I decided to google Nasa anti gravity and found this in Popular Mechanics 

 NASA's Antigravity Machine

What goes up must come down. Well, maybe not.

Later this month, NASA researchers hope to conduct an experiment that could determine if the force of gravity might someday be adjusted, like the volume of a radio. The space agency says that turning down the gravity in the immediate vicinity of a rocket would enable future spacecraft to roam the galaxy by using the tug of distant planets and stars.

Scientists have historically dismissed talk of antigravity machines as utter nonsense. But at a rare, closed-door conference at NASA's Lewis Research Center in Cleveland, Ohio, scientists representing major universities, national weapons laboratories, defense contractors and the corporate research and development community gathered to hear a detailed account of the space agency's progress in attempting to build a machine that once seemed beyond the bounds of possibility.

In a surprising departure from its long-standing policy of openness, NASA did not invite the press to the conference. However, after interviews with attendees, POPULAR MECHANICS has learned that a group of researchers at NASA's Marshall Manned Space Flight Center in Huntsville, Alabama, has nearly completed building a device that could make it possible to reduce gravitational attractions in its immediate vicinity. Part of the reason for the secrecy is that the very thought of such a machine defies conventional scientific wisdom.

To understand why, it's helpful to know there are two complementary but not entirely compatible explanations for gravity. Isaac Newton, the first physicist, described gravity as an attraction between two masses (see illustration at top of page). Albert Einstein's general theory of relativity suggests mass actually causes space-time to warp around it. Imagine, for instance, the indentation created by placing a bowling ball on a soft bed.

Both theories explain why apples fall from trees. Scientists consider Einstein's theory superior because it explains also why light - which has no mass - appears to bend in strong gravitational fields. Light, as the theory goes, follows the mass-induced curve in space-time (see illustration on opposite page). Viewing gravity this way makes it more of a feature of the universe. It is for this reason that scientists consider the idea of an antigravity device preposterous. This article has a seond page for anyone who wants to click the above link and go read it. I also found another article about how important this projrct is to Nasa that they are dumping a ton of money into it but I can't share that here do to copywrite infringement so I'm giving you the link instead  Space.com I really wish I could have posted that one here because it look to me like it discribed something simular to what Saint was discribing.