<?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8"?>
<rss version="2.0" xmlns:atom="http://www.w3.org/2005/Atom"><channel><title>Anti-Gravitation · HackerPapers discussions</title><link>https://hackerpaper.kaipfister.de/p/gr-qc_0508013/</link><description>Collected HN comments and submissions linking this paper.</description><language>en</language><lastBuildDate>Mon, 02 Nov 2026 11:16:22 GMT</lastBuildDate><atom:link href="https://hackerpaper.kaipfister.de/p/gr-qc_0508013/feed.xml" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml" /><item><title>Anti-Gravitation — mentioned by raattgift</title><link>https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=33488376</link><guid isPermaLink="false">urn:hackerpapers:mention:gr-qc_0508013:33488376</guid><pubDate>Sun, 06 Nov 2022 02:55:44 GMT</pubDate><description>&lt;p&gt;Unfortunately, different quantum spin orientations don&amp;#x27;t appear to evade the weak equivalence principle. Dropping Bose-Einstein condensates in vacuum drop towers is a popular experiment. An example, &amp;quot;Tests of the Universality of Free Fall with Atoms in Different Spin Orientations&amp;quot;, 2016, &amp;lt;http://dx.doi.org/10.1103/PhysRevLett.117.023001&amp;gt; which is the published version of &amp;lt;https://arxiv.org/abs/1503.00433v1&amp;gt;. Likewise, one would not expect a ferromagnet and a ferroic glass to fall differently in a drop tower. Quantum spin is relevant in post-Newtonian (GR-compatible) gravitation, though. Rough…&lt;/p&gt;&lt;p&gt;&lt;a href="https://hackerpaper.kaipfister.de/p/gr-qc_0508013/"&gt;Paper and discussion history&lt;/a&gt;. A mention is not an endorsement.&lt;/p&gt;</description><category>gr-qc</category></item><item><title>Anti-Gravitation — mentioned by raattgift</title><link>https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=18368915</link><guid isPermaLink="false">urn:hackerpapers:mention:gr-qc_0508013:18368915</guid><pubDate>Sat, 03 Nov 2018 05:42:09 GMT</pubDate><description>&lt;p&gt;You asked an interesting question: If (arguendo) anti-matter anti-gravitates, then &amp;gt; Does it not then make sense that in-falling anti-matter would have an evaporating effect Yes, kinda. More precisely, it would depend on how anti-gravitation works exactly, i.e., how anti-matter couples to gravity differently from matter. So even more precisely, &amp;quot;we don&amp;#x27;t know but can model various remotely plausible ideas with current theory&amp;quot; [a concrete attempt to model below at [1]]. One approach to model anti-matter anti-gravitation is to have a second metric which anti-matter feels but matter doesn&amp;#x27;t.…&lt;/p&gt;&lt;p&gt;&lt;a href="https://hackerpaper.kaipfister.de/p/gr-qc_0508013/"&gt;Paper and discussion history&lt;/a&gt;. A mention is not an endorsement.&lt;/p&gt;</description><category>gr-qc</category></item><item><title>Anti-Gravitation — mentioned by raattgift</title><link>https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=16510900</link><guid isPermaLink="false">urn:hackerpapers:mention:gr-qc_0508013:16510900</guid><pubDate>Sat, 03 Mar 2018 19:02:29 GMT</pubDate><description>&lt;p&gt;Sabine Hossenfelder has a slightly tongue-in-cheek FAQ on anti-gravitation, and from time to time blogs about it. https://fias.uni-frankfurt.de/~hossi/Physics/anti-gravity.ht... You might find that interesting. The key constraints come from General Relativity; the successes of the Schwarzschild and Kerr(-Newman) metrics for physically plausible arrangements of matter need to be preserved if you try to add in a symmetry. If we use perturbation theory to capture deviations from the metric of a reasonable exact solution to the Einstein Field Equations, the structures can be represented as…&lt;/p&gt;&lt;p&gt;&lt;a href="https://hackerpaper.kaipfister.de/p/gr-qc_0508013/"&gt;Paper and discussion history&lt;/a&gt;. A mention is not an endorsement.&lt;/p&gt;</description><category>gr-qc</category></item></channel></rss>
