Pegasus Research Consortium

The Living Moon => Thorfourwinds Section => Amaterasu Solar - Abundance Paradigm => Topic started by: Amaterasu on May 13, 2012, 03:56:50 pm

Title: Electrogravitics – A Simplified Description
Post by: Amaterasu on May 13, 2012, 03:56:50 pm
Electrogravitics – A Simplified Description
by Amaterasu Solar


Electrogravitics... This technology was being developed and tested in all major aerospace companies in the 1950's.  Martin, Convair, Lear, Sperry, Raytheon, and many others all were eagerly studying electrogravitics.  But in 1959 or early 1960, the technology became highly classified and the path to energy abundance was stymied.  Here is a basic description of electrogravitics:

First, One has to understand that the model offered by Einstein is flawed...  There are other models.  There is one in particular...

The model, which I say is a far better one than relativity, is subquantum kinetics (SQK). Its developer, Dr. Paul A. LaViolette (an interesting character, to say the least), started with chemical kinetics (as above, so below?) and came up with SQK, being very concerned by its gravitational predictions. He had not heard of the Biefeld-Brown Effect, nor the work of T. Townsend Brown. He struggled with these predictions until He encountered Brown's work, discovering that SQK predicted exactly what Brown was showing experimentally.

Why is SQK better than relativity?

It takes no element on faith: Einstein's relativity is based on the faith that matter somehow "bends" space-time. Nowhere does He explain (or even try to) HOW or WHY this might be. One just has to take it on faith.

It explains things without the need for "renormalization;" relativity ends in infinities without this mathematical fudge.

It integrates EM with gravity. Einstein Himself died still trying to do so.

And it still predicts things like the lensing of light, the apparent time dilation, and all other predictions of relativity, plus more - all of which are testable (string theory is 100% untestable).

In fact, many of the mysteries of Einsteinian mathematics are predicted in SQK.

I recommend reading a book called Secrets of Antigravity Propulsion, by Dr. LaViolette, for more on the Biefeld-Brown Effect, Brown's work, electrogravitics, SQK, and more.

In SQK, positively charged particles have a positive gravity potential "well."  (Positive particles have positive gravity.) Negatively charged particles have a negative gravity potential "hill."  (Negative particles have negative gravity.)  The positive particle's "well" is just the smallest fraction bigger than the negative "hill," accounting for the apparent weakness of gravity, where essentially even amounts of positively charged and negatively charged particles make up common matter, and in quantities as big as the earth, say, offer a slight "well" overall, thus explaining why We are aware of gravity at all.

The Biefeld-Brown Effect was discovered when it was noted that a dielectric with electrodes attached at either end, would apparently lose weight when charged if the positive pole was pointed upwards on a scale, and apparently gain weight when reversed, when placed on a scale.  It was soon discovered that it was not a weight loss, but a movement in the direction of the positive pole.  Higher voltage increased this effect.

Further study showed that the higher the K of the dielectric, the more pronounced the movements became.  Asymmetrical electrodes contribute to the increase of the effect, as well.  Also, a non-linear dielectric produced greater movement than a linear one.  With high K, non-linear dielectrics, a substantial force could be observed, even to the point of levitation with a local gravity field induced.

If, say, four devices were placed on a cross, each oriented 90° to the center and pointing in the same direction relative to that center, and a shaft was set at center and into a generator, when small amounts of energy are used at high voltage on the units, the resulting rotation will induce a greater output at the generator than the input to the units.  Overunity (as energy is drawn from the zero point field) is achieved.

(http://www.thelivingmoon.com/forum/index.php?action=dlattach;topic=1308.0;attach=1142;image)



A petition for the release of electrogravitics from black projects has been started; please sign this petition and spread the information.  If We can reach the tipping point of awareness, We can demand this technology:

http://www.change.org/petitions/us-military-release-the-technology-of-electrogravitics

Edited to add image to post
Title: Re: Electrogravitics – A Simplified Description
Post by: Linda Brown on May 13, 2012, 06:27:00 pm
AMY.  You posted.....

If, say, four devices were placed on a cross, each oriented 90° to the center and pointing in the same direction relative to that center, and a shaft was set at center and into a generator, when small amounts of energy are used at high voltage on the units, the resulting rotation will induce a greater output at the generator than the input to the units.  Overunity (as energy is drawn from the zero point field) is achieved

Can I invite others who are reading this particular section to comment on it....so that we can have a clearer vision of what Amaterasu is saying here.....
I expect you may have some critics but thats what this area is all about!

( Well done, by the way)   Linda
Title: Re: Electrogravitics – A Simplified Description
Post by: Amaterasu on May 13, 2012, 06:36:53 pm
Thank You.  I communicated with Paul LaViolette on this, and He gave Me a nod...  [smile]

So I figured I was on the right track.
Title: Re: Electrogravitics – A Simplified Description
Post by: Linda Brown on May 13, 2012, 06:50:36 pm
Absolutely.
Title: Re: Electrogravitics – A Simplified Description
Post by: 1Worldwatcher on May 16, 2012, 10:25:11 am
Armaerasu wrote:
Quote
If, say, four devices were placed on a cross, each oriented 90° to the center and pointing in the same direction relative to that center,

CG or "Center of Gravity" is the automatic standard of anything tha needs to move. Aircraft use CG as a focal point to the design's of aircraft, no matter how big or how small, with out it they would be unmanagalbe in flight , landing and take offs. The fixed "Chord" of an aircrafts wing is 17*, it remains as such to create lift with thrust viable and applicable with sufficient power plant.
Labourghini, Porsche and Corvette designer's are aware of this vital configuration and it's importance to the performance of such vehicles. They handle better than your average vehicle, corner/turn, accelerate and have high end speed abilities with this type of application.
I know we aren't talking aircraft or sports cars here, but it is vital too understand the sugnificance of such design application's.
Another point here is that it is not necessary to have "More" areas of thrust, there are those types out there that are the fastest and most efficient in the world with single propulsion drivese. I can't mentally see what you are trying to convey with your design, but if you could render us/me a drawing of the concept, I would be better to understand the application and positioning factors you have brought to the table with your idea.

Quote
and a shaft was set at center and into a generator,

Torque friction is a real stickler. There are some newer thing's out there that have little to no torque resistances, but once again, I would have to see a rendering of the proposed design. It would be even more practical if one could figure out how to produce low input, high out put by getting rid of the access hardware. Helicopters are a great example of this method, not only are they more manuverable and efficient, they also have an excellent balance between mass and gravity.

Quote
when small amounts of energy are used at high voltage on the units, the resulting rotation will induce a greater output at the generator than the input to the units.

This depends on what you are referring too as far as "Generator". And for the application of the low voltage uses by high energy input, everything becomes a factor of what this design pertains to you are discussing.

Quote
Overunity (as energy is drawn from the zero point field) is achieved

If there is a application of zero point energy being used, other than in lab tests, I am not aware of it. I do understand it, but for the most part, for anything of substantial size, it currently does not exist.

I think your thoughts are well founded, and I do believe we will one day power our planet with free energy. Which bring's me to another question, are we trying to achieve anti gravity or free energy with your concept?

The best idea would have to be a device with absolutely no friction or moving parts, if there is a way to harness gravities effects to have it oppose itself, then we would really have something!!
Gravity is a mind blower, I do so love being able to say I understand it's function and form, but I am still bewildered as to it's origin's and significance to our future. And I also think it's fare to say that we know thing's can produce their own gravity fields providing it has enough speed of rotation.

Hoping to get a rendering/drawing from you Amaterasu, I am very interested in seeing what you have in mind.

1Worldwatcher
Title: Re: Electrogravitics – A Simplified Description
Post by: Amaterasu on May 16, 2012, 02:08:48 pm
Ok, had to take time out to create this.  (Still unsure how to get it to show up in thread and not as an attachment...)

Hope this helps.

Quote
I think your thoughts are well founded, and I do believe we will one day power our planet with free energy. Which bring's me to another question, are we trying to achieve anti gravity or free energy with your concept?

I think the answer to that is...  Yes.
Title: Re: Electrogravitics – A Simplified Description
Post by: 1Worldwatcher on May 17, 2012, 01:04:02 am
Here is a complete library of experimental and implicated devices for the Zero effect energy's Amaterasu. A very detailed and linked page for different and possible application's, by both inventor and devices, also has click link available.

http://www.freegrab.net/Update%C2%A0Tesla.htm (http://www.freegrab.net/Update%C2%A0Tesla.htm)

There is also the discussions we have had in the past of the "Black Box" theory that isn't really theory at all, Tesla powered his car with this device, you can find the details with in the link I have provided.

Matayas, Zorgon, Doc, Chris and myself  were in deep of the topic, unfortunately Steve died and there wasn't much more said about it. The last I had heard, the box actually kept a 60W lightbulb going for an extremely long amount of time. Keep in mind, the last I heard was before Steve had passed away. (You know what I mean)
It may be in the archives, but for quicker gratification, I would just Email Zorgon and ask for the thread from Yahoo Groups side.
I think it was operating on a Scalar device mechanism with Rare Earth magnetics.
Ask Zorg, he can tell you and get the info. I have a heck of a time finding archived thing's here on the living moon, if you can navigate the search engines here, should be a breeze, for you, not me! LOL  :-\

1Worldwatcher
 
Title: Re: Electrogravitics – A Simplified Description
Post by: Amaterasu on May 17, 2012, 07:20:49 am
Thank You so much for that!  I am unsure yet how many methods also offer gravity control, but just free energy is good.  The gravity control allows Humanity to add a third dimension of where We live on this planet, and will allow a great deal of the planet to return to the "wild" state.

It is both the energy and the gravity control I like in EG - and it is negentropic.
Title: Re: Electrogravitics – A Simplified Description
Post by: Linda Brown on May 17, 2012, 09:26:20 am
Amaterasu.... in your childhood fancies of what electrogravitics might mean.... Did you ever envision.... no cars or trucks anywhere? No " planes" in the air.

  D referenced them...

We could become those people who would be so intriqued by the sight of that type of technology that we would have to send probes out to investigate ..... simply outof sheer curiosity!

by then .... our "cosmic conciousness" would have been wiped clean.  allowing us to forget the strife of the past. we could finally be a planet where a little girl could put her arm over a fawn and they could walk together..... and neither of them would have to remember what the old world and terror of the spoken word  "HUMAN" meant.

Linda
Title: Re: Electrogravitics – A Simplified Description
Post by: Amaterasu on May 17, 2012, 10:16:11 am
Amaterasu.... in your childhood fancies of what electrogravitics might mean.... Did you ever envision.... no cars or trucks anywhere? No " planes" in the air.

  D referenced them...

We could become those people who would be so intriqued by the sight of that type of technology that we would have to send probes out to investigate ..... simply outof sheer curiosity!

by then .... our "cosmic conciousness" would have been wiped clean.  allowing us to forget the strife of the past. we could finally be a planet where a little girl could put her arm over a fawn and they could walk together..... and neither of them would have to remember what the old world and terror of the spoken word  "HUMAN" meant.

Linda

Not sure I follow, but I saw cities in the air, vehicles flying, perhaps, but most transportation was via what I call "jump doors" in My novella.  Teleportation, basically.

Not sure what it means to wipe Our "cosmic consciousness" nor why We would want to...  Remembering past strife allows far better appreciation of any current comfort and bliss.

And I do not think the term, "Human," is a terror.  Humans have been twisted, subverted, abused, tormented, and maligned by powers very likely NOT Human...through money, propaganda, bad education, and direct mind control.
Title: Re: Electrogravitics – A Simplified Description
Post by: Linda Brown on May 17, 2012, 10:40:28 am
Ah! A difference of opinion!

Remembering past strife allows far better appreciation of any current comfort and bliss.

How do you know that you wouldn't have a fine appreciation of your current " comfort and bliss" without a memory of the past?  <g> You really can't answer that..... can you? Your statement might very well be valid..... but it might be flawed too... no way of knowing without experiencing that " brain wipe".

You say
"Not sure I follow, but I saw cities in the air, vehicles flying, perhaps, but most transportation was via what I call "jump doors" in My novella.  Teleportation, basically..... Walking in one door in one place and out of the other side in another.... yes.... I am familiar with that. And I think that your name " Jump doors" is a great descriptive title for them.

Ah... cities in the Air.... I love that.

"And I do not think the term, "Human," is a terror.  Humans have been twisted, subverted, abused, tormented, and maligned by powers very likely NOT Human...through money, propaganda, bad education, and direct mind control

I was referring to a scene from Alice in Wonderland where she and a fawn find each other and they walk together because she has not put a name to herself... and the deer hasn't either.... but when that happens the deer runs away..... she has remembered that she was HUMAN.

How do you know that the maligning in our history and currently was NOT Human? You seem so sure.

" Humans have been twisted, subverted, abused, tormented, and maligned by powers very likely NOT Human...through money, propaganda, bad education, and direct mind control.I look at everything that you have mentioned here and I am sorry but I see no link to an outside agenda other than human actions......

Its easier to blame some outside force for the evils that we place on each other.... harder to look at ourselves and say.... wait just a minute....The Enemy is US.

But until we are tough on ourselves... will we grow into something better?   Linda   
Title: Re: Electrogravitics – A Simplified Description
Post by: 1Worldwatcher on May 17, 2012, 11:59:12 am
Amaterasu said:
Quote
Humans have been twisted, subverted, abused, tormented, and maligned by powers very likely NOT Human...through money, propaganda, bad education, and direct mind control.

Linda response:
Quote
Its easier to blame some outside force for the evils that we place on each other.... harder to look at ourselves and say.... wait just a minute....The Enemy is US.

I personally believe it is the interpretation of life's training's as well Linda. It is a Ipso-Facto that has permeated our collective and corrective thinking processes for our futures future.

I came from a very wild and untamed youth situation, and I always find myself saying "If I only knew then what I know now, thing's would be different." This is full admittance of my incorrect way of dealing with thing's that applied to my reality, and by doing so, under the guise of "I am not hurting anyone but myself." ideologies during those time's, I inadvertently effected not only myself an my future, I also hurt and affected those who care about me the most.

With the 'Dumbing Down' of our current future global inhabitants, I must admit as ell that there are those PT B's that have rather strange way's of dealing of public matter's that allow the mindset for the youth to decipher from what they hear whilst listening (Most children hear, but they are not truly listening anymore) and then they contrive their own personal ideology of thing's such as "The Gov is too blame" or "If it weren't for he/she/this/that or the other thing" kind of none accountable perception's, they stand to fall.

If you weigh all thing's good and bad, you will see there is a common denominator of all these issue's. It will revert back to the basic form's of thought, perception and execution of ones own reality, and there is no one that is too blame but self accountability. Granted Gov, Media and other products of mans ingenious practices for our current reality of governed peoples does hold a lot of personal perception ideologies, the point is, this was instilled upon us and now we judge with vigorous and deductive self perceptive and instituted frames of thought.

The mind is a Universe with in our skull, the skull keeps it all together, but the mind with in has free range equivalent to the Universe for decisive and deductive reasoning, but this frame work is set to fail if one does not analyze all out comes before taking action to emerge these ways of thinking into a literal reality of it's own.

I am sure you have all used the phrase "I should have known better" or "Didn't think that through very well" and my favorite "What the hell was I thinking?" personal thought perception's to a mistake that could have been avoided, but now is out there, you can't take it back literally, but if you learn from that one moment of clarity, then the mistake takes on a life of it's own under the guise of self accountability and awareness.

There is no one more that you can trust than self, and if you are having issue's with that, you are doomed to fail. What the big wig's do with our infrastructured government effects greatly, monetarily and mentally, but realise that there is a way for you to maintain your innocence to these event's "Think before you speak, act or react." This is when accountability is truly owned for who it was intended "You/Me/Them/We"

1Worldwatcher
Title: Re: Electrogravitics – A Simplified Description
Post by: Amaterasu on May 17, 2012, 12:25:56 pm
How do you know that the maligning in our history and currently was NOT Human? You seem so sure.

