.g., The ship will move in orbit around the star just as a planet does. In a binary system, the closer star is orbited by the spacecraft (in reality, the distance would depend on the size of the star, but we ignore this for simplicity). Paragravitic rest velocity does not affect the motion of the spacecraft unless the drive field is deactivated, in most cases, though it may affect movement very near planets, moons, and star. In a starless system, with no nearby massive objects, the rest velocity is that of galactic motion, and will be zero relative to the warp points in the system.

Paragravity resistance becomes stronger as the object moves faster and when local gravity is much stronger (like the effect of moving wire through magnetic lines of force). Paragravity will cause an opposite direction force to a ship moving (in some ways, its like a 'gravity friction' but it can actually slow an object 'trying' to go faster). This is why objects in a drive field have a maximum 'speed limit' less than the speed of light. An object within a drive field is always at the local gravitic 'rest' velocity. This is the velocity at which the object will remain at a stable distance relative to the strongest local gravity source, either a star or a planet. Away from any planet, this is the orbital velocity a planet around of the star (modified by the local galactic motion, as the star moves, etc.), and the ship will move in orbit around the star if the drive field is deactivated, or unable to hold station (as with space stations). A unit with station-keeping ability may choose to hold its position relative to the star, remaining unmoving on the system map. At 60 tactical hexes from a planet (the distance should be based on the size of the planet but simplicity is better), the planetary gravity field is strong enough to cause the ship to orbit the planet (which is orbiting the star)at the same velocity as a moon would orbit the planet, which means the ship would remain at a fixed distance from the planet (if it elected not to use its drive or lost its drive). At this distance, a unit that uses its drive in station-keeping/standby mode can not overcome the influence of the planet. It may hold station fixed relative to the planet but it will move in orbit as the planet moves around the star. Within one tactical hex of a planet/moon, a modified 'orbital' synchronous drive' can be used to remain stationary to the planets surface, and for simplicity, this distance will allow a spacecraft to occupy a synchronous orbit if it deactivates its drive field, if that is desired.
• Topic Stats
• Top Replies
Type: Discussion • Score: 1 • Views: 1,480 • Replies: 16
No top replies

TheCorrectResponse

1
Fri 17 Aug, 2007 12:44 pm
You have been asking this same question over and over since May 15, 2005. Any particular reason that you won't take NO for an answer???
0 Replies

spendius

1
Fri 17 Aug, 2007 05:06 pm
There's no para-gravity in our pub. I can vouch for that. The tits are forever below the sightscreen and self-evidently not voluntarily.

The drive field generator is a bit rusty I think. Not yet actually deactivated.
0 Replies

Heliotrope

1
Sat 18 Aug, 2007 04:18 am
Paragragity is pseudoscientific nonsense.
It's in the same vein as homeopathy and astrology.
ie. it's bullsh*t.
0 Replies

JGoldman10

1
Sat 18 Aug, 2007 01:37 pm
TheCorrectResponse wrote:
You have been asking this same question over and over since May 15, 2005. Any particular reason that you won't take NO for an answer???

I believe you.
0 Replies

JGoldman10

1
Tue 21 Aug, 2007 02:25 pm
I've seen the term "parafield" used in a scientific context-what is a parafield?
0 Replies

Heliotrope

1
Tue 21 Aug, 2007 03:04 pm
Any physics term taken randomly out of context with 'para' as a prefix, paragravity, parafield, paraparticle etc... is 99% likely to be some new-age hippy pseudoscience nonsense about "crystals that cure cancer by flashing on and off with LEDs" or how a pyramid made of cheese can prevent you becoming an alien or something.

0 Replies

ebrown p

1
Tue 21 Aug, 2007 03:36 pm
So Heliotrope...

Are you going to tell me that parachutes don't work.

(I have actually seen them work).
0 Replies

spendius

1
Tue 21 Aug, 2007 05:42 pm
They often do. But not always. Filling in a lottery ticket might be said to work. We actually saw that last week.
0 Replies

JGoldman10

1
Tue 21 Aug, 2007 05:49 pm
I was trying to have a serious discussion here-but apparently you people are spewing nonsense-I just asked a science expert for the answers.
0 Replies

spendius

1
Tue 21 Aug, 2007 06:05 pm
Sorry mate. I thought it was a paradebate.
0 Replies

ebrown p

1
Tue 21 Aug, 2007 06:52 pm
JGoldman10 wrote:
I was trying to have a serious discussion here-but apparently you people are spewing nonsense-I just asked a science expert for the answers.

