digg

Join DiggAbout

The Digg Crew wants to hear your thoughts!
Please take our short survey about Digg and potential feature ideas.

Physicists have 'solved' mystery of levitation

telegraph.co.uk — Levitation has been elevated from being pure science fiction to science fact, according to a study reported today by physicists. In earlier work the same team of theoretical physicists showed that invisibility cloaks are feasible. Their discovery could ultimately lead to frictionless micro-machines with moving parts that levitate...

show profanity settings
expand all
  • DiggCommando, on 10/10/2007, -4/+44Ok, now where is the flying car I was promised?

    All joking aside, this is a truly fascinating discovery as friction can become a limiting factor very quickly when you are talking about nano scale physics.
    • MasterThief117, on 10/10/2007, -1/+35People can barely drive in 2 dimensions. What makes you think people can drive in 3?
      • nepawoods, on 10/10/2007, -1/+26It may actually be easier. Collisions in three dimensions are far less likely than in two.
        • archlich, on 10/10/2007, -0/+22Until you go from 3d to 2d... landing.
          • FTLJohnson, on 10/10/2007, -2/+4If you can have a force that repels objects in a fashion that allows them to levitate and fly, what makes you think that same technology couldn't be used to create a bumper zone for negating impacts? Also, COMPUTER GUIDANCE SYSTEMS. There really aren't many obstacles to worry about in the air when the landscape is mapped, and all airborne objects would have some form of transponder which would cause onboard computers to avoid that object.

            look at a map of roads, and reaize that when you extrude that into a MILE's worth of 3rd dimension, cars could fly around SO far apart from one another, it's ridiculous. Unless everyone was flying on computer generated paths mapped based on GPS coordinates, you'd probably only even SEE other cars while you were taking off or landing... or maybe a little more often in very urban areas.
          • FLarsen, on 10/10/2007, -0/+3That's when the problem sorts itself out.
          • archlich, on 10/10/2007, -1/+1I can't reply directly to FTL so:
            http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Crash_landing
          • arjie, on 10/10/2007, -0/+1Haha, a story that talks about science fiction turning to reality and a guy with the name FTL comments.

            More importantly, I swear the same set of comments happens every time someone talks about 'flying cars'.
    • cmwotring, on 10/10/2007, -5/+4here's your flying car.

      http://www.moller.com/
      • gwolf, on 10/10/2007, -1/+1The Moller car is a fraud and will never fly without a string attached to it.
        However if it weighed, Oh say, 1/3 what it does now, it might have a shot.
        • cmwotring, on 10/10/2007, -0/+1I think you've just contradicted yourself in your statement. It has flown. Maybe it's not as stable as it could or should be, but it has left the ground in semi controlled flight. I can see where there may be problems if one of the engines fail, but it's a pretty solid example of a flying car.
    • zachblume, on 10/10/2007, -2/+2Right but on non nano-scales, the casmir force is basically null. It was only discovered very recently because its the weakest force in existence, weaker than gravity.
      • bIuebonics, on 10/10/2007, -0/+2first, the casimir force is nothing like gravity; it is not a fundamental force. second, it is not weak either; it just has a small range.
        • stev31h, on 10/10/2007, -0/+1Since googling such a topic is tough for someone who isn't that far through physics, can you sum up the casimir force?
    • pandaking, on 10/10/2007, -0/+0Glad you liked it. I found it pretty fascinating too - reminds me I need to google the invisibility cloak mentioned ^^
  • VeryBoredNow, on 10/10/2007, -5/+113And by 'solved' they mean "not solved"
    • mentor, on 10/10/2007, -0/+5And by "levitation" the poster means 'Casimir force' and realises that levitation could be achieved using any number of configurations of applied forces.
      • JCSaint, on 10/10/2007, -0/+3No, I think they just dissected David Blaine. =P (If there's an Ace of Clubs in my ass.....)
  • Al3x, on 10/10/2007, -0/+19I personally would like to see something tangible...(not that stupid hovering top, seen that before). Something that shows me they can levitate...not just a spinning magnet.
    • GMorgan, on 10/10/2007, -1/+1There are videos out there of them levitating a frog though I think they use different principles to this.
    • bIuebonics, on 10/10/2007, -0/+3this is not levitation of large objects.
  • slayerab, on 10/10/2007, -0/+24Hoverboards? I want a Pitbull...
    • dvddesign, on 10/10/2007, -0/+7*****, I'll settle for a pink one from Mattel.
    • FTLJohnson, on 10/10/2007, -0/+14McFly, you BOJO!!! Those boards don't work on water - unless you've got POWER!!! HAHAHAHA!!!
  • LetsGoHawks, on 10/10/2007, -4/+9Then you read the article and find out this will only work for really small stuff at really close range.