I only am sure - and You may note I used the words "most likely" - through "spidy sense" and lots of research and analysis.  Surely many at the top (or virtually) are Human, but I see Them duped into a "satan" worship, just as controlled as We are by Them, by a non-Human Entity(ies).  They have been convinced that Their evil behavior is somehow in service to Themselves and the Entity passing Itself off as "satan." 

Quote
I look at everything that you have mentioned here and I am sorry but I see no link to an outside agenda other than human actions......

And I see a very tangled web of mislead Humans and Those who dupe Them - either into evil or into accepting that They are flawed, "sinful," bad - and must humble Themselves in repentance.  All for control purposes.

Quote
Its easier to blame some outside force for the evils that we place on each other.... harder to look at ourselves and say.... wait just a minute....The Enemy is US.

Actually...  I struggled with the conclusions that it was NOT all Human created.  But People in the satanic groups claiming to have seen "satan," illogical behaviors unless some "higher power" was directing, and, of course, My spidy sense all pointing to that, allowed Me to place very high probabilities in that arena.

I look at most Humans and see very beautiful beings placed in very disadvantaged positions, prodded and cajoled and tempted to poor behavior choices out of desperation, anguish, bad information, and even perceived sacrifice for Others They care for.  No, the enemy is not Humans as a whole.  The enemy is the system into which We have been forced.

Quote
But until we are tough on ourselves... will we grow into something better?   Linda

We will THRIVE in beauty once removed from the system.  That is the whole point of My work here on this planet:  to allow Us to do just that.
Title: Re: Electrogravitics – A Simplified Description
Post by: 1Worldwatcher on May 17, 2012, 01:30:41 pm
Amaterasu wrote:
Quote
Actually...  I struggled with the conclusions that it was NOT all Human created.  But People in the satanic groups claiming to have seen "Satan," illogical behaviors unless some "higher power" was directing, and, of course, My spidy sense all pointing to that, allowed Me to place very high probabilities in that arena.

The illogical behavior you are speaking of is nothing more than a self interpretation of wants needs and desires for the logically challenged. The only reason why people have such such thing's as a perception of Deities is because the lack of understanding that we create our world by our actions and reactions.
The high probabilities you mentioned is the inability to cope on life's terms, and with that comes loneliness, chaos and all the other negative thing's we tend to blame on other ambiguous ideologies. the only way to "REALLY" believe such thing's is too allow yourself to believe with in it's parameters of perceptions. Satanism is only one of many, but is a prime example of misinterpretation of what the Deity "God" was designed for, they are opposites of the highest form, but yet, if you were to ask a Christian vs. Satanist which 'God' is more Devinne, it is only from pure self interpretation and understanding.
"WE" are the only ones at fault here. if there is something amok in our reality, we quickly have the blame game at hand for rebuttal and defense. It is "Incorrect" thinking and posthumous ideologies thatlinger these types of conclusion's to reality form and therefore are nothing more than "Self gratification".

Amaterasu wrote:
Quote
I look at most Humans and see very beautiful beings placed in very disadvantaged positions, prodded and cajoled and tempted to poor behavior choices out of desperation, anguish, bad information, and even perceived sacrifice for Others They care for.  No, the enemy is not Humans as a whole.  The enemy is the system into which We have been forced.

These thing's only happen when the "Individuals" allow them to over come their thought perceptions and emotion's. (Emotion being the greater of the two) and when this happens, personal persuasive behavior becomes common place and the norm, which, in true reality term's is not reality, but an Ideology of personal beliefs.

For instance, I was baptised a Lutheran, and I proclaimed Christianity, then I was awakened with an Epiphany, why am I proclaiming such thing's when there is no one and nothing that can persuade me from my own demise and individual catastrophe's? Simple, "I am accountable for everything and everyone I affect with my thoughts and reaction's to my liefs realities."

No one to blame but myself, no one to avoid the bad out comes other than my thoughts and those being converted into reality , but only after conscientiously being aware of all option's available to me before my thoughts become such realities.
"Metaphysics" is a vital and deep living thing with all of us, there is no one to blame for your action's, reaction's or outcomes of these types of realities except for self.
And on the same note, if someone instills their negative thoughts into a reality for me or towards me, I have choices to make to not avoid the issue, but to be made aware of how thoughts and perception's are strictly individually oriented to the onset of becoming "disadvantaged positions, prodded and cajoled and tempted to poor behavior choices out of desperation, anguish, bad information, and even perceived sacrifice for Others They care for." I control these events, but for those who wish me ill with their own agenda, I am watching with open eyes, ears and mind. If it happens, then one allows it to happen to them.

1Worldwatcher

Title: Re: Electrogravitics – A Simplified Description
Post by: Amaterasu on May 17, 2012, 02:00:55 pm
While I appreciate Your point of view...  I still can't reconcile the reports of satan actually manifesting in rituals with mere Self-dissatisfaction or such...  Too many have made claims to have seen such very physical manifestations.

And the illogical behavior has much to do with doing things with claims of being told to (usually by satan) - sometimes by the Ones claiming to have seen satan in the flesh.

When I add all this together, I conclude there is a segment of non-Human who is manipulating Humans to maintain the system.  To keep Our prison bars in place.

And while You are technically correct that We each "allow" Ourselves to either remain blind in the system or opening Our eyes...One has to be aware that One's eyes are closed first to willfully open them.  (I do agree with You that I am personally responsible for all I AM - thought, word and deed, and how I thus affect the universe around Me.)  Through subtle and overt ways, We are convinced Our eyes are open when in fact they are not, and thus We make no willful eye-openings.

And the tactic of saying that suffering will end "in the future" when someOne outside of Self comes "to the rescue" produces docile slaves.  And Human energy is really all this "satan" wants.  Productivity.  Promote a "work ethic" and the slaves will believe They are being righteous as They enrich the elite and THEIR controllers.

So, yes, 1WW, when One truly opens One's eyes, then these things become Self evident.  But most of Humanity is still with eyes wide shut.
Title: Re: Electrogravitics – A Simplified Description
Post by: Mikado on June 12, 2012, 06:06:10 pm
I liked and enjoyed reading your post.

Electrogravitics – A Simplified Description
by Amaterasu Solar



The Biefeld-Brown Effect was discovered when it was noted that a dielectric with electrodes attached at either end, would apparently lose weight when charged if the positive pole was pointed upwards on a scale, and apparently gain weight when reversed, when placed on a scale.  It was soon discovered that it was not a weight loss, but a movement in the direction of the positive pole.  Higher voltage increased this effect.

Further study showed that the higher the K of the dielectric, the more pronounced the movements became.  Asymmetrical electrodes contribute to the increase of the effect, as well.  Also, a non-linear dielectric produced greater movement than a linear one.  With high K, non-linear dielectrics, a substantial force could be observed, even to the point of levitation with a local gravity field induced.

It has been found, in my experiments, that altitude will have an effect on High K dielectrics. One experiment performed was done with only electrostatic N to respect to the Earth and the asymmetric Gravitor, that weighed 2 lb 9 oz lost 1 lb 4 oz and 1 lb 6 oz on two separate attempts. Total applied Voltage was 14.2 K with an inrush of 542 ?A. This was a 50% efficiency using only a static charge. Is it Biefeld-Brown? Remains to be seen.  But the real question was.... where did the current go for there was only one lead.

Electrogravitics – A Simplified Description
by Amaterasu Solar
If, say, four devices were placed on a cross, each oriented 90° to the center and pointing in the same direction relative to that center, and a shaft was set at center and into a generator, when small amounts of energy are used at high voltage on the units, the resulting rotation will induce a greater output at the generator than the input to the units.  Overunity (as energy is drawn from the zero point field) is achieved.



This one here I have a difficult time grasping as it stands. I have a feeling from experiments performed that discharging Gravitors can be used in a manner of a seesaw which will extract energy and thus the need for an axle and generator may not be necessary. But alas, it is only preliminary experiments.

Mikado
Title: Re: Electrogravitics – A Simplified Description
Post by: Linda Brown on June 12, 2012, 10:01:34 pm
"that weighed 2 lb 9 oz lost 1 lb 4 oz and 1 lb 6 oz on two separate attempts. Total applied Voltage was 14.2 K with an inrush of 542 ?A. This was a 50% efficiency using only a static charge. Is it Biefeld-Brown


No, it would be my guess that it is strictly what someday someone will call the " Mikado Effect".
But thats just my guess and you know that I don't have any handle on things scientific at all. I do however recognize smoke.  Linda
Title: Re: Electrogravitics – A Simplified Description
Post by: Amaterasu on June 12, 2012, 11:20:06 pm
I liked and enjoyed reading your post.

Thank You. [smile]

Quote
It has been found, in my experiments, that altitude will have an effect on High K dielectrics. One experiment performed was done with only electrostatic N to respect to the Earth and the asymmetric Gravitor, that weighed 2 lb 9 oz lost 1 lb 4 oz and 1 lb 6 oz on two separate attempts. Total applied Voltage was 14.2 K with an inrush of 542 ?A. This was a 50% efficiency using only a static charge. Is it Biefeld-Brown? Remains to be seen.  But the real question was.... where did the current go for there was only one lead.

Hmmmm.  Interesting.  I think 7RedOrbs may have an answer to Your last question...  He seems more into the technical details - I am a conceptual Person, and not a mathematician or electrical engineer.  I can ask Him over - He's registered here, but busy with His own site.

Quote
This one here I have a difficult time grasping as it stands. I have a feeling from experiments performed that discharging Gravitors can be used in a manner of a seesaw which will extract energy and thus the need for an axle and generator may not be necessary. But alas, it is only preliminary experiments.

This is a combination of what My father told Me and what was written by Dr. Paul A. LaViolette - who said I have things essentially correct from His viewpoint - in Secrets of Antigravity Propulsion.  If You haven't read it, I highly recommend it.  It's not "squiggly" dense so someOne mathematically challenged like M'self can follow, but has a few spots where the squigglies show up for those more skilled with such things.  I posted an image I thought in this thread of the idea as I see it.  Must be on a previous page.

EDIT to add: Ah, it's there.  Same page. (Heh. Only one page!  LOL!)
Title: Re: Electrogravitics – A Simplified Description
Post by: deuem on June 13, 2012, 02:52:22 am
I wanted to give this a short try based on what you wrote about the plates and the positive side being up. I then took the A51 sports model as a start. Took Bob Lazars idea about a buffer ring and laid it all together in a simple 2D model.  It gives a lot of room for a crew station.

The first print is a cut away view from the side with the plates vertical and over heavy on the “+” Plus side. The “–“ Minus side is really small. I put what I think would be the generator in the center of it all and on the bottom for a better center of gravity. It would be the heaviest thing in the craft. I have no idea what would power it. Ask Bob.  By tilting the generator on a gamble the direction of the forces might change. True speculation in its rawest form!


Side view, craft cut open to see inside and only 1 side.

(http://i1198.photobucket.com/albums/aa458/deuem/Sideview.jpg)


On the top view I added 60 plates because jut 4 looked to simple. The field is penetrating the craft right below the buffer ring and creating a torrent shape. The field wraps around the craft on the outside in only 1 direction. I know it all looks rather silly but I hope you could use it to toss darts at instead of just words. I know I am more of a visual person.

Top view, looking down on craft

(http://i1198.photobucket.com/albums/aa458/deuem/TopView.jpg)
 
This last photo might give me the EMG ring bubbles I find.

Ps, it is perfectly Ok to laugh at the above saucer layout; I am not a UFO designer.  Yet!

Deuem
Title: Re: Electrogravitics – A Simplified Description
Post by: dcooper on June 13, 2012, 04:47:28 am
Amaterasu - "Why is SQK better than relativity?

It takes no element on faith: Einstein's relativity is based on the faith that matter somehow "bends" space-time. Nowhere does He explain (or even try to) HOW or WHY this might be. One just has to take it on faith."


Well you are right that Einstein's theory does not explain how mass can curve space but Einstein's theory is very much incomplete you got to remember that i am not a fan of SQK or ether im a Relativity fan but i got to admit at one point i did not believe in einstein special relativity  until i did so much research and i found how beautiful einstein theory is im a believer now so i can see were you are cumming from.                               -dcooper
Title: Re: Electrogravitics – A Simplified Description
Post by: Mikado on June 13, 2012, 06:33:42 am
"that weighed 2 lb 9 oz lost 1 lb 4 oz and 1 lb 6 oz on two separate attempts. Total applied Voltage was 14.2 K with an inrush of 542 ?A. This was a 50% efficiency using only a static charge. Is it Biefeld-Brown


No, it would be my guess that it is strictly what someday someone will call the " Mikado Effect".
But thats just my guess and you know that I don't have any handle on things scientific at all. I do however recognize smoke.  Linda

Where there is smoke, there is fire. And no, it is not known as the "Mikado Effect".

I would comment on your "scientific handle" but I won't, however, others would be wise to recognize what you have just said.

Mikado

NOTE: apparently the font to support "micro" or "mu" is not available. The current should have read as "542 microamps" and not "?A".
Title: Re: Electrogravitics – A Simplified Description
Post by: Mikado on June 13, 2012, 06:39:39 am
Amaterasu - "Why is SQK better than relativity?

It takes no element on faith: Einstein's relativity is based on the faith that matter somehow "bends" space-time. Nowhere does He explain (or even try to) HOW or WHY this might be. One just has to take it on faith."


Well you are right that Einstein's theory does not explain how mass can curve space but Einstein's theory is very much incomplete you got to remember that i am not a fan of SQK or ether im a Relativity fan but i got to admit at one point i did not believe in einstein special relativity  until i did so much research and i found how beautiful einstein theory is im a believer now so i can see were you are cumming from.                               -dcooper

I realize that you are addressing someone else but I would like to make a comment.

I too have reservations in regard to SQK in that when reading the second book, the writer refers to his first book as a reference source. That is not acceptable in most scientific circles and I would have rather seen references of others work to substantiate the claims.

If you do a bit more research, you will find that Einstein never ruled out the possibility of the ether (aether). And further, if you are interested in Dr. Brown's work, you will have to come to terms with, at the very least, the possibility of the existence of the aether.

Just my opinion,

Mikado
Title: Re: Electrogravitics – A Simplified Description
Post by: Linda Brown on June 13, 2012, 06:48:52 am
Where there is smoke, there is fire. And no, it is not known as the "Mikado Effect".

And you set the rule for that?  Linda
Title: Re: Electrogravitics – A Simplified Description
Post by: Amaterasu on June 13, 2012, 07:13:34 am
Amaterasu - "Why is SQK better than relativity?

It takes no element on faith: Einstein's relativity is based on the faith that matter somehow "bends" space-time. Nowhere does He explain (or even try to) HOW or WHY this might be. One just has to take it on faith."


Well you are right that Einstein's theory does not explain how mass can curve space but Einstein's theory is very much incomplete you got to remember that i am not a fan of SQK or ether im a Relativity fan but i got to admit at one point i did not believe in einstein special relativity  until i did so much research and i found how beautiful einstein theory is im a believer now so i can see were you are cumming from.                               -dcooper

Oh, it's got its good points.  Have You read Sectrets of Antigravity Propulsion?  Or LaViolette's Subquantum Kinetics?  I have not been able to obtain the latter, and it's probably too squiggly dense for Me.  My biggest problem with Einstein is that He does not predict the Biefeld-Brown Effect.  SQK does.  I like the fact that SQK predicts ALL of what Einstein predicts and MUCH more that experiments have shown to hold true to.

But then...  I am squiggly challenged.  So mere successes in predicting correctly the outcome of experiments may fall short of a good reason to prefer a theory.
Title: Re: Electrogravitics – A Simplified Description
Post by: Amaterasu on June 13, 2012, 07:18:55 am
I realize that you are addressing someone else but I would like to make a comment.

I too have reservations in regard to SQK in that when reading the second book, the writer refers to his first book as a reference source. That is not acceptable in most scientific circles and I would have rather seen references of others work to substantiate the claims.