Heliotrope gave you a perfectly fine set of responses, and I don't know of anything more to add. The rest of us are just looking to have a bit of fun at the threads expense..

.... I guess that would makes us parasites.
0 Replies

JGoldman10

1
Tue 21 Aug, 2007 09:11 pm
ebrown_p wrote:
JGoldman10 wrote:
I was trying to have a serious discussion here-but apparently you people are spewing nonsense-I just asked a science expert for the answers.

Heliotrope gave you a perfectly fine set of responses, and I don't know of anything more to add. The rest of us are just looking to have a bit of fun at the threads expense..

.... I guess that would makes us parasites.

I know "paraparticles" are hyperthetical particles. I've seen the terms "parafield generator" and "parafield theory" used-I'd still like to know what a "parafield" is.
0 Replies

JGoldman10

1
Tue 21 Aug, 2007 09:31 pm
Heliotrope wrote:
Any physics term taken randomly out of context with 'para' as a prefix, paragravity, parafield, paraparticle etc... is 99% likely to be some new-age hippy pseudoscience nonsense about "crystals that cure cancer by flashing on and off with LEDs" or how a pyramid made of cheese can prevent you becoming an alien or something.

Real or not-these ideals are ideal fodder for a comic book.
0 Replies

g day

1
Wed 22 Aug, 2007 11:13 pm
Only in symmetric field where high parasymapethic stupidity applies.
0 Replies

Heliotrope

1
Tue 28 Aug, 2007 02:03 pm
JGoldman10 wrote:
ebrown_p wrote:
JGoldman10 wrote:
I was trying to have a serious discussion here-but apparently you people are spewing nonsense-I just asked a science expert for the answers.

Heliotrope gave you a perfectly fine set of responses, and I don't know of anything more to add. The rest of us are just looking to have a bit of fun at the threads expense..

.... I guess that would makes us parasites.

I know "paraparticles" are hyperthetical particles. I've seen the terms "parafield generator" and "parafield theory" used-I'd still like to know what a "parafield" is.

Perhaps I was a little too peremptorally dismissive of the subject. Please excuse my hasty words and allow me to say what I actually intended.

I meant, of course, for my words to convey the ultimate in contemptuous and absolute dismissal of a crassly obvious mental capitualtion to anti-thought perpetuated by the grossly lacking in any critical faculties or rationality.

Clearly I am not referring to you JG. You have merely asked a question regarding something you have heard.

I am referring to those who insist on using scientific sounding terminology to describe ideas that have no grounding in reality or any support from even the flimsiest of evidence whatsoever.
My ire is directed at them.

para-
Prefix.
1, Beside; adjacent to eg. parathyroid.
2, Beyond or distinct from, but comparable to eg. paramilitary.
Origin from Greek para ‘beside, beyond’.

A similar definition to 'meta-'.

For example; "paragravity" is gravity beyond gravity.
A "parafield" is a field beyond a field.
A "paraparticle" is a particle beyond a particle.

All of these words form part of the staple diet of the pseudoscientist who has no respect for, and less understanding of evidence but a great fondness for using scientific sounding terms to gull the foolish into accepting nonsense as the truth.

Paragravity et al is utter tripe and nonsense.
It has no relationship to anything currently understood to be connected with reality or anything based upon corroborated evidence.

It is not part of physics in any way shape or form.

If I were to make so bold as to offer advice I would suggest ignoring the terms and whatever source they came from.

Please do not take offence. My remarks are not directed at you.
There is no such thing as a stupid question.
Occasionally there are questions that amuse me enough to turn on the eloquent denunciation of foolishness.

None of that changes the truth of my words however.
0 Replies

g day

1
Mon 17 Sep, 2007 12:09 am
No
0 Replies

### Related Topics

Evolution 101 - Discussion by gungasnake
Typing Equations on a PC - Discussion by Brandon9000
The Future of Artificial Intelligence - Discussion by Brandon9000
The well known Mind vs Brain. - Discussion by crayon851
Scientists Offer Proof of 'Dark Matter' - Discussion by oralloy
Blue Saturn - Discussion by oralloy
Bald Eagle-DDT Myth Still Flying High - Discussion by gungasnake
DDT: A Weapon of Mass Survival - Discussion by gungasnake

1. Forums
2. » Does paragravity exist?