    Also, it's not really "levitation" it's more like "make two particles repel each other".
    • Casedot, on 10/10/2007, -0/+3"The practicalities of designing the lens to do this are daunting but not impossible and levitation 'could happen over quite a distance'."
      • emjaymj, on 10/10/2007, -0/+3Yes, LetGoHawks, we all assumed that physicists solving levitation was not be taken in a scientific context, but rather that levitation can only be magic.
    • orangedog, on 10/10/2007, -0/+5And in the 1950's the transistor was a neat gadget, but no one ever thought it could handle any serious current.
    • streetr8cer13, on 10/10/2007, -0/+4repel two objects IS levitation
  • budgetguitar, on 10/10/2007, -1/+57Forget flying cars. Who wants Lindsey Lohan crashing her wasted self through their roof in the middle of the night because she can't read the altimeter properly? Where's my hoverboard is the real question? I've been waiting since 1985.
    • Graemebru, on 10/10/2007, -1/+6Thats Heavy
      • archlich, on 10/10/2007, -0/+13Why is everything heavy? Did the gravitational constant of the universe change in the future?
    • IRoaChI, on 10/10/2007, -0/+3I know, the tomorrow we were promised in Back to Future still hasn't happened. I am pissed off Marty you used to be cool.
    • GMorgan, on 10/10/2007, -1/+8There is a side benefit to that. At least you get Lindsey Lohan in your bedroom.
    • BobbyMC, on 07/21/2008, -0/+2Back to the Future 2 didn't come out until 1989.
    • loopyloopy, on 10/10/2007, -0/+2Back to the Future 2 was set in 2015. So 8 years to wait at most!!
  • siszam, on 10/10/2007, -25/+2Science regularly declares things as fiction then later admits it mistake. I have no idea with people worship at it's alter and lose their souls over something so consistently wrong.
    • akula696969, on 10/10/2007, -1/+9I am sure by this you mean that "God" is always right. And then i would ask you for proof. This is the point you give me the bible....LOL
      • Pixelante, on 10/10/2007, -0/+1Correct. She knows everything and She is always right. Don't try to contradict Her, She tends to pout.
    • caliyankee, on 10/10/2007, -3/+7BAHAHAHAAHAHAHAHAAHAAAAA!!
    • psion01, on 10/10/2007, -1/+10Siszam, let's try to put this in its proper context and then you might see where this is coming from. Science never declared levitation to be fiction. Rather, levitation has been a staple of /science fiction/, and only recently have scientists figured out a way to make it work at small scales and close ranges.
    • crazybrit, on 10/10/2007, -0/+18Oh, wow...

      Someone's missing the entire point of science.
      • brharri1, on 10/10/2007, -0/+13Surprisingly common, unfortunately.
    • simpleid, on 10/10/2007, -0/+2Lol goodness siszam, please do not procreate. :-)
  • MasterThief117, on 10/10/2007, -1/+13Kind of reminds me of this comic
    http://xkcd.com/298/
  • UtahApocalyse, on 10/10/2007, -9/+4David Blaine has been doing this for years.
  • arunforce, on 10/10/2007, -3/+1Dupe, but it has an awesome picture. =)
    • pandaking, on 10/10/2007, -0/+0Sorry - I did a little search and didn't see anything posted recently...
      • JCSaint, on 10/10/2007, -0/+1Oh yeah, because Digg's search is sooooo reliable.
  • digitallysick, on 10/10/2007, -4/+4Is it just me, or does that womans fingers look really nasty in that photo? eeew
  • Zreitan, on 10/10/2007, -2/+1this is deceptive. "very small things float! as if by magic!" this isn't my jet pack or my flying car!
  • TheKorn2, on 10/10/2007, -10/+5LAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAMMMMMMMMMMMMMMMMMMMMEEEEEEEEEEEEEEE!!!!!
  • AvengeX, on 10/10/2007, -8/+3Buried (duped)
  • Graemebru, on 10/10/2007, -3/+3Been duped like 10 times today
  • colinbg, on 10/10/2007, -1/+2Yeah, you can even buy one on thinkgeek...