If you do a bit more research, you will find that Einstein never ruled out the possibility of the ether (aether). And further, if you are interested in Dr. Brown's work, you will have to come to terms with, at the very least, the possibility of the existence of the aether.

Just my opinion,

Mikado

I agree that the aether is a part of things, and in fact, I believe Einstein not only didn't rule it out, He specifically said it had to exist...

As for LaViolette's self-reference...  What do You do if there really ARE no others to reference.  To be sure, if there had been and He knew of them, He WOULD have used them.  But He is a pioneer in the SQK arena, and had no other material (that He knew of) to reference.  Just sayin'.
Title: Re: Electrogravitics – A Simplified Description
Post by: Littleenki on June 13, 2012, 07:27:26 am
 :oYou had me going with that 542 amps, Mikado, but I figured there was an explanation! I pictured your workshop exploding with flames when all that current shot into a gravitor, and thought..damn he's still around to tell us about it?

Sounds like a cool experiment with a definite positive outcome!Have you tried to attach it to a paraconical pendulum yet?

Really, Sub quantum kinetics is just another layer of all existence, and noone will ever see the tiniest particle, as it doesnt exist.

Call CERN and tell them to turn it into a big waterslide for the scientist's sweaty kids in the summer!

Size doesnt matter either, and a quark is as voluminous as a universe, and sub quauntum just leads to sub-sub quantum, and so forth. No finality in sight, and thats what defines life.

No beginning, no end.

For every level, another exists above and below, so the search to define our mass or matter or aether is a quandry which has no answer.

The only word in physics that is applicable in definition is infinity, and of course it's the only word which physics cant define.

That my friends is fact, and nothing more.

Littleenki
Title: Re: Electrogravitics – A Simplified Description
Post by: dcooper on June 13, 2012, 07:28:06 am
Amaterasu-"  My biggest problem with Einstein is that He does not predict the Biefeld-Brown Effect.  SQK does. "

well the reason why it does not is because of Einstein's theory only explains mass not charge, but einstein wanted to modify his equation so that electricity and magnetic can be in curved space but fail (this was his Unified field theory) so once someone finishes this it will incorporated the Biefeld-Brown effect but not rate know it does not.
Title: Re: Electrogravitics – A Simplified Description
Post by: Mikado on June 13, 2012, 07:36:26 am
Where there is smoke, there is fire. And no, it is not known as the "Mikado Effect".

And you set the rule for that?  Linda

Rule for what? Smoke and fire or the effect?

In the first, well, I didn't invent fire. As to the second, it was your Father but then you did admit to being scientifically slow.

Mikado
Title: Re: Electrogravitics – A Simplified Description
Post by: Amaterasu on June 13, 2012, 07:53:20 am
Amaterasu-"  My biggest problem with Einstein is that He does not predict the Biefeld-Brown Effect.  SQK does. "

well the reason why it does not is because of Einstein's theory only explains mass not charge, but einstein wanted to modify his equation so that electricity and magnetic can be in curved space but fail (this was his Unified field theory) so once someone finishes this it will incorporated the Biefeld-Brown effect but not rate know it does not.

We assume there is a way...  And on top of all that, SQK integrates gravity which, I am led to believe, Einstein died trying to do...  Why cling to an incomplete theory when one that covers all the bases neatly is there...?
Title: Re: Electrogravitics – A Simplified Description
Post by: dcooper on June 18, 2012, 04:03:53 pm
scientist don't belive in ether thus SQK, im not in favor of SQK either but i can see were you are coming from.
Title: Re: Electrogravitics – A Simplified Description
Post by: Cosmic4life on June 18, 2012, 06:27:50 pm
Just chipping in here.....

Didn't Tesla believe in a Dynamic Aether as well ??

I think it is too early to rule some sort of Aether out........maybe it's the Higgs Field.

Cosmic..
Title: Re: Electrogravitics – A Simplified Description
Post by: Cosmic4life on June 18, 2012, 08:40:50 pm
:oYou had me going with that 542 amps, Mikado, but I figured there was an explanation! I pictured your workshop exploding with flames when all that current shot into a gravitor, and thought..damn he's still around to tell us about it?

Sounds like a cool experiment with a definite positive outcome!Have you tried to attach it to a paraconical pendulum yet?

Really, Sub quantum kinetics is just another layer of all existence, and noone will ever see the tiniest particle, as it doesnt exist.

Call CERN and tell them to turn it into a big waterslide for the scientist's sweaty kids in the summer!

Size doesnt matter either, and a quark is as voluminous as a universe, and sub quauntum just leads to sub-sub quantum, and so forth. No finality in sight, and thats what defines life.

No beginning, no end.

For every level, another exists above and below, so the search to define our mass or matter or aether is a quandry which has no answer.

The only word in physics that is applicable in definition is infinity, and of course it's the only word which physics cant define.

That my friends is fact, and nothing more.

Littleenki

Where's Unit 16 when you need them....all i need is a Bead condenser (model #: AB-619) , a tin can and a snorkel !

Cosmic..
Title: Re: Electrogravitics – A Simplified Description
Post by: Littleenki on June 18, 2012, 09:03:55 pm
Hey, Cosmic!
Ive got a couple of intericitors laying around still, Ill ship one right out!LOL!

Now if they could find that Higgins Boson...
(http://www.magnumpi.it/S1/images/1-2higgins.JPG)

Have a great night, Cosmic!

Littleenki
Title: Re: Electrogravitics – A Simplified Description
Post by: Amaterasu on June 18, 2012, 10:43:06 pm
scientist don't belive in ether thus SQK, im not in favor of SQK either but i can see were you are coming from.

SOME scientists don't believe in an aether.  Some do.  The fact that SQK can explain more and predict more than relativity leads Me to believe it's closer to what's really going on.  [shrug]

Just chipping in here.....

Didn't Tesla believe in a Dynamic Aether as well ??

I think it is too early to rule some sort of Aether out........maybe it's the Higgs Field.

Cosmic..

Yes, Tesla thought there was an aether - so did Einstein, ironically.  Today's assertion that there is no aether is based on the Michaelson-Morley experiment, which, being enclosed, is flawed.  The aether would be stationary relative to the experiment.

So...  I have heard of other experiments, kept secret, that show there IS an aether - but have nothing but hearsay on that.  I also have heard that the aether is a major assumption in black projects...  A totally different physics than the mainstream which is taught degraded science to keep things like free energy and the Biefeld-Brown Effect in question.
Title: Re: Electrogravitics – A Simplified Description
Post by: Mikado on June 19, 2012, 06:23:05 am
SOME scientists don't believe in an aether.  Some do.  The fact that SQK can explain more and predict more than relativity leads Me to believe it's closer to what's really going on.  [shrug]

Yes, Tesla thought there was an aether - so did Einstein, ironically.  Today's assertion that there is no aether is based on the Michaelson-Morley experiment, which, being enclosed, is flawed.  The aether would be stationary relative to the experiment.

So...  I have heard of other experiments, kept secret, that show there IS an aether - but have nothing but hearsay on that.  I also have heard that the aether is a major assumption in black projects...  A totally different physics than the mainstream which is taught degraded science to keep things like free energy and the Biefeld-Brown Effect in question.

A physicist who worked with Morley in regard to measuring the aether drift was Dayton Miller. Miller continued the experiments and then built an interferometer with longer arms.

His results indicated that the drift was always in a direction toward a certain constellation. However, his results were contested saying that he didn't allow for temperature etc and then he came back claiming that he did but then in the 80's, his research was again looked into.

My opinion is that the jury is still out on the question of the aether for if it doesn't exist, in some manner, then what the he!! is Biefeld-Brown?

In any event, perhaps we are drifting along with the aether. As one would drift in a canoe on a river, without visual references, it is a bit more difficult to detect the flow of the current moving you along. Perhaps it is something similar.

Just an opinion, as I said.

Mikado
Title: Re: Electrogravitics – A Simplified Description
Post by: Littleenki on June 19, 2012, 07:19:58 am
True it does seem od that with a verifiable effect like BB, there would still be questions if if there is an aether or not, but what is for sure, whatever it is, we are a part of it at a different scalr level.

The canoe on the river is a good analogy, and the way a  breeze seems to become unnoticeable when moving with it is unmistakeable.

I have pondered whether we move at all, and how time is the movement...relocating within the so called aether. Does anything actually move?

Also I have theorized that the BB effect itself is basically time travel although not many folks have the lab equipment to observe teleportation events with any reliability, if at all.

Do those gravitors swing through the aether, or do they switch between dimensions so fast they appear to be moving? And if they relocate dimesionally, what is the resonant frequency for such an event? That frequency would be the biscuit to get the dogs begging!

I think Tesla had it when he strapped the box on that column, and if he hadnt smashed it and erased the design from his files(hismind) we might be way farther ahead time travel wise, but much worse off weapon wise. Thanks Nikola for protecting us from ourselves!

Littleenki
Title: Re: Electrogravitics – A Simplified Description
Post by: Mikado on June 19, 2012, 07:34:34 am
True it does seem od that with a verifiable effect like BB, there would still be questions if if there is an aether or not, but what is for sure, whatever it is, we are a part of it at a different scalr level.

The canoe on the river is a good analogy, and the way a  breeze seems to become unnoticeable when moving with it is unmistakeable.

I have pondered whether we move at all, and how time is the movement...relocating within the so called aether. Does anything actually move?

Also I have theorized that the BB effect itself is basically time travel although not many folks have the lab equipment to observe teleportation events with any reliability, if at all.

Do those gravitors swing through the aether, or do they switch between dimensions so fast they appear to be moving? And if they relocate dimesionally, what is the resonant frequency for such an event? That frequency would be the biscuit to get the dogs begging!

I think Tesla had it when he strapped the box on that column, and if he hadnt smashed it and erased the design from his files(hismind) we might be way farther ahead time travel wise, but much worse off weapon wise. Thanks Nikola for protecting us from ourselves!

Littleenki

A Gravitor will do different "things" with regard to the aether...in my opinion. A term that I use is "displacement" and the amount of the displacement is determined by the K of the dielectric, the frequency of the displacement and a few other variables that at the present, I don't wish to discuss.

Certain experiments to date have been successful in substantiating claims made by Dr Brown in his "Structure of Space" in that areas of space are comprised of high Kmu and low Kmu and everything in between. A good analogy would be to look at weather - areas of High and Low pressure.

Mikado
Title: Re: Electrogravitics – A Simplified Description
Post by: hobbit on June 19, 2012, 07:35:37 am
Mikado,
In a K.I.S.S manner....what if the aether is going in both directions at once????
And what if then someone places a device that locally diverts one of those flows, and the consequence is that the device slams along in the direction that one flow is still travelling????

Or still in simple terms...what if like a rock in a river that creates a resistance to the flow, it creates an upstream flow behind the rock???

I consider that the so called aether flows are omni directional, but that they create a dominant cross feature in every torroidal memory flow they create, and that the memory switchs relative to the next larger dominant memory any memory field is submerged within, and that by locally reorientating the dominant cross feature of that local memory that a variant switching direction is created, otherwise all that will be noted is a one direction force, which may continue after the voltage is shut off due to the local memory still remaining for a period of time.

Know anyone who has built such a device????
And when a humans field went near it ( or it's stacked components..variations occured????
It's all by field...fields within fields , within fields ....add infirnitum.

hobbit
Title: Re: Electrogravitics – A Simplified Description
Post by: Mikado on June 19, 2012, 07:37:37 am

Know anyone who has built such a device????
And when a humans field went near it ( or it's stacked components..variations occured????


hobbit


Yes
Title: Re: Electrogravitics – A Simplified Description
Post by: Littleenki on June 19, 2012, 08:00:58 am
Would that be called and electroscope?
:-)
Le
Title: Re: Electrogravitics – A Simplified Description
Post by: hobbit on June 19, 2012, 08:02:48 am

Yes

And I have a huge respect for who has.
I don't need to build anything, there are far far better enginneers and accountants than this little hobbit, but...I am a hobbit.

There are more things in heaven and earth, horatio, than are dreamt of in your philosophy.
Some things won't add up like 2+2=4, but in a sequence manner they will.
The answers are not blowin in the wind, as the wind ain't a blowin.
The spiral implosion versus the spiral counter rotating outflows create zones of attraction that each memory field of what is the atmosphere respond by relocating in space relative to the attraction.
The Earths memory field smoothes out all of this into layers that will look like rippled postcards if viewed in cross section relative to the multitude of inputs and outputs, with a dominant heart centred zone where the spin reverses.

The planet is not zooming along as commonly accepted, it is been displaced relative to how the memory field that surrounds the planet is switching, and that pathway is mostly controlled by the dominant suns memory field.

hobbit
Title: Re: Electrogravitics – A Simplified Description
Post by: Linda Brown on June 19, 2012, 08:11:53 am
"A Gravitor will do different "things" with regard to the aether...in my opinion. A term that I use is "displacement" and the amount of the displacement is determined by the K of the dielectric, the frequency of the displacement and a few other variables that at the present, I don't wish to discuss.

Yes. Mikado is absolutely right here. I like the word " displacement" too.

I also am fond of a couple of the concepts that Littleenki has floated here just recently and know that this discussion will continue.... unhampered.... and uncontrolled..... here and elsewhere.   Linda
Title: Re: Electrogravitics – A Simplified Description
Post by: Linda Brown on June 19, 2012, 08:20:09 am
Note how deftly the Navigator steered...

"Know anyone who has built such a device?
And when a humans field went near it ( or it's stacked components..variations occured?
It's all by field...fields within fields , within fields ....add infirnitum.

And the answer was  YES.

Linda
Title: Re: Electrogravitics – A Simplified Description
Post by: hobbit on June 19, 2012, 08:30:20 am
Littlenki,
http://www.spaceandmotion.com/Philosophy-Socrates-Philosopher.htm
Know thyself.

I have been to such, and My physical body was somewhat upset at not having a body, or ground to stand on, and it was most illuminating.

Humans have given Me the most information relative to what is at play, as the multitude don't realise that what they view in a mirror is not really them.
YOU are a TIME machine, You displace all of the atoms that compounded are Your vehicle, YOUR flying saucer.

The Earths body is the mass, and the less dense atmosphere and liquids, the overall polarity is to the heart centre, and humans are normally vectored to correspond, except when asleep, then You are at ninty degrees commonly.

By having this strange hobbit ability to be able to determine anythings memory field , I can measure it and plot how this memory flows, and how it interacts with other such larger and smaller scale similer .

Think about Your spine and how it has alternate layers, think of conductive and resistive, in multiple layers, think of how anyone breaking their spines loose movement ability.
Think of movement as displacement of atoms relative to attraction flows been sent about the torroidal field that enables YOU to be, or not to be.
hobbit the simple
Title: Re: Electrogravitics – A Simplified Description
Post by: Linda Brown on June 19, 2012, 08:52:31 am
All the more reason to keep such a thing safe Hobbit. To be able to simply " tell" the atoms of anothers body to " forget" what they have known... changes that person then into..... nothingness. To BE..... or not TO BE.

The rest of the Bards statement works here too. For later.

Didn't Tesla believe in a Dynamic Aether as well ??

This was a question from Cosmic.... and the answer of course was yes.... but he also had an odd quirk to that thought that others ( as well as my Dad) developed their concepts upon..... that the aether somehow was " Intelligent" 

Chew on that one for awhile folks. It is more than the simplistic questions of whether the aether exists or not..... it is more the question....what interactions has this "Intelligence" had with us?

Linda
Title: Re: Electrogravitics – A Simplified Description
Post by: Littleenki on June 19, 2012, 09:28:09 am
Good afternoon, Linda!
I have been thinking more than building, as Hobbit says, we dont have to be the one who constructs a device or apparatus, if we undestand it, someone will have the tech to do so typically before our wallet can do so!:-)

As far as an aether, with magnetism and the realization that it may be a life force, I must conclude that all aetheric  theories should include a possibilty of it being alive, or at least sentient.

Why does everything seem so fast or imposible to measure for us in our memory field? Because it all is a superior form of lifeforce than we are...yet.

I think thats what has kept the military from perfecting an Eg craft which is reliable and safe, as the surrounding memory field knows what will happen if they do, and that special force..magnetism, electricity, or gravity....is alive and wont let us share its desert until we eat our meat.

Mohenjo Daro?

Tunguska?

The Mahabarata war?

All lessons learned by humankind over the millenia, and when we come free of our tiny sandbox of  2 dimensional ideas and beliefs, those sentient forces will serve us the biggest creme brullee of all...our future!

Cheers!
Littleenki
Title: Re: Electrogravitics – A Simplified Description
Post by: Mikado on June 19, 2012, 09:40:58 am
Note how deftly the Navigator steered...

"Know anyone who has built such a device?
And when a humans field went near it ( or it's stacked components..variations occured?
It's all by field...fields within fields , within fields ....add infirnitum.

And the answer was  YES.

Linda

Note how deftly the Navigator steered...

..when one allows oneself to be steered. <g>

Mikado
Title: Re: Electrogravitics – A Simplified Description
Post by: hobbit on June 19, 2012, 09:50:39 am
Note how deftly the Navigator steered...

..when one allows oneself to be steered. <g>

Mikado

When one goes with the flow.
Right now is a new moon, the flows I detect are off the scale( My scale, arms not long enough)
As the attraction zone strengthens,  the atmosphere displaces towards the attraction, the sails offer a resistance to the atmosphere which is transferred via the mast to the hull of the vessel.
The vessel is powered via resistance.
If the hull of the vessel offered no resistance, then there would be no wind felt, and You would travel with the flow of atmosphere.

The thing is though what happens if You go with the flow that creates the attraction????
hobbit with no strings attached
Title: Re: Electrogravitics – A Simplified Description
Post by: hobbit on June 19, 2012, 10:05:56 am
RESISTANCE.
I mean't to add that resistance is MEMORY been observed.
Memory enables whatever in 3D creation to remember how it is arranged.

It strives to remain as arranged and thus offers up a resistance to whatever is attempting to force it to FORGET.

A diamond offers up huge memory of how it is arranged, it will create huge resistance to anything trying to make it forget.

The local ability to divert resistance is where the so called BB force is located, imho.
By allowing the memory of whatever to displace with no resistance been met , means superluminal displacement.
hobbit... having lived for a while on peanut butter.
Title: Re: Electrogravitics – A Simplified Description
Post by: Littleenki on June 19, 2012, 10:35:39 am
Lots of Smuckers chunky organic for me, Hobbit!

I see the light of your statement about resistance and how without it we are just another molecule of water flowing down the river. Until we encounter that Shauberger effect and turn back on ourselves likenwhen meeting thar rock in the eddy.

As far as those superluminal shifts, it seems the supposed travel we see through the aether is a result of superluminal velocity and switching,eh? No wonder it appears so seamless.

What presents resistance to a superluminal dimension shift?

Other mass?
Em or eg wavefronts?
The aether itself?
I would guess all of the above, chunks in the peanut butter.

Cheers!
Littleenki
Title: Re: Electrogravitics – A Simplified Description
Post by: PLAYSWITHMACHINES on June 19, 2012, 11:18:13 am
Amy;
Quote
I agree that the aether is a part of things, and in fact, I believe Einstein not only didn't rule it out, He specifically said it had to exist...

As for LaViolette's self-reference...  What do You do if there really ARE no others to reference.  To be sure, if there had been and He knew of them, He WOULD have used them.  But He is a pioneer in the SQK arena, and had no other material (that He knew of) to reference.  Just sayin'.

Right, and right :)

L.E;
Yes, i had the same moment of seeing 7.6 Mw being unleashed in a microsecond.......

OK so it was 7.6 Watts, that sounds about right ;)
Your eloquent post said it all, mate.

Mikado;
Quote
Amaterasu-"  My biggest problem with Einstein is that He does not predict the Biefeld-Brown Effect.  SQK does. "

well the reason why it does not is because of Einstein's theory only explains mass not charge, but einstein wanted to modify his equation so that electricity and magnetic can be in curved space but fail (this was his Unified field theory) so once someone finishes this it will incorporated the Biefeld-Brown effect but not rate know it does not.

I would agree to that, but it's something very like SQK, Bearden explains more of it, Aspden says the same. Even string theory becoming N theory are all aspects of the same thing.
I tend to refer to it as ZPE in an energy context, and EG in the mass/gravitation context.
 Not very scientific, but it works as an explanation.

Linda;
A good question, is the aether intelligent?
 I would say yes and no. On the one hand the flow of mass & energy is in no way sentient, even on a 'universe' scale.
But there is also the Gaia field if you like, the energy of all living cells that can transmit through space, possibly using an EG or Aether medium, and reacting with it. This sounds very much like Hobbit's 'memory field'......

Quote
Quote from: Linda Brown on Today at 08:20:09 AM
Note how deftly the Navigator steered...

"Know anyone who has built such a device?
And when a humans field went near it ( or it's stacked components..variations occured?
It's all by field...fields within fields , within fields ....add infirnitum.

And the answer was  YES.

Linda

Note how deftly the Navigator steered...

..when one allows oneself to be steered. <g>

Mikado

No, no more riddles & guessing games, if you have something to add to the discussion, let's hear it. no need for quotes, Linda, i'm well aware of what he said.
 I would like to know more about this amazing weight loss using only 7.6 watts...... and the 'variations'- may i call them 'anomalies'?

Hobbit;
Yes, and yes.
And i like peanut butter, too ;P
Title: Re: Electrogravitics – A Simplified Description
Post by: Amaterasu on June 19, 2012, 06:48:49 pm
Chew on that one for awhile folks. It is more than the simplistic questions of whether the aether exists or not..... it is more the question....what interactions has this "Intelligence" had with us?

Linda

Considering My one experience where I became the universe, experienced that zero dimension, was everyOne and everything, experienced the All being Consciousness creating the Now...

I'm guessing I have an answer relative to Myself...
Title: Re: Electrogravitics – A Simplified Description
Post by: Mikado on June 21, 2012, 07:21:01 am


Mikado;
I would agree to that, but it's something very like SQK, Bearden explains more of it, Aspden says the same. Even string theory becoming N theory are all aspects of the same thing.
I tend to refer to it as ZPE in an energy context, and EG in the mass/gravitation context.
 Not very scientific, but it works as an explanation.



I didn't make the quote you have attributed to me.

Mikado
Title: Re: Electrogravitics – A Simplified Description
Post by: PLAYSWITHMACHINES on June 21, 2012, 11:39:46 am
I was referring to your quote about Morely & the aether, and that you did not agree with SQK, etc.

I would like to hear more about this 50% weight reduction using only 7.6 watts. Thats quite impressive.
Title: Re: Electrogravitics – A Simplified Description
Post by: Mikado on June 22, 2012, 07:04:48 am
I was referring to your quote about Morely & the aether, and that you did not agree with SQK, etc.

I would like to hear more about this 50% weight reduction using only 7.6 watts. Thats quite impressive.

It is not that impressive, however, the short version is that the apparatus was in the vertical position and on an electronic scale. It was stressed with electrostatic voltage only, meaning, one lead to the apparatus, the earth becomes the other pole. The Power Supply had a ripple of 0.1% and the spin up was for 3 seconds with the full  measured displacement lasting for approximately 1 second.

This series of experiments were designed to establish a base for free EG that might occur naturally in nature and were not designed to substantiate the Biefeld-Brown effect which is something totally different. However, it does exhibit signs that EG may very well be as natural as lightning is in the EM.

And lastly, it sang for a brief moment with a sound I never heard before. It must have thrown out one he11 of an EG pulse but then, no one showed up either. No Morgan, no twigsnapper, no MIB, no aliens and it has been quite awhile.

Keep experimenting and don't fear the bogey man but then, keep your anonymity until you are done and then present to the public. Just read what has been posted here in regard to Paul Brown and others.


Mikado
Title: Re: Electrogravitics – A Simplified Description
Post by: Littleenki on June 22, 2012, 04:18:57 pm
Am I correct in reading the device was grounded through an electronic scale?

So, the scale was the ground path? You mustbe grounde the scale platform and insulated it from the top of the scale body, eh?

And, Im guessing that to see 7.6 watts, you popped it with 20kv and .00038 amps?
or 40kv with .00019 amps?

Either sounds like a reasonable amount of current and voltage for an Eg test.

What was the device made from, and was it like a gravitor?

i understand if you dont want to describe it to us, as this is an open forum.:D

When I pulse my gravitor, it swings quite handily, but I havent tried to do so on a scale as it sits on a ground plane. Im afraid the scale might get fried if I try that...how did you avoid the scale getting damaged?

Cheers!
Littleenki
Title: Re: Electrogravitics – A Simplified Description
Post by: Linda Brown on June 22, 2012, 04:28:35 pm
Mikado,

You said

"And lastly, it sang for a brief moment with a sound I never heard before. It must have thrown out one he11 of an EG pulse but then, no one showed up either. No Morgan, no twigsnapper, no MIB, no aliens and it has been quite awhile.

My question is .... if it "sang" for a brief moment with a sound that you had never heard before" How do you know WHAT it was doing.

And the fact that no one came beating down your door means nothing.  Other than.... no one came beating down your door.

Just questions.  Linda
Title: Re: Electrogravitics – A Simplified Description
Post by: Mikado on June 23, 2012, 07:27:19 am
Am I correct in reading the device was grounded through an electronic scale?

So, the scale was the ground path? You mustbe grounde the scale platform and insulated it from the top of the scale body, eh?

And, Im guessing that to see 7.6 watts, you popped it with 20kv and .00038 amps?
or 40kv with .00019 amps?

Either sounds like a reasonable amount of current and voltage for an Eg test.

What was the device made from, and was it like a gravitor?

i understand if you dont want to describe it to us, as this is an open forum.:D

When I pulse my gravitor, it swings quite handily, but I havent tried to do so on a scale as it sits on a ground plane. Im afraid the scale might get fried if I try that...how did you avoid the scale getting damaged?

Cheers!
Littleenki

You are jumping to conclusions.

First, the scale was covered in mylar at .100 inches. It was NOT grounded through anything. The scale was operated by a 9 volt battery so as not to have a path to earth ground and the scale was in a plastic box. Steps were taken to ensure that NO leakage would be to earth ground since it was an electrostatic test.

Secondly, why are you guessing when you know exactly the voltage and current that was used? You even commented upon it.

http://www.thelivingmoon.com/forum/index.php?topic=1308.msg19155#msg19155

So the question begging at the moment is - why are you guessing?

Thirdly, I doubt that what you have as a Gravitor is what I am working with for just one of mine costs over $10,000 and I have two. I may be wrong, maybe yours have cost that amount but I seriously doubt that anyone has as few brains as I to invest that kind of money.

As to your comment - "What was the device made from, and was it like a gravitor?" I have a question - "What makes a Gravitor different from a Capacitor? Apparently you can answer that merely based upon your question so I await your response.

And as to this statement -

"And, Im guessing that to see 7.6 watts, you popped it with 20kv and .00038 amps?
or 40kv with .00019 amps?

Either sounds like a reasonable amount of current and voltage for an Eg test."

Actually, the numbers you gave are quite low and are on a par with a Lifter. What about inrush? The numbers you gave are way too low for appreciable displacement. The numbers you have quoted are in keeping with the theorem that as the Voltage increases the Current will decrease with a fixed load. So, does that mean that Ohm's law/Kirchoff's Law/Lenz' Law/Farraday's Law will still apply to the operation of a Gravitor or will there be a slight deviation? Work is being done and will follow the laws of Physics in that respect BUT..... well, since you have Gravitors you should be able to answer that question, shouldn't you.

Dr. Brown claimed that the Biefeld-Brown effect was a departure from Coulomb's Law - in what way? To understand a Gravitor you need to be able to answer that and it is a very simple answer.

I would wager, that if you do have a simple Gravitor on an armature and you reverse the leads that it will move in the opposite direction. Mine will not. It has a fixed negative lead and a fixed positive lead.

There are two types of Gravitors and different configurations and different laws apply to all except for what appears to be the basic tenent - Negative will allows follow the positive and that is the Biefeld-Brown effect and the credit goes to Dr. Brown.

So please stop guessing when you have already quoted me and previously read my post in which you commented about the current. Are you really reading what I have posted?

Best

Mikado
Title: Re: Electrogravitics – A Simplified Description
Post by: Mikado on June 23, 2012, 07:33:02 am
Mikado,

You said

"And lastly, it sang for a brief moment with a sound I never heard before. It must have thrown out one he11 of an EG pulse but then, no one showed up either. No Morgan, no twigsnapper, no MIB, no aliens and it has been quite awhile.

My question is .... if it "sang" for a brief moment with a sound that you had never heard before" How do you know WHAT it was doing.

How do I know? Because that is what an experiment is meant to do - answer questions. As to the sound it made, I was the only one in the room to hear it. Strange, more than likely a figment of my imagination so take it with a grain of salt but in any event, to create that much displacement had to have thrown out a nice EG pulse but why worry, you claimed on the Token that someone has been doing it for "weeks". But that was well after I did.

And the fact that no one came beating down your door means nothing.  Other than.... no one came beating down your door.

Just questions.  Linda

Exactly my point - no one came beating down my door and all the "chicken little talk" you have done is just that - talk.

Mikado
Title: Re: Electrogravitics – A Simplified Description
Post by: Littleenki on June 23, 2012, 08:25:37 am
What makes a gravitor different from a capacitor?
I have no idea, Mikado, Im just trying to understand the effect YOU are seeing versus the effect I have seen.

I do know what a capacitor is, and how it is similar to a gravitor in construction, but as we see, there are many types and styles of capacitors, so to call a gravitor a capacitor is an all encompassing statement many just make out of a loss for words to describe the actual differences.

As for watts, yes, I am using the old faithful formula that works for most power measurements, and as I dont see any empirical proof of any other force taking place there, I cant say whether or not it acts like a capacitor either.

And in the case of the scale apparatus, I was just wondering how you did it, and not challenging anything you said. It is called asking a question, but some dont like to be asked, as they feel they are privy to "special" knowledge that noone else has.

The statement about your 7.6 watt measurement was according to YOUR experiment, not mine, and the numbers for mine are quite a bit different, but as for now, Im not sharing any of that info, as it seems that it will be better shared upon a private message if I so feel.

Lets just say that there is a bit more current than that...quite a bit!

As far as a gravitor is concerned, what Ive built is simple and made from a series of tapering, flexible dielectric plates layered with sections of a specific metal foil I wish to not divulge, but that which has an amazing ability to stand up to repeated "pops" from the HV, and when I pop it with that voltage it swings quite well on a pendulum. im sure not spending 10 grand on any apparatus thats questionable as to it's potential, but if youve got that kind of cash laying around, go for it!

Yes I said flexible dielectric...take that to the bank!:D

Obviously Im not the electronics genius you seem to be, and I never claimed so, but my post was directly a number of questions I had, and nothing more.

You must realize, we have a reason for asking these questions, and if you take them as attacks on your credibility, well thats your problem. Sorry amigo, no disrespect intended.

And, anyone reading that quote of mine will see clearly it was an observance of a mistype, so why are you reposting it as if it was an attack on your credibility? You posted 542 amps, and it sounded easily like a mistake hence the somewhat silly nature of my reply, which was done with a kind thought towards you specifically...heres the first two lines....

":oYou had me going with that 542 amps, Mikado, but I figured there was an explanation! I pictured your workshop exploding with flames when all that current shot into a gravitor, and thought..damn he's still around to tell us about it?

Sounds like a cool experiment with a definite positive outcome!Have you tried to attach it to a paraconical pendulum yet? "

Does that sound bad to anyone else here but you?

It even includes a suggestion as to how to try a different approach, which in my opinion is the ultimate olive branch.

Yes, I have made a gravitor, using TT Browns patent drawing, and it swings from a paraconical pendulum.
Thats as far as Ive gotten in 6 months, and maybe all Ill ever see, but for me it is a successful rendition of an effect many doubt, and thats empirical enough for me.