    http://www.thinkgeek.com/homeoffice/lights/84ad/
  • mewainwr, on 10/10/2007, -5/+2They can levitate things, but they can't clean their fingernails :)
  • catalysis, on 10/10/2007, -4/+2She needs to get that fungal infection under her nails checked out.
    • Bosiljevac, on 10/10/2007, -0/+1Her hands are dry, but that is nail polish on her finger nails.
  • Kenzan, on 10/10/2007, -0/+2levitating tops! Awwwww I wanted a peanut...
  • CDoug03, on 10/10/2007, -0/+5discovering that subatomic particles can "levitate" is sort of like discovering that sticking together like poles of two magnets creates a repelling force.
    • bIuebonics, on 10/10/2007, -0/+1the levitation deals with molecules and such, but your point is well taken.
  • shane1337, on 10/10/2007, -3/+2if by solved they put a magnet in a top, then my 5th grade science teacher "solved" this years ago
  • flamingbird, on 10/10/2007, -2/+1the man-hands on that chick are like WOW!
  • pleiadianagenda, on 10/10/2007, -1/+2Go to google video and look up monatomic gold, and watch the science lectures and other docos about the levitation properties AND teleportation properties that they were doing a few years ago with it.

    Levitation is nothing new. There's so much stuff on the net about anti gravity systems and zero point energy and other technologies that have been sat on for ages.
  • coredump0x01, on 10/10/2007, -0/+7Very uplifting news.
  • nitrojunky24, on 10/10/2007, -2/+2great now make my car levitate!
  • CatsAreGods, on 10/10/2007, -1/+9I think most of the people finding a problem with this article don't understand enough physics to do anything but whine about their flying cars.
    • nonnald, on 10/10/2007, -0/+2not whining about flying cars, whining about the lack of flying cars
    • bIuebonics, on 10/10/2007, -0/+1or because every headline this has made front page with today has been entirely misleading.
  • Ansible, on 10/10/2007, -0/+3Could you employ this in a disruptor beam, to make all the molecules in someones body repel each other? Puddle gun!
  • D3koy, on 10/10/2007, -3/+1I've said it before and I'll say it again...stop wasting time on science fiction and make commercial space a reality!
  • whoaback, on 10/10/2007, -0/+2Suck it Gravity!
  • skinturtle, on 10/10/2007, -0/+1Those are calluses from playing the guitar
  • YourDoom123, on 10/10/2007, -0/+4I think a lot of people are missing this FTA: "But they say that, in principle at least, the same effect could be used to levitate bigger objects too, even a person." In otherwords, its just a matter of developing the tech before flying cars, hoverboards, etc. are possible.

    oh and to the people talking about the magnetic top... RTFA, its about quantum physics, not magnets.
    • Skiessi, on 10/10/2007, -0/+0Who wants a flying car when you can fly by yourself?
  • kaelyiesta, on 10/10/2007, -4/+3Yet another pseudoscience article with a harry potter reference. Is anyone else besides me feeling a bit homicidal?

    If that is considered levitation, then why stop there? Why not declare planes, helicopters, hell even pogo sticks able to levitate? It's a ***** repelling force. Stop the ***** and stick with the science.
    • bIuebonics, on 10/10/2007, -0/+3for some reason, i get the notion you have no clue what levitate even means. here: http://www.google.com/search?source=ig&hl=en&q=define%3Alevitate&btnG=Google+Search ... generally, when you want to counter act the gravitational force you have to, you know, always use another force... since there really is no such thing as magic to cause levitation, as you seem to believe, a repelling force would be a good place to start when trying to counter act gravity... especially one that loses strength pretty quickly over distance.
    • Thumper13, on 10/10/2007, -0/+1Did you read the ***** article? You are dumber than a spoon.

      Is it pseudoscience because you just didn't get it?
  • rowlodge, on 10/10/2007, -1/+1levitation means no magnets holding it up externally, it must be self contained. then i'll be impressed.
  • Nidy1, on 10/10/2007, -2/+1Pics or it didn't HOLY ***** COOL!
    • ColdDimSum, on 10/10/2007, -0/+2Except the pic in the article has nothing to do with the type of "levitation" that they are talking about. It's a magnetic top spinning over another magnet that is below it and hidden from the picture. FAKE!
  • Zomar, on 10/10/2007, -1/+2interesting. some highly awakened Buddhist monks are supposed to be able to levitate and perform other psychic acts however they can not show off their powers except under the most drastic of circumstances. i dunno why they'd lie about it as lying and misleading people is one of the worst acts in Buddhism.
    • addicted68098, on 10/10/2007, -1/+1The power of thought is more powerful then any other force.
      • phrantakle, on 10/10/2007, -0/+0Except all the other forces.
        • Pixelante, on 10/10/2007, -0/+0Especially the Force.
        • qbyte, on 10/10/2007, -0/+1Why does this thread sound like Dwight from "The Office" arguing with himself?
  • cantoral, on 10/10/2007, -0/+1A thin piece of aluminum foil 1/2 a micron thick can levitate on top of a bunch of particle anti-particle pairs. Neat.
  • bladebronson, on 10/10/2007, -0/+0I hope they're working on solving a nail file next.
  • rrbest, on 10/10/2007, -1/+1I guess more jews will be receiving a flying dradle for christmas this year!
  • mrfior2, on 10/10/2007, -0/+5If anyone has ever read a proper article on the casimir effect, the way they do it is actually really cool. The science is easy to appreciate, if not fully understand, so I can't see why they didn't attempt to describe it better in this article. It has nothing to do with magnets. Here is a quick link that explains the easiest to understand explanation, the one that I first encountered:

    http://physicsworld.com/cws/article/print/9747

    However, it was discovered years ago, and I can't see what these people are doing that is particularly different.
    • ColdDimSum, on 10/10/2007, -0/+1Now that is an excellent article, thanks for the link!
  • firecaptain, on 10/10/2007, -2/+0MINDFREAK!

    Chris Angel's been levitating for years.

    Wait. Are you telling me that it's all an illusion?
  • borg359, on 10/10/2007, -1/+0I doubt this paper will ever make it past peer review. Most of their claims sound dubious at best. The force from the Casmir effect drops off so quickly with distance, that even if they have been able to "reverse it" (a statement which makes no sense, btw), it would have little effect on macroscopic objects. So don't get your hopes up for hover boards just yet.
  • m4csrgh3yk3v, on 10/10/2007, -1/+5*Put's on invisibility cloak*
    "Wingardium leviosa!"
  • Thumper13, on 10/10/2007, -1/+2oh ***** die already.
  • teethman, on 10/10/2007, -1/+3jesus did it
  • tracker198x, on 10/10/2007, -1/+1it isnt like theyll let you ever use anything invisible. the government will use it for the military but theyll block anyone who tries to make it available to the public. so much for being able to overthrow the govt when they strip our rights away...
  • ChickenOfDoom, on 10/10/2007, -3/+0buried as inaccurate. Geckos stick to walls because of vanderwalls forces.
    • Kyan, on 10/10/2007, -0/+1Flies stick to flypaper because it's sticky. So?
  • Gabberwok, on 10/10/2007, -2/+1Buried because it's misleading. The picture they show is not of the Casimir effect, but just your typical levitating magnet over a superconductor, stabilized by a gyroscope.
  • QuantumAvatar, on 10/10/2007, -0/+0For those of you interested in a more physic-nerd article
    http://physicsworld.com/cws/article/news/30670
    I didnt find this one to satisfy my needs.
  • treelovinhippie, on 10/10/2007, -1/+1Holy crap!

    Wasn't there a story on Digg a few days ago about someone saying that the government is witholding alien technology and that they're likely to introduce "anti-gravity" technology soon?

    Hmmmmmmmmm
  • Synthos, on 10/10/2007, -0/+1With a little investigation this claim is ***** so far:
    From Wikipedia article on Casimir effect.
    http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Kashmir_effect
    "Because the strength of the force falls off rapidly with distance, it is only measurable when the distance between the objects is extremely small."
    Attempting to "reverse" this force is futile. As you repel the distance gets larger and the force decreases.
    And
    Levitation has been elevated from being pure science fiction to science fact, according to a study reported today by physicists. ("According to a recent study". That pervasive line is unanimous with headlines and *****. (Though it does not necessarily make the possibility *****))
    In earlier work the same team of theoretical physicists showed that invisibility cloaks are feasible. (THE SAME TEAM? It certainly doesn't seem feasible to me for the same group of physicists to not only prove invisibility but levitation as possible. What's next, cold fusion? Give me break.)
    • phrantakle, on 10/10/2007, -0/+0They didn't "prove invisibility", they discovered how to theoretically shield an object from reflecting within only a very narrow wavelength. They didn't even make an "invisibility cloak", just talked about it. The bit about levitating humans is because a retarded science journalist probably asked the scientists enthusiastically "so, could we expect to levitate people with this technology?" and the scientist said "haha, I suppose it isn't out of the question". The main, and most useful application here, is stopping the casimir effect from ***** up our uber nanotechs, which operate on a scale that is most definitely affected by the effect. ("Nice grammar at the end there, *****." Thanks.)
  • Fetching more discussions...
    Show 51 - 57 of 57 discussions
  •  

    Login or register to add a comment

    Create a new account or login to join in the conversation on Digg. You'll also be able to Digg stories to help promote things you like.


© Digg Inc. 2008 — Content posted by Digg users is dedicated to the public domain.
DIGG, DIGG IT, DUGG, DIGG THIS, Digg graphics, logos, designs, page headers, button icons, scripts, and other service names are the trademarks of Digg Inc.