Cheers!
Littleenki
Title: Re: Electrogravitics – A Simplified Description
Post by: Mikado on June 23, 2012, 09:30:58 am
What makes a gravitor different from a capacitor?
I have no idea, Mikado, Im just trying to understand the effect YOU are seeing versus the effect I have seen.

I do know what a capacitor is, and how it is similar to a gravitor in construction, but as we see, there are many types and styles of capacitors, so to call a gravitor a capacitor is an all encompassing statement many just make out of a loss for words to describe the actual differences.

How about this: A Gravitor is to a capacitor as an Electromagnet is to a coil.

As for watts, yes, I am using the old faithful formula that works for most power measurements, and as I dont see any empirical proof of any other force taking place there, I cant say whether or not it acts like a capacitor either.

So let me understand what you are saying. The question I was asking - " So, does that mean that Ohm's law/Kirchoff's Law/Lenz' Law/Farraday's Law will still apply to the operation of a Gravitor or will there be a slight deviation?" - was to determine the electrical characteristics of the operation of a Gravitor and not simple computation of watts for there is a good deal more taking place, for example, capacitive reactance.

You further mention - "<snip>as I dont see any empirical proof of any other force taking place there,<snip>..

...didn't you mention that your Gravitors spun around? Isn't that empirical proof of some kind of force?


And in the case of the scale apparatus, I was just wondering how you did it, and not challenging anything you said. It is called asking a question, but some dont like to be asked, as they feel they are privy to "special" knowledge that noone else has.

Here is what you said:
"Am I correct in reading the device was grounded through an electronic scale?

So, the scale was the ground path? You mustbe grounde the scale platform and insulated it from the top of the scale body, eh?"

and then I said:

First, the scale was covered in mylar at .100 inches. It was NOT grounded through anything. The scale was operated by a 9 volt battery so as not to have a path to earth ground and the scale was in a plastic box. Steps were taken to ensure that NO leakage would be to earth ground since it was an electrostatic test.

Now answer me this, How is my answer a refusal to give an answer? Are you looking for an argument where none exists?

I answered your question as to how the scale was setup and your answer quoted above is argumentative which I will not bite at.

The statement about your 7.6 watt measurement was according to YOUR experiment, not mine, and the numbers for mine are quite a bit different, but as for now, Im not sharing any of that info, as it seems that it will be better shared upon a private message if I so feel.

Lets just say that there is a bit more current than that...quite a bit!

Let me refresh what your original statement was that I commented upon:

"And, Im guessing that to see 7.6 watts, you popped it with 20kv and .00038 amps?
or 40kv with .00019 amps?

Either sounds like a reasonable amount of current and voltage for an Eg test."

You were giving out Voltages and Currents and NOT Watts in the above quote. I originally gave a Voltage (14.2KV) and a Current (542 microamps), I did NOT ever give out Watts. The person that calculated the Watts was Playing With Machines".

I was attempting to point out that you apparently did NOT read what I wrote in a previous post for why else would you be making a guess as to Voltage and Current.

As far as a gravitor is concerned, what Ive built is simple and made from a series of tapering, flexible dielectric plates layered with sections of a specific metal foil I wish to not divulge, but that which has an amazing ability to stand up to repeated "pops" from the HV, and when I pop it with that voltage it swings quite well on a pendulum. im sure not spending 10 grand on any apparatus thats questionable as to it's potential, but if youve got that kind of cash laying around, go for it!

Yes I said flexible dielectric...take that to the bank!:D

First of all, you said early that you have NOT seen any empirical evidence as to a force and here you are claiming that your Gravitors are moving. Why the diametrically opposed statements? Which is true?

As to " spending 10 grand on any apparatus thats questionable as to it's potential," - well, that is the cost of research and in some circles, that amount would be considered "donut money".

Flexible dielectric's? Sure, mylar, waxed paper, clays and a host of others. Nothing new there.

Obviously Im not the electronics genius you seem to be, and I never claimed so, but my post was directly a number of questions I had, and nothing more.

You must realize, we have a reason for asking these questions, and if you take them as attacks on your credibility, well thats your problem. Sorry amigo, no disrespect intended.

I am not an electronics genius but did I NOT answer some of your questions?

As to credibility, do a search of Mikado on this website and you will see that I have no credibility according to others, of which I am sure your name will be included in the results of that search.

And, anyone reading that quote of mine will see clearly it was an observance of a mistype, so why are you reposting it as if it was an attack on your credibility? You posted 542 amps, and it sounded easily like a mistake hence the somewhat silly nature of my reply, which was done with a kind thought towards you specifically...heres the first two lines....

":oYou had me going with that 542 amps, Mikado, but I figured there was an explanation! I pictured your workshop exploding with flames when all that current shot into a gravitor, and thought..damn he's still around to tell us about it?

Hold on there a moment. Where in my post does it mention anything about "542 ?A"? It doesn't. I was commenting about your guessing the Voltage and Current and you are being argumentative since nothing about this was addressed. What was addressed was your guessing Voltage and Current when in a previous post I gave the measurements. That tells me you don't read.

Sounds like a cool experiment with a definite positive outcome!Have you tried to attach it to a paraconical pendulum yet? "

Does that sound bad to anyone else here but you?

It even includes a suggestion as to how to try a different approach, which in my opinion is the ultimate olive branch.

Attaching a Gravitor to a pendulum, an armature or any other device to see the movement in a manner you have described is nothing more than a carnival ride. If you don't see that then perhaps you can't see the necessity for controlled experiments and I don't know how to make you see that.

One good thing is this. As long as anyone builds a device as you have then the idea will stay alive and that is IMPORTANT! It affords a first hand view of the effect, the Biefeld-Brown effect. I am not judging anyone that does so. However, to analyze what is being done involves support equipment that costs a good deal more than some foil and flexible dielectrics and it even costs more than what my Gravitors have cost.

Learning costs money. Even Linda will attest to that in respect to her Father.

Yes, I have made a gravitor, using TT Browns patent drawing, and it swings from a paraconical pendulum.
Thats as far as Ive gotten in 6 months, and maybe all Ill ever see, but for me it is a successful rendition of an effect many doubt, and thats empirical enough for me.


Cheers!
Littleenki

Here is the second quote from above:

As for watts, yes, I am using the old faithful formula that works for most power measurements, and as I dont see any empirical proof of any other force taking place there, I cant say whether or not it acts like a capacitor either.

So what is it? Either you have or you haven't seen proof.

Not being argumentative, just pointing out the dichotomy you have going on in your posts which is confusing, I am sure, to others.

Mikado
Title: Re: Electrogravitics – A Simplified Description
Post by: Linda Brown on June 23, 2012, 09:59:37 am
Mikado you said

"Attaching a Gravitor to a pendulum, an armature or any other device to see the movement in a manner you have described is nothing more than a carnival ride. If you don't see that then perhaps you can't see the necessity for controlled experiments and I don't know how to make you see that.

Funny..... thats what the FBI called the Pearl Harbor Experiment results in the fifties.. Nothing more than a carnival ride here folks.... move along move along move along! 

Necessity for controlled experiments? There is always that Mikado. And also a choice of who is doing the controlling.  Linda
Title: Re: Electrogravitics – A Simplified Description
Post by: Mikado on June 23, 2012, 10:18:09 am
Mikado you said

"Attaching a Gravitor to a pendulum, an armature or any other device to see the movement in a manner you have described is nothing more than a carnival ride. If you don't see that then perhaps you can't see the necessity for controlled experiments and I don't know how to make you see that.

Funny..... thats what the FBI called the Pearl Harbor Experiment results in the fifties.. Nothing more than a carnival ride here folks.... move along move along move along!

It is what it is and that is what it is.

Necessity for controlled experiments? There is always that Mikado. And also a choice of who is doing the controlling.  Linda

You have not disappointed me in your answer. Keep the conspiracy stuff flowing.

Apparently, you have no clue what is meant by "controlled experiments" but thankfully, your Father did.

Mikado
Title: Re: Electrogravitics – A Simplified Description
Post by: Linda Brown on June 23, 2012, 10:29:24 am
Yes, I agree with you. Thankfully he did.   Linda
Title: Re: Electrogravitics – A Simplified Description
Post by: Littleenki on June 23, 2012, 02:04:45 pm
Wow, Mikado so much color in your text, id have to guess your an artist!:D

You can twist and repost my words around for your pleasure, but you know what was really implied in them...not that I havent seen any empirical proof, but that possibly YOU have not.

No more can you believe what I post can I believe what you post, and it seems your sole purpose for joining this forum has been to twist and stab at others and their ideas and theories. Not to mention tha number of times you have replied with smart alecky comments, which are not necessary, And I like that you keep a dictionary next to your computer, It makes you sound much smarter.

Hobbit has it right, and what he has said in the past is finally coming to fruition here as well, and I have to wonder...what have any of us learned with you here, but to edit every post with anal retentiveness reserved typically for a proctologist.

"quote from Mikado:
...didn't you mention that your Gravitors spun around? Isn't that empirical proof of some kind of force?"

 I didnt mention they spun around, but that i expect them to spin around, the one I have now swings from a paraconical pendulum, and for reasons you dont even know.

Quote from Mikado:
"...Now answer me this, How is my answer a refusal to give an answer? Are you looking for an argument where none exists?

I answered your question as to how the scale was setup and your answer quoted above is argumentative which I will not bite at.?"

Nowhere have I suggested you refused to answer that question.
Wrong again.

Quote from Mikado:
"You were giving out Voltages and Currents and NOT Watts in the above quote. I originally gave a Voltage (14.2KV) and a Current (542 microamps), I did NOT ever give out Watts. The person that calculated the Watts was Playing With Machines".

I was attempting to point out that you apparently did NOT read what I wrote in a previous post for why else would you be making a guess as to Voltage and Current."

Bzzzzz! wrong again..heres what you posted...

"Total applied Voltage was 14.2 K with an inrush of 542 ?A."

Thanks to PWM for doing the math, Im completely incompetent in that category!

Oops wrong again.

Quote from Mikado:
"Flexible dielectric's? Sure, mylar, waxed paper, clays and a host of others. Nothing new there."

Sure there is...none of those mentioned will stretch, and thats part of flexibility, in addition to the ability to fold and ripple.
My material does both, so it is truly flexible.

wrong again.

Quote from Mikado:
"Hold on there a moment. Where in my post does it mention anything about "542 ?A"? It doesn't. I was commenting about your guessing the Voltage and Current and you are being argumentative since nothing about this was addressed. What was addressed was your guessing Voltage and Current when in a previous post I gave the measurements. That tells me you don't read."

I read well, and that statement was corrected above, but heres the quote from your post on page 2 of the eg simplified thread...again...

Quote from Mikado:
"Total applied Voltage was 14.2 K with an inrush of 542 ?A.""

Ouch...wrong twice in one reply, is that a record?

Quote from Mikado:
"Attaching a Gravitor to a pendulum, an armature or any other device to see the movement in a manner you have described is nothing more than a carnival ride. If you don't see that then perhaps you can't see the necessity for controlled experiments and I don't know how to make you see that. "

Besides being rather insulting(carnival ride..they are nothing but fun!)youre clueless as to why, arent you?

Hmmm, so you dont even know why I attached it to a paraconical pendulum?
Didnt think so.
And you can look it up, as you wouldnt understand it even if I typed it in all caps.

Quote from Mikado:
"So what is it? Either you have or you haven't seen proof."

here is where I said I had proof, in the very next line from your previous quote...

"Yes, I have made a gravitor, using TT Browns patent drawing, and it swings from a paraconical pendulum.
Thats as far as Ive gotten in 6 months, and maybe all Ill ever see, but for me it is a successful rendition of an effect many doubt, and thats empirical enough for me!

What part of that is dichotomous to you, Mikado?

Stop with your desperate attacks and snippy quote reposting, as it makes you appear to be quite combative to me, and noone here will ever say I am combative in any way, so your shooting blanks my friend.

Le



Title: Re: Electrogravitics – A Simplified Description
Post by: zorgon on June 23, 2012, 02:11:17 pm
NOTE: apparently the font to support "micro" or "mu" is not available. The current should have read as "542 microamps" and not "?A".

Yes the unicode characters do not display in this current overlay. Its a nuisance but the last time I fixed it the software upgrade messed it up again and this style sheet is no longer supported

I need to find a php programmer to come on board so we can fix the style sheets manually There are over 4000 style sheets on this forum and making even a small change sends ripples
Title: Re: Electrogravitics – A Simplified Description
Post by: Littleenki on June 23, 2012, 02:14:44 pm
Aha, Zorgon, that makes sense to me, as in my original post I was like" wow, 542 amps?"

LOL! I weld with less than that!

I wish I could help with the programming, but Im woefully bad at even html, hence my ancient website Ive given up on years ago!

Thanks for the clarification, Z!
Le
Title: Re: Electrogravitics – A Simplified Description
Post by: Linda Brown on June 23, 2012, 02:21:55 pm
I must be tired. I read "  forum and making even a small change sends ripples" from Zorgon three times and saw Nipples each time. My mind is taking itself on its own vacation I think!!!  Linda
Title: Re: Electrogravitics – A Simplified Description
Post by: Littleenki on June 23, 2012, 02:26:25 pm
Hehehe! Linda! I saw the same thing!LOL!
I guess all that copy and paste made my brain see stars!

Hey how about a new drink? A Ripply Nipple?

Oh dear, time for more coffee!

I certainly hope you understand my platform above with Mikado, as you know Ive never been confrontational and just felt I was being unduly singled out by him.

It's OK, with all the swimming I do, his remarks and half truths are sliding of my back like a proud mallard flying around that beautiful lakehouse you once visited!


Hugs!
Littleenki
Title: Re: Electrogravitics – A Simplified Description
Post by: PLAYSWITHMACHINES on June 23, 2012, 04:27:54 pm
Hi all,
There's far too much bickering & quoting going on, it's a waste of precious bytes, OK?
So i will refrain from quoting too much myself this time, i assume you can all remember what you said?

Quote
This series of experiments were designed to establish a base for free EG that might occur naturally in nature and were not designed to substantiate the Biefeld-Brown effect which is something totally different. However, it does exhibit signs that EG may very well be as natural as lightning is in the EM.

I agree with what you are saying, but how can it be different from the BB effect?, it has been broadly discussed & generally agreed to be an 'electro-gravitational' force, or reaction may be a better word.
'Displacement' is even better.
Maybe you missed my posts on the exact likeness to the work of Podkletnov & others.

It's too much of a coincidence to be wrong.
Given Brown's penchant for 'rocks', he was clearly studying the origin of EG signals, rather than the more obvious antigravity applications, and the very nature of these effects maybe interested him more than other aspects.....

Quote
And lastly, it sang for a brief moment with a sound I never heard before. It must have thrown out one he11 of an EG pulse but then, no one showed up either. No Morgan, no twigsnapper, no MIB, no aliens and it has been quite awhile.

All i can say is, you were lucky ;)
OK i have to agree with you up to a point, because i have been sending all kinds of pulses, HF signals, and more recently, EG signals.
That last is not advisable until we learn more about it, and can prove it's not being used already.

I'm not that hard to track down, i'm not that bothered, everything i know is out on the net anyway, and of course i'm just a lone inventor, one of many thousands who can do this, and more.

Quote
Keep experimenting and don't fear the bogey man but then, keep your anonymity until you are done and then present to the public. Just read what has been posted here in regard to Paul Brown and others.
I intend to ;)
The FBI know where i live, so it's not a big deal, i asked them to come here & shoot me if they could prove what i did was illegal.....
First i present it to the forum here, then it all goes in the official write-up.
This will be made 'open source' when the time is right.

I have read Paul Brown's letters, here's one of them;


(http://www.thelivingmoon.com/forum/index.php?action=dlattach;topic=1308.0;attach=1396)

This is his version of Godin & Roschin's 'poor man's Searl' project.
 I could write a book on that :) or at least a thread.....

10 grand! i would think, Mikado, that you are using some exotic materials for it, good for you.

First of all, i have been trying T.T.Brown's original experiments, using locally available dielectrics, and more recently more exotic ones. The point was to verify this work, which has been done, and to try to find the mechanism behind it.

All the boogeyman talk is being covered in the 'dangers of electrogravitics' thread :O

Littleenki;
Quote
Yes, I have made a gravitor, using TT Browns patent drawing, and it swings from a paraconical pendulum.
Thats as far as Ive gotten in 6 months, and maybe all Ill ever see, but for me it is a successful rendition of an effect many doubt, and thats empirical enough for me.

Definitely!
I think we can safely move on from 'does it work?' to 'how can we improve it?'
As has been duly presented by LaViolette, a higk-K dielectric such as a Barium Titanate/Hafnium alloy, with maybe some Tellurium & or Tantalum thrown in for good measure will do the job.
Expensive 8)
It would be powered by a resonating HV field of millions of volts, powered by something like a 'flame jet' generator.

That's only half the story, the other half is inertia control, where rotating magnets come in handy, but may or may not be directly related to inertia per se.

Reading on through this thread, i was the one who calculated the 7.6 watts. 7.588 if i remember, given your original data Mikado, so yes, LE misread a decimal point here & there, please don't bite his head off ;)

A pendulum or rotator is a good empirical method for measuring thrust or 'displacement', but a scale is more tricky, how would you know, for example, that the strong EM field from & around the gravitor cause a misreading in the electronic scale? A balance experiment might give better results, as i'm sure you know.

Brown chose the rotating version precisely because it had the 'wow' factor, and could be repeated in a vacuum. Call it a carnival ride if you wish, this was the 40's remember.....

Mikado:
If you & Linda have an axe to grind, go ahead, but you are both wasting your time IMHO.

Can we please get back to the O.P. and discuss it in a civilised manner?
I for one have no problem with you, i take everything you tell me in good faith, but i will analyse everything to the smallest detail.
So let's talk about the science involved, if you are up for it?
Can we talk frequencies, for example?
PWM





 
Title: Re: Electrogravitics – A Simplified Description
Post by: Mikado on June 23, 2012, 04:57:02 pm
Wow, Mikado so much color in your text, id have to guess your an artist!:D

You can twist and repost my words around for your pleasure, but you know what was really implied in them...not that I havent seen any empirical proof, but that possibly YOU have not.

No more can you believe what I post can I believe what you post, and it seems your sole purpose for joining this forum has been to twist and stab at others and their ideas and theories. Not to mention tha number of times you have replied with smart alecky comments, which are not necessary, And I like that you keep a dictionary next to your computer, It makes you sound much smarter.

Hobbit has it right, and what he has said in the past is finally coming to fruition here as well, and I have to wonder...what have any of us learned with you here, but to edit every post with anal retentiveness reserved typically for a proctologist.

"quote from Mikado:
...didn't you mention that your Gravitors spun around? Isn't that empirical proof of some kind of force?"

 I didnt mention they spun around, but that i expect them to spin around, the one I have now swings from a paraconical pendulum, and for reasons you dont even know.

Quote from Mikado:
"...Now answer me this, How is my answer a refusal to give an answer? Are you looking for an argument where none exists?

I answered your question as to how the scale was setup and your answer quoted above is argumentative which I will not bite at.?"

Nowhere have I suggested you refused to answer that question.
Wrong again.

Quote from Mikado:
"You were giving out Voltages and Currents and NOT Watts in the above quote. I originally gave a Voltage (14.2KV) and a Current (542 microamps), I did NOT ever give out Watts. The person that calculated the Watts was Playing With Machines".

I was attempting to point out that you apparently did NOT read what I wrote in a previous post for why else would you be making a guess as to Voltage and Current."

Bzzzzz! wrong again..heres what you posted...

"Total applied Voltage was 14.2 K with an inrush of 542 ?A."

Thanks to PWM for doing the math, Im completely incompetent in that category!

Oops wrong again.

Quote from Mikado:
"Flexible dielectric's? Sure, mylar, waxed paper, clays and a host of others. Nothing new there."

Sure there is...none of those mentioned will stretch, and thats part of flexibility, in addition to the ability to fold and ripple.
My material does both, so it is truly flexible.

wrong again.

Quote from Mikado:
"Hold on there a moment. Where in my post does it mention anything about "542 ?A"? It doesn't. I was commenting about your guessing the Voltage and Current and you are being argumentative since nothing about this was addressed. What was addressed was your guessing Voltage and Current when in a previous post I gave the measurements. That tells me you don't read."

I read well, and that statement was corrected above, but heres the quote from your post on page 2 of the eg simplified thread...again...

Quote from Mikado:
"Total applied Voltage was 14.2 K with an inrush of 542 ?A.""

Ouch...wrong twice in one reply, is that a record?

Quote from Mikado:
"Attaching a Gravitor to a pendulum, an armature or any other device to see the movement in a manner you have described is nothing more than a carnival ride. If you don't see that then perhaps you can't see the necessity for controlled experiments and I don't know how to make you see that. "

Besides being rather insulting(carnival ride..they are nothing but fun!)youre clueless as to why, arent you?

Hmmm, so you dont even know why I attached it to a paraconical pendulum?
Didnt think so.
And you can look it up, as you wouldnt understand it even if I typed it in all caps.

Quote from Mikado:
"So what is it? Either you have or you haven't seen proof."

here is where I said I had proof, in the very next line from your previous quote...

"Yes, I have made a gravitor, using TT Browns patent drawing, and it swings from a paraconical pendulum.
Thats as far as Ive gotten in 6 months, and maybe all Ill ever see, but for me it is a successful rendition of an effect many doubt, and thats empirical enough for me!

What part of that is dichotomous to you, Mikado?

Stop with your desperate attacks and snippy quote reposting, as it makes you appear to be quite combative to me, and noone here will ever say I am combative in any way, so your shooting blanks my friend.

Le

Red were your quotes and yellow were mine. If you read it, you would have noticed. Instead you still didn't get what I was saying.

When you want to make a point and answer a quote, try to put it in the proper perspective so others may comprehend "who said what". Your post is difficult to follow and speaking of twists, you do a very good job. Just look at your responses, so very bombastic. I was not wrong in anything I said, you just didn't comprehend it. Which doesn't surprise me in the least.

I answered your questions and you argued. When you want to be open minded and comprehend what I write and not be influenced by others than perhaps this discussion can continue.

There was nothing snippy except your above post.

Best,

Mikado
Title: Re: Electrogravitics – A Simplified Description
Post by: Littleenki on June 23, 2012, 04:58:46 pm
Greetings, PWM!
That poor mans searl sounds cool, and the parts dont seem to pricey. Have you any drawings, or are there any online?

I have a ton of neos laying round, and the caps and other parts, too, it's the silicone/steel cores you know Im eyeing up!

Do you think some of my magnetite cores would suffice? I can cast them in any shape, as you know, and even make molds for more in the process.

Searl had quite a dandy with his generator, so it would be cool to build a smaller version to upgrade later if successful.

As long as we lock it into a vise when firing it!:D

Le

Title: Re: Electrogravitics – A Simplified Description
Post by: Littleenki on June 23, 2012, 05:00:59 pm
No thanks,  :)
Le
Title: Re: Electrogravitics – A Simplified Description
Post by: 1Worldwatcher on June 23, 2012, 05:54:30 pm
We must all keep in mind the value of the research that we inquire about, any naysayers would scough at the belittling that is happening here, anyone can read a post to their liking, bu tit does sometimes get misconstrued as either fascist remarks or some what intensive moments of understanding one another.
So, All I can really add for the topic at hand is"Read with diligence and respect" do not over presume what the emotion is going across from one person's post too another, it is a difficult thing to understand writing as an emotional placement of discussion, but more times than not, it does get convoluted for the proper digestion of such statements and rhetorical remarks.
PWM's and Mikado, there are difference's of analogies, we all know this for being fact, but, I do respect you both with what you have to offer, there may be some inner connecting facts that both of you have brought to the table for deliberation, litigation and deductive reasoning, but whether or not either one is correct or incorrect, it remains as a "possibility" to a numerous area of expectations.
There has been no one on this forum that has brought forth a working model or an irrefutable mathematical evaluation, we are all in this together, let us all work together as a team, squabble can be done via PM's or another chatroom.

Very interesting finds though, and very pertinent too what we are trying to achieve here at the PRC, we have the smartest cookies of any Forum, let's keep that our first priority folks.

1Worldwatcher
Title: Re: Electrogravitics – A Simplified Description
Post by: Linda Brown on June 23, 2012, 06:23:23 pm
The OP here really is a tough one. Electrogravitics.... A Simplified Description. Obviously it is not all that simple but it is gratifying to see so many who have some what of a grasp of the technology.

Linda
Title: Re: Electrogravitics – A Simplified Description
Post by: PLAYSWITHMACHINES on June 24, 2012, 04:28:01 am
It is unclear who made the first copy of Searl's work, the 2 russians contacted him & asked him for his co-operation, which he did in part.

Collins & Paul brown seem to have used this version, which was (apparently) a set of plans from Gunnar Sandberg, from the university of Sussex.
 You would need to visit Searl's website for more on that, i do have all the plans, reports etc if anyone's interested.
The basic set up is in the drawing below.
I'm not going to go into this too much as yet, one thing at a time......
Title: Re: Electrogravitics – A Simplified Description
Post by: Littleenki on June 24, 2012, 05:31:51 am
Hey, PWM!
Thanks for that drawing, as it helps my minds eye to visualize the setup.
Is that the same as the pictures of the "flying disc" Ive seen from the UK?

It also reminds me of the Carr Disc.

The materials are certainly attainable, and some of the parts are ripe for improvement, but I wonder how much it costs to build those big ring magnets? :o

What part of this would you feel comfortable building?
For me, of course building and winding the coils would be a fun weekend of busted knuckes and single malt:) I have to imagine the teflon could be layered with tape into a thicker amalgum, right?

And the copper wraps on the outer and inner rings would be where we would need to be very careful with the tolerances, just for balance sake.

Of course the neo magnets are where the dough starts to flow, and is there a way we could make them from smaller neos epoxied together or some other type of assemblage of separate ones? Like maybe bar magnets in a ring, glued together on the flats? I kow that would create a bunch of different fields,instead of one within the ring, but would it work, I wonder?

 Damn brain, there it goes again, thinking of stuff I cant afford...LOL!!!

That working prototype in Searl's lab in the video on his website looked pretty uncomplex, and with a bit of capital, one could easily make a final version...I wonder why it hasnt been done yet, unless someone suppressed it again, like many other technologies weve seen promise from.

For now, Ill study the prospective architecture, and try to visualize the thing working in a final result sort of way, and just try to grasp the effect itself, and of course, the "Law of Squares" which I found very intriguing, for a very non-mathematics guy like myself!

I can picture a pod of about ten of these stacked atop each other in a case, powering a house, or small building through some simple tranformers and a control circuit.

Good post, especially the poor mans(most of us) version!

Cheers!
Littleenki
Title: Re: Electrogravitics – A Simplified Description
Post by: PLAYSWITHMACHINES on June 24, 2012, 07:07:27 am
Right on!
I have lots of plans like these, the russian one used neo's embedded in a ring for the 'plate' so it could be done using many small magnets instead of one big one...
But there are a lot of pitfalls & problems with this tech, the main one being that it's not 100% verified :o
 But i can dump all the plans on a cloud site for you to look at, just PM me for the details, i can't post it freely, there may be copyright issues etc, i wouldn't want Zorgon to get problems ;)
Besides, it pays to look more closely how the rotating fields interact, than the actual rotation of the magnets.
Are they creating 'torsion fields' that would maybe also create temporal effects......?

ETA: Yes, i would like to build something like this :P but i would first have to verify the 'diode' action that Searl claims from his composite materials for the SEG, this being but one chapter in the 'gravity' folder.
Damn, i really need to start a thread on this sometime....
Title: Re: Electrogravitics – A Simplified Description
Post by: Littleenki on June 24, 2012, 07:30:59 am
I did think about the temporal effects and how the toroidal fields might interact in close quarters. Could this device be causing the same interdimensional effect that TTB's do?

Haramein's torus?

It seems a lot of us are realizing that these "effects" may be more than we bargained for, and within the difficult realm of eg studies, is there another whole world of physics we dont even have a clue to yet?

Something is in the path, and until we remove it, it will continue to be a speed bump on every pass.

Cheers
Littleenki
Title: Re: Electrogravitics – A Simplified Description
Post by: Linda Brown on June 24, 2012, 08:05:59 am
Sort of like discovering a land mine on your trail. The important thing is to realize that such things exist and are dangerous and then the object is to learn to deal with it.... and disarm it....  Linda
Title: Re: Electrogravitics – A Simplified Description
Post by: PLAYSWITHMACHINES on June 24, 2012, 08:42:11 am
Absolutely, Linda ;D

I don't think we are using any dangerous power levels here, my last experiment was 18 watts, just enough to prove the concept.
Now i'm building the supply for the next experiments, which will be 100 watts or more, and considerably higher voltages.
This one will be tested outside, and with a remote kill switch ::)

I had a small setback from an EMP from a lightning strike nearby,which killed a couple of instruments and stopped 2 clocks :o

Next time i will send that lightning straight back where it came from :P
Title: Re: Electrogravitics – A Simplified Description
Post by: Littleenki on June 24, 2012, 09:07:23 am


Next time i will send that lightning straight back where it came from :P
[/quote]

Indeed, PWM, and we may need to change your name to LittleTesla! ;)

Silly lightning!

Littleenki
Title: Re: Electrogravitics – A Simplified Description
Post by: Mikado on June 24, 2012, 09:09:00 am
I did think about the temporal effects and how the toroidal fields might interact in close quarters. Could this device be causing the same interdimensional effect that TTB's do?


Littleenki

Could you cite a reference as to where you received this information?

Thanks

Mikado
Title: Re: Electrogravitics – A Simplified Description
Post by: PLAYSWITHMACHINES on June 24, 2012, 09:38:30 am
It's probably from Roschin & Godin's experiment;
Title: Re: Electrogravitics – A Simplified Description
Post by: Mikado on June 24, 2012, 09:49:11 am
It's probably from Roschin & Godin's experiment;

I do not see Dr. Brown's name mentioned.

The comment made was:

"I did think about the temporal effects and how the toroidal fields might interact in close quarters. Could this device be causing the same interdimensional effect that TTB's do?"

I am asking for the reference to the conclusive statement made.

Best,

Mikado
Title: Re: Electrogravitics – A Simplified Description
Post by: Amaterasu on June 24, 2012, 09:55:27 am
Not sure what this shows.  Didn't watch, but I thought it might interest many here:


[youtube]http://www.youtube.com/watch?feature=player_embedded&v=yUHxuqoUOas[/youtube]
Title: Re: Electrogravitics – A Simplified Description
Post by: deuem on June 24, 2012, 11:19:03 am
I watched the video and he got the rotor to fly around using magnets.
 
OK
 
I don't see a connection to a UFO drive?
 
This needs to go a lot further than this. He jut touched it and it stopped.
 
What would a load do?
 
Deuem
Title: Re: Electrogravitics – A Simplified Description
Post by: Littleenki on June 24, 2012, 12:25:25 pm
Not sure what this shows.  Didn't watch, but I thought it might interest many here:


[youtube]http://www.youtube.com/watch?feature=player_embedded&v=yUHxuqoUOas[/youtube]
That would appear to be a repulsion motor of some kind, although Im not sure why it works, but it's a cool video nevertheless, Amy!

It seems like it might work off of repulsion between two magnets, as when you lower one into another with like poles they jump apart!

I might have to build one of those..although there isnt any diagram or parts list..DOH!

Cheers!
Littleenki
Title: Re: Electrogravitics – A Simplified Description
Post by: Amaterasu on June 24, 2012, 12:58:42 pm
It looked like it might offer some ideas, if not specific plans...  Glad I brought it over here.
Title: Re: Electrogravitics – A Simplified Description
Post by: Littleenki on June 24, 2012, 01:10:30 pm
It looked like it might offer some ideas, if not specific plans...  Glad I brought it over here.
Youre cool, Amy..always thinking of others, a genuine friend!
I have nearly everything, including the skateboard bearings...and the big neos, lets see what spins!
Le
Title: Re: Electrogravitics – A Simplified Description
Post by: Amaterasu on June 24, 2012, 01:24:59 pm
Take vids AND stills!  Looking forward to what You get, Dave!
Title: Re: Electrogravitics – A Simplified Description
Post by: Littleenki on June 24, 2012, 01:45:22 pm
Take vids AND stills!  Looking forward to what You get, Dave!
Will do, Amy, into the Hobbit house, although its got a moat today!LOL!
"tiptoe through the tidal flats...with meeee!"
Ok back to work!
Le:D
Title: Re: Electrogravitics – A Simplified Description
Post by: Amaterasu on June 24, 2012, 03:03:29 pm
LOL!  Yeah, hope You're keeping dry.
Title: Re: Electrogravitics – A Simplified Description
Post by: Littleenki on June 24, 2012, 03:11:02 pm
LOL!  Yeah, hope You're keeping dry.
Oh dear, I have to work with electricity in there? LOL!
This is the path to the Hobbit house(my shop)
Swim trunks anyone?

Le
Title: Re: Electrogravitics – A Simplified Description
Post by: Amaterasu on June 24, 2012, 05:49:48 pm
Get them on and breast-stroke, Dave!  Though it looks like a lovely setting overall.
Title: Re: Electrogravitics – A Simplified Description
Post by: Littleenki on June 24, 2012, 05:54:22 pm
Get them on and breast-stroke, Dave!  Though it looks like a lovely setting overall.
Hey, now I have waterfront property! Just got missed by three tornados! Whew!

I havent gotten the motor to spin yet, and I believe theres a secret magnet setup, or he has a motor in that bearing with a magnetic switch..DOH!:D

Le
Title: Re: Electrogravitics – A Simplified Description
Post by: Amaterasu on June 24, 2012, 06:39:51 pm
I guess Your property value just trebled!  Waterfront AND tornado-resilient!

Keep plugging on that device.
Title: Re: Electrogravitics – A Simplified Description
Post by: Littleenki on June 24, 2012, 07:26:51 pm
I guess Your property value just trebled!  Waterfront AND tornado-resilient!

Keep plugging on that device.

Yes! as Chappelle used to say...
[youtube]http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=98958txVSrE[/youtube]

Im ree-ich!!Not!:D
I am working on using the basic idea, but with magnets epoxied into the wheel, instead of glued onto the hub as shown. Also the magnets he used may have been specific for the field shapes, and he may have searched high and low for them, or just got lucky.

Either way, what stumps me, is when I build a device like that, the repulsion is immediately cancelled out by the attraction of the next magnet in the ring, effectively idling the device with no rotation. The magnet he pulses it with would have to be switched on and off, to make the thing work the way he shows it, from my knowledge.

I do think if it is to work, it will require specialized magnets, in the wheel and maybe the trigger block he's using, as well. That trigger setup may be the key, so my wheel is epoxied and drying overnight, and tomorrow I may make some headway on that trigger block with its different neos, if the tide goes out so I can go to the shop!LOL!

Cheers!
Littleenki
Title: Re: Electrogravitics – A Simplified Description
Post by: Mikado on June 24, 2012, 08:10:56 pm



Im ree-ich!!Not!:D
I am working on using the basic idea, but with magnets epoxied into the wheel, instead of glued onto the hub as shown. Also the magnets he used may have been specific for the field shapes, and he may have searched high and low for them, or just got lucky.

Either way, what stumps me, is when I build a device like that, the repulsion is immediately cancelled out by the attraction of the next magnet in the ring, effectively idling the device with no rotation. The magnet he pulses it with would have to be switched on and off, to make the thing work the way he shows it, from my knowledge.

I do think if it is to work, it will require specialized magnets, in the wheel and maybe the trigger block he's using, as well. That trigger setup may be the key, so my wheel is epoxied and drying overnight, and tomorrow I may make some headway on that trigger block with its different neos, if the tide goes out so I can go to the shop!LOL!

Cheers!
Littleenki

Try a 10 degree offset facing in the direction of rotation for starters on both the stator and rotor. It has worked in other applications but it will eventually stall out, as you mentioned, unless additional energy can be put into the system to overcome entropic losses.

Also, optical triggering has been used in the past.

Unfortunately, our universe has entropy and some energy will always have to put into a closed system to overcome those losses.

Is perpetual possible? Really? With only magnets?

The fiddler will always have to be paid in some manner if one wants to dance, even if it is only maintenance to the device.

Mikado
Title: Re: Electrogravitics – A Simplified Description
Post by: deuem on June 25, 2012, 08:19:01 am
Youre cool, Amy..always thinking of others, a genuine friend!
I have nearly everything, including the skateboard bearings...and the big neos, lets see what spins!
Le

Hey Littleenki, Teach me here, Ok if you can get it to spin. What are you guys after? How does this turn into a UFO motor?
I seem to be missing the missing link. If this could be turning an Electric motor and producing voltage that would be cool. Or are you just after the EM or EMG fielgs to reduce the gravity?
 
Deuem
Title: Re: Electrogravitics – A Simplified Description
Post by: Linda Brown on June 25, 2012, 08:42:23 am
I have to admit... I am lost too but sometimes the strangest treasures are found at the end of a detour?
Linda
Title: Re: Electrogravitics – A Simplified Description
Post by: deuem on June 25, 2012, 09:10:52 am
I did try and get a process shot from this but the light is comming from the back and the rail is in shadow.
The magnets have a very slight glow but too hard to tell for sure. If he could place a paper under the ring and change the lighting I would try again. Get rid of the shadow so I can see the real road, if there is one.
It does look like my kids roller blade wheel. I will ask him if he minds dad cutting off the rubber.
Hey his wheels light up when they spin. Real cool at night. I still need to connect some dots that are miles away for me.
Deuem, my head is spinning from watching that video over and over.
Title: Re: Electrogravitics – A Simplified Description
Post by: Littleenki on June 25, 2012, 09:32:24 am
Hey, D!
What im hoping for isnt a ufo motor, but to try to see how he created perpetual motion with just permanent magnets.
Recreating the experiment is difficult, as its never been done, so I have attempted to see what really going on there.
Personally im guessing hes got a motor in that bearing structure, actuvated with a magnetic switch, but it could be magic, too!
Jusy a rainy day project for me, as im not firing up the bench due to all the wind and lightning here in fla, no storms gonna fry my bad ass oscope! :-):-):-)
Cheers!
Littleenki
Title: Re: Electrogravitics – A Simplified Description
Post by: deuem on June 25, 2012, 09:39:09 am
Understood, but even if it could run forever, if I can't get any power out of it what do I do, just watch it spin?
Title: Re: Electrogravitics – A Simplified Description
Post by: PLAYSWITHMACHINES on June 25, 2012, 01:41:11 pm
Hey Dave, i guessed you missed my 'perendev' video?
 You need an unequal number of magnets to avoid this 'cogging' problem.

Then if you use enough magnets, the 'repel' or 'cog' area will be much smaller than the 'force' area. Notice this is a 'push only' design, you can always add iron for an attraction component, or a small coil that fires at the cogging point just enough to dampen the field, & the wheel's momentum will carry it through.

These things are even for sale, but it's a question of keeping the magnets when not in use....

And now for something completely different, NASA ufo's, spirals, torsion fields, vibration, antigravity.

[youtube]YFq-NcHFi4Q[/youtube]

Apologies to those who can't see it, you really need to fix those problems....

ETA: Dave, maybe you should think about a hydro-electric scheme for the hobbit hut?... :P
Title: Re: Electrogravitics – A Simplified Description
Post by: Littleenki on June 26, 2012, 06:41:36 am
Quote
ETA: Dave, maybe you should think about a hydro-electric scheme for the hobbit hut?...

Yeah, Luke, I might have to call Paddlewheel Pete to drive me over there, too!LOL!

Great video series, and Ive seen those shots before. I did find that a fellow named Paul Muir with his Orb Bar Wave theory could explain some of them, but not the slow floaters that resemble the dropa stone, and many in there make turns and moves that clearly indicate intelligent design and piloting.

As far as perendev, I havent seen that video, but I will check it out..thanks for the bump!

After playing with magnets for years, Ive made a few devices which spin for quite a while, but have always been stumped by how one could present a load to it without stoppin it in it's tracks.

That wheel actually accelerated quite quickly, and thats what peaked my interest!

Onto those UFO's.....the floating dropa stones in particular...
What would the pulsing be a result of, could it be like Barclay's FFM device with concentric rings of apparati creating the field to shift it through space?

http://www.gravitycontrol.org/projectunity1.html

Or are they shifting in and out of OUR physical plane?

And do you yourself think there are that many ufos flying all around Earth like it seems?

I do.

If these "folks" are to become a part of our lives and world soon, I cant see any drawbacks, as we currently are deep in the doo-doo, and could use a "reset" if you will.

Change is good, and soon the bully on the block wont be able to beat us up with lies anymore, as we have become adults just like them, and will follow our own path. Kicking arse all the way!

I think Amy knows what path that is, and so do a few others such as the Venus Project, so Ill be ok when they come down and we lose power for a few days, or have to actually stay home from work due to the "evil ufo invasion" which our PTB will call it.

Their last breath will be used for more disinfo, and someday I hope to hear the gasp from the lungs of those who have placed us in a stalled mode for so long.

Not buying it, PTB, not anymore!

I guess theres one phrase that sums up my opinion on whether ufos should come here and change our lives...Bring It!

Because we really need it!

Littleenki
Title: Re: Electrogravitics – A Simplified Description
Post by: PLAYSWITHMACHINES on June 26, 2012, 03:21:53 pm
About the ufo's, yes, i think there are that many. There would appear to be several levels of technology involved, which leads me to think there are several species of ET's.
Apart from some possible cattle mutilation, and kidnapping the odd human (come on, WE would) they appear to be quite harmless.

This frequency-is-energy idea is interesting, in that it is the exact opposite of conventional cosmology, which sees backround noise rasing it's frequency as it gets weaker.

But is that true?

Certainly his fibonacci spiral 'clock' idea was a good one.

And his explanation for the 'ripple' effect of the waves seems good, also the 'shifting' out of the visible light spectrum.
(It would be nice to know what they saw on radar at that moment, don't you think?)
I think he is right in the raising of the energy per unit space will show effects like this...but there are some 'but's........

As for ET,I think they mainly stop by to top up on water (the most precious commodity you can have in space), recharge the reactor in a thunderstorm, buzz a few F16's, stop by & laugh as the Tether was overloaded, maybe lunch on the Moon, and off to Sirius by teatime.

I swear, i could make a fortune, with just one ship, and do the same to them :P

Quote
I think Amy knows what path that is, and so do a few others such as the Venus Project, so Ill be ok when they come down and we lose power for a few days, or have to actually stay home from work due to the "evil ufo invasion" which our PTB will call it.

Their last breath will be used for more disinfo, and someday I hope to hear the gasp from the lungs of those who have placed us in a stalled mode for so long.

Not buying it, PTB, not anymore!

I guess theres one phrase that sums up my opinion on whether ufos should come here and change our lives...Bring It!

Because we really need it!

Littleenki

Yes, yes,yes, and yes, in that order :)
Title: Re: Electrogravitics – A Simplified Description
Post by: Littleenki on June 26, 2012, 05:55:03 pm
Big gennies fueled up and ready, Luke, now you just need that first class plane ticket to get here!LOL!

The video is real convincing, and Im showing it to my wife tonight to keep her up for a few days straight!
Cheers!
Le
Title: Re: Electrogravitics – A Simplified Description
Post by: PLAYSWITHMACHINES on June 27, 2012, 04:59:13 am
I may be crossing the water soon, as it happens.
It seems there's a shortage of disciplined field angineers out there, no offense guys  ;D

We need to do some serious note taking & comparing soon, i will try to do an EG write up soon.
Have 2 go, later.
Title: Re: Electrogravitics – A Simplified Description
Post by: Linda Brown on June 27, 2012, 05:17:38 am
Ha No offense taken. Things haven't changed very much since Beau Kitselman said that Dad had to to Europe to find some "thinking scientists." I don't know if that was the exact quote but you get the drift.

Linda
Title: Re: Electrogravitics – A Simplified Description
Post by: Littleenki on June 27, 2012, 05:55:20 am
I may be crossing the water soon, as it happens.
It seems there's a shortage of disciplined field angineers out there, no offense guys  ;D

We need to do some serious note taking & comparing soon, i will try to do an EG write up soon.
Have 2 go, later.

Great to hear, for us here, but hopefully you arent leaving the family for too long.

I have a note book, Luke, but its quite like chicken scratch, and scribbles!:D

I have to say, after years of working in various construction fields the field engineers we had on some of the bigger buildings were fresh out of college, and completely unaware of their place in the food chain.

It was like crowning a four year old queen of England! All lording, with no thinking!

You know where I live(somewhat) so if you go by or near, youd better tell me!

I think we spoke of an alternative type of curriculum for Eg you wee going to start working on, and how we could employ others to assist in the progress, so let me know if you do it, and as I said before, Im happy to add whatever I can.

Hows about, Electrogravitics for Dummies? Oh yeah!

Littleenki
Title: Re: Electrogravitics – A Simplified Description
Post by: PLAYSWITHMACHINES on June 27, 2012, 02:18:11 pm
Hi Dave, love your new signature LOL!
Quote
I have to say, after years of working in various construction fields the field engineers we had on some of the bigger buildings were fresh out of college, and completely unaware of their place in the food chain.

It was like crowning a four year old queen of England! All lording, with no thinking!

You know where I live(somewhat) so if you go by or near, youd better tell me!

I will, they just opened the world's biggest rollercoaster in Florida, and they want someone to work on it LOL!
 But i could end up working for any number of clients out there, Silicon Valley has also been mentioned (drool, dribble) ;D

The funny thing is, i am very much at home in strange environments...

If i come over, i will need to contact you (of course!) & i will bring some English ale, to be enjoyed at room temperature, no chillers here!
Later!
PWM
Title: Re: Electrogravitics – A Simplified Description
Post by: Littleenki on June 27, 2012, 10:03:34 pm
Ill touch on that room temp ale, just dont ask me to move too fast, or foaming will commence!LOL!
Le
Title: Re: Electrogravitics – A Simplified Description
Post by: Amaterasu on June 27, 2012, 11:35:51 pm
What I want to know is...  Is that European room temp - or Florida room temp.  If Florida...I'm guessing that will be some mighty warm ale.
Title: Re: Electrogravitics – A Simplified Description
Post by: PLAYSWITHMACHINES on June 28, 2012, 04:57:08 am
Good point Amy ;D

In Scotland, room temperature is about 12 degrees C (55F ?)
 :) ;) :D ;D :o ::) :-*

BTW i have started on the 'gravity workshop' thread, coming soon to a server near you LOL
Title: Re: Electrogravitics – A Simplified Description
Post by: Littleenki on June 28, 2012, 05:41:07 am
55F sounds good, but we will need to put the ale in that little white room with the wire racks inside to achieve that temp here, as today itll be 92F.:D

Le
Title: Re: Electrogravitics – A Simplified Description
Post by: Amaterasu on June 28, 2012, 08:50:57 am
That little white room, at 55°F sounds PERFECT!  I don't think I would want to drink ale at 92°F!
Title: Re: Electrogravitics – A Simplified Description
Post by: deuem on June 28, 2012, 09:40:40 am
My office without ac today was at 38c or around 100F. Humidity about 90% The beer would blow up or we would have to drink it fast. With Ac it is hard to keep 25c/40%. So 15c is nice, no AC and no heat! Cool beer right on the table. I'll drink to that!  Deuem
Title: Re: Electrogravitics – A Simplified Description
Post by: Littleenki on June 28, 2012, 10:15:08 am
That little white room, at 55°F sounds PERFECT!  I don't think I would want to drink ale at 92°F!
Ouch, can you say foaming at the mouth?
55 it is!
Shall we share one in four winds someday?:-):-):-)
Le
Title: Re: Electrogravitics – A Simplified Description
Post by: Littleenki on June 28, 2012, 10:16:09 am
My office without ac today was at 38c or around 100F. Humidity about 90% The beer would blow up or we would have to drink it fast. With Ac it is hard to keep 25c/40%. So 15c is nice, no AC and no heat! Cool beer right on the table. I'll drink to that!  Deuem
Wow, D!
I hope your scantily clad!:-)
Le
Title: Re: Electrogravitics – A Simplified Description
Post by: Amaterasu on June 28, 2012, 11:02:38 am
Ouch, can you say foaming at the mouth?
55 it is!
Shall we share one in four winds someday?:-):-):-)
Le

As long as it's dark and thick - a spoon has to stand up in it!  [wink]  Truly, ASAP, I say!
Title: Re: Electrogravitics – A Simplified Description
Post by: PLAYSWITHMACHINES on June 28, 2012, 12:41:58 pm
Back here in europe it's suddenly gone to 25C (77F) and i am being forced to drink expensive lager from the 'white room' at the 'external testing facility' 8) Oh the shame of it......

Getting back on topic,this is part of my OP for the 'gravity workshop'
Let me know what you think :)

Quote
           .............................The Gravity Workshop................................


In an attempt to get all that is currently known about gravity and the means of defeating it into one place, i thought i'd start this thread.

First of all, i would like to keep fanciful & esoteric ideas to one side, we will concentrate on what is known at this time and what we have to work on.
The topics will be divided into various ideas coming from earlier experiments, like Searl, Podkletnov, Roschin/Godin, and of course T.T.Brown.

It is my intention to tackle each of these ideas from a 'feasability' standpoint, with the accent on getting reliable information and a working model of each of the devices shown here.

They do share a lot of factors, and here is where we must pay particular attention, especially as to the effects so far reported...

I will dip into my files & post some backround info on each device/inventor, and there will probably be a lot of links (for copyright reasons) I will try to make sure it's all in plain format so everyone can read it :)

How's that sound?
(I hate using 'I' so much,like it's all about me, so i will instead use 'we' which means Us, and will refer your questions to one of my other personalities.....) LOL
Title: Re: Electrogravitics – A Simplified Description
Post by: Littleenki on June 28, 2012, 12:48:25 pm
Multiple personalities aside, I like the outlay, Luke!:D

I think we need to do as you say, and focus on the known and somewhat well understood aspects of gravity and what it might be frist, and let everybody come up to speed, one inventor at a time.

As you go through the list of the tops 6 or 7, we can begin to see a pattern in theories which combine into a unified theory in the end.

We might not solve gravity, and its real definition, but we can meld the different ideas many researchers have had throughout history into one cohesive theory.

I do think an bit of esoteric approach would be good, once the science is nailed down, and of course I do have theories about that, as im sure Hobbit will and others.

Pedal to the Metal, bro!
Le
Title: Re: Electrogravitics – A Simplified Description
Post by: Amaterasu on June 28, 2012, 12:51:20 pm
I LIKE it, PWM!  Is discussing SQK allowed?  The idea that positively charged particles have positive gravity and negatively charged particles have negative gravity?  I know it's not "known," per se, but does predict the Biefeld-Brown Effect...which IS known.
Title: Re: Electrogravitics – A Simplified Description
Post by: PLAYSWITHMACHINES on June 28, 2012, 01:25:03 pm
Of course SQK is allowed, it comes closest to explaining Brown's work :) but i think each section will be divided into;

The inventor.
The machine or experiment.
The theory behind it.
3rd party replication (I.E. what others have done) and updates etc.

Be assured, i will be posting a few secrets here, some are mine & some from others, i hope they appreciate why.
Of course, all contributors will be mentioned in advance 8) whether they know it or not ;D
Title: Re: Electrogravitics – A Simplified Description
Post by: Linda Brown on June 28, 2012, 01:36:13 pm
Looking forward to see what develops.... Linda
Title: Re: Electrogravitics – A Simplified Description
Post by: Amaterasu on June 28, 2012, 02:09:58 pm
Of course SQK is allowed, it comes closest to explaining Brown's work :) but i think each section will be divided into;

The inventor.
The machine or experiment.
The theory behind it.
3rd party replication (I.E. what others have done) and updates etc.

Be assured, i will be posting a few secrets here, some are mine & some from others, i hope they appreciate why.
Of course, all contributors will be mentioned in advance 8) whether they know it or not ;D

AWESOME!
Title: Re: Electrogravitics – A Simplified Description
Post by: SarK0Y on July 01, 2012, 01:22:25 pm
In SQK, positively charged particles have a positive gravity potential "well."  (Positive particles have positive gravity.) Negatively charged particles have a negative gravity potential "hill."  (Negative particles have negative gravity.)  The positive particle's "well" is just the smallest fraction bigger than the negative "hill," accounting for the apparent weakness of gravity, where essentially even amounts of positively charged and negatively charged particles make up common matter, and in quantities as big as the earth, say, offer a slight "well" overall, thus explaining why We are aware of gravity at all.ww.change.org/petitions/us-military-release-the-technology-of-electrogravitics
looks damned stretched :) what about... hmmmm....  Neutron?  ::)
Title: Re: Electrogravitics – A Simplified Description
Post by: Amaterasu on July 01, 2012, 01:27:32 pm
That's easy.  They are gravitationally neutral.
Title: Re: Electrogravitics – A Simplified Description
Post by: SarK0Y on July 01, 2012, 02:15:09 pm
That's easy.  They are gravitationally neutral.
in theory  ;) but any theory is Nothing w/o solid proof  :)
Title: Re: Electrogravitics – A Simplified Description
Post by: Amaterasu on July 01, 2012, 10:12:03 pm
Read Subquantum Kinetics by Dr. Paul A. LaViolette.  Also, consider.  Electrons have negative charge.  Protons have positive charge.  Neutrons are neutral.  Since gravity is intimately linked to EM, without an electromagnetic component, they would have no gravitational component.

Also I recommend reading Secrets of Antigravity Propulsion by Dr. LaViolette too. If You're not into the squigglies (higher math), this is a good layman's source.
Title: Re: Electrogravitics – A Simplified Description
Post by: SarK0Y on July 02, 2012, 11:12:09 am
Read Subquantum Kinetics by Dr. Paul A. LaViolette.  Also, consider.  Electrons have negative charge.  Protons have positive charge.  Neutrons are neutral.  Since gravity is intimately linked to EM, without an electromagnetic component, they would have no gravitational component.

Also I recommend reading Secrets of Antigravity Propulsion by Dr. LaViolette too. If You're not into the squigglies (higher math), this is a good layman's source.
what about colliders?  ::) the greater speed makes the greater mass. this fact too contradicts such conjecture  :)
Title: Re: Electrogravitics – A Simplified Description
Post by: Amaterasu on July 02, 2012, 11:21:15 am
what about colliders?  ::) the greater speed makes the greater mass. this fact too contradicts such conjecture  :)

Um...  "Colliders?"  Forgive Me...but I'm not sure what You're on about.
Title: Re: Electrogravitics – A Simplified Description
Post by: SarK0Y on July 02, 2012, 11:24:16 am
Um...  "Colliders?"  Forgive Me...but I'm not sure what You're on about.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Large_Hadron_Collider
Title: Re: Electrogravitics – A Simplified Description
Post by: Amaterasu on July 02, 2012, 11:41:32 am
OHHH.  Right right right.  Long day, rather tired.

So You're saying that the greater speed makes the greater mass, and this fact too contradicts such conjecture of LaViolette's work or...?
Title: Re: Electrogravitics – A Simplified Description
Post by: SarK0Y on July 02, 2012, 11:54:53 am
OHHH.  Right right right.  Long day, rather tired.

So You're saying that the greater speed makes the greater mass, and this fact too contradicts such conjecture of LaViolette's work or...?
why particle's charge doesn't increase with greater velocity?
Title: Re: Electrogravitics – A Simplified Description
Post by: Amaterasu on July 02, 2012, 01:03:20 pm
I had not read anything one way or the other.  LaViolette does not address the charge relative to velocity in Secrets of Antigravity Propulsion (I am squiggly-challenged, so have not read the more challenging book), but I am unsure how it might be expected to...
Title: Re: Electrogravitics – A Simplified Description
Post by: SarK0Y on July 02, 2012, 01:38:59 pm
unless theory has no clear explanation about that collision, it'd be too gloomy to bet on such a horsey.
Title: Re: Electrogravitics – A Simplified Description
Post by: Amaterasu on July 02, 2012, 01:51:43 pm
Don't know if it does or not, Sar.  Maybe You have the squiggly skills to get though Subquantum Kinetics (by LaViolette, of course).

Report back on whether it addresses that or not.  Secrets only was a quick overview in with discussions of things using the Biefeld-Brown Effect - which SQK predicts (and relativity does not) - and other interesting and related stuff.

I would be most interested to hear.
Title: Re: Electrogravitics – A Simplified Description
Post by: SarK0Y on July 02, 2012, 02:14:02 pm
Synchrotron has to intensify magnetic field to hold beam on within proper radius because particle's mass goes wild as much as gets closer to c - velocity. so this example doesn't & cannot show the direct relation of mass with charge.
Title: Re: Electrogravitics – A Simplified Description
Post by: Linda Brown on July 02, 2012, 02:16:12 pm
All due respect Sarkoy

I don't understand a word that you just said.

Was that my fault or are you intentionally doing that?

Linda
Title: Re: Electrogravitics – A Simplified Description
Post by: SarK0Y on July 02, 2012, 02:27:47 pm
All due respect Sarkov

I don't understand a word that you just said.

Was that my fault or are you intentionally doing that?

Linda

Linda, example, please. + it'd be helpful, if you re-write parts (that were unclear  4 you) in the way ye understood'em. thanks in Advance  :)   
Title: Re: Electrogravitics – A Simplified Description
Post by: dcooper on July 02, 2012, 02:47:59 pm
SorKOY if you want examples go to the www.thomastownsendbrown.com the go to Library then the best place go to Stress in dielectric.  and also www.thomastownsendbrown.com/forum  the click Thomas T. Brown tech. and click my post Elecrogravitic diff from Electromagnetic and you will get examples, Linda you Know you dad found and could not dismiss that there was a strong mass - charge & electricity- and gravity coupling

and by the way the coupling of charge has nothing to do with V because charge does not increase with v has nothing to do with the EG coupling between mass-charge that's OBVISE
Title: Re: Electrogravitics – A Simplified Description
Post by: Linda Brown on July 02, 2012, 03:00:31 pm
When I said that I didn't understand a word that you said I meant exactly that. Not a combination.... not a part there of. Nothing. When I am dense. I am surprisingly densel

Linda
Title: Re: Electrogravitics – A Simplified Description
Post by: SarK0Y on July 02, 2012, 04:22:35 pm
well, Amici, i wanna see this effect in the kinda vacuum chamber, shielded against Earth magnetic field  ::)

P.S.

Linda, at least, post's number, please. i hella am  not a remote viewer cuz Ancient Bro cruelly did turn my f*King telepathy off  ;)
Title: Re: Electrogravitics – A Simplified Description
Post by: Linda Brown on July 02, 2012, 04:37:23 pm
Sarkov.... we are still having a failure to communicate. You keep on talking to others and when I finally get it I will chime in on the conversation. Don't worry/   Linda
Title: Re: Electrogravitics – A Simplified Description
Post by: SarK0Y on July 02, 2012, 04:54:51 pm
Sarkov.... we are still having a failure to communicate. You keep on talking to others and when I finally get it I will chime in on the conversation. Don't worry/   Linda

good idea, Linda  :) + i'm already not worried.  8)
Title: Re: Electrogravitics – A Simplified Description
Post by: arc on July 02, 2012, 05:07:04 pm
what about colliders?  ::) the greater speed makes the greater mass. this fact too contradicts such conjecture  :)

Greater "speed"/velocity results in higher "Impact Energy". But  remember the "particles" are being accelerated by using a strong magnetic field supplied by the superconducting magnetic torus. Each particle is effectively being pumped up to higher energy levels.. hence apparent mass increase.  Their energy is related to the intrinsic relativistic effects.

So is the TTB effect...


if it is raining and you want to walk outside, do you fire up a 100Billion watt giant fan heater to blow the clouds away... and expend 5 years worth of energy in 10 minutes.. or do you simply take an umbrella, and use your simple but subtle diversion shield  ...

arc
Title: Re: Electrogravitics – A Simplified Description
Post by: Linda Brown on July 02, 2012, 06:04:18 pm
" your simple but subtle diversion shield  ...

The.... KISS Principle............a diversion shield.

Linda
Title: Re: Electrogravitics – A Simplified Description
Post by: deuem on July 03, 2012, 05:20:27 am
Sarkoy, if I may ask?  Is English your mother language or are you translating?
Thanks
Title: Re: Electrogravitics – A Simplified Description
Post by: Mikado on July 03, 2012, 06:05:20 am
He's Russian. He is doing pretty good so far.

Mikado
Title: Re: Electrogravitics – A Simplified Description
Post by: PLAYSWITHMACHINES on July 03, 2012, 06:14:00 am
He is, welcome sarKOY 8)

I would like to hear your thoughts on your countrymen like Podkletnov.

Arc has a point. The mass/charge relationship is very complex & indeed i believe they may be treated as being of 2 different dimensions.

Think of uncharged Mass, charged Mass, and Massless charge......
Title: Re: Electrogravitics – A Simplified Description
Post by: Linda Brown on July 03, 2012, 08:07:43 am
well, Amici, i wanna see this effect in the kinda vacuum chamber, shielded against Earth magnetic field  ::)

P.S.

Linda, at least, post's number, please. i hella am  not a remote viewer cuz Ancient Bro cruelly did turn my f*King telepathy off  ;)

In rereading your post I finally had the light dawn on me a little. I will be happy to step aside and let you fellows discuss the scientific end of all of this and when I do have a specific question I will point it out clearly. I would not hold your breath if I were you! ;D
I do finally get your inference to Ancient Bro... I told you I could be amazingly dense.... but I understand better now. Thankyou. Mine apparently is still active.

And probably for my own peace of mind I probably will get.....less knowledgeable as time goes on! Intentionally!.

I am so excited about the conversations that are happening here. I don't understand a word you guys are saying but that does not stop me from seeing how important this interaction is for everyone concerned.

Thank you Sarkoy for helping me understand what I am given to understand.   Linda 
Title: Re: Electrogravitics – A Simplified Description
Post by: SarK0Y on July 03, 2012, 03:07:07 pm
Linda, thank ye very much 4 warm words.  :)

Greater "speed"/velocity results in higher "Impact Energy". But  remember the "particles" are being accelerated by using a strong magnetic field supplied by the superconducting magnetic torus. Each particle is effectively being pumped up to higher energy levels.. hence apparent mass increase.  Their energy is related to the intrinsic relativistic effects.
Arc, a little remark: magnetic field doesn't accelerate particles, it controls radius of beam's orbit.  other moments ain't Nothing, but about Conservation Law. in short, if c-velocity is constant, then additional energy of particle has  to flow into another properties. in the our case, 'tis mass. but the charge still keeps the same. needless to say, EG'd be better off to've clear explanation of this wacky situation :) Anyway, i'd like to see well-orchestrated experiment, but not torrential hail of theories ::)

Sarkoy, if I may ask?  Is English your mother language or are you translating?
Thanks

Deuem, my Mother lang is Ru, but i no've used automatic translators coz it's hella $hit: they use statistical analysis, but not contextual  :(

I would like to hear your thoughts on your countrymen like Podkletnov.

AFAIK, Podkletnov's experiment didn't exclude parasitic influences such the Atmosphere & Earth's magnetic field, thereby i can't take his findings so serious.


Arc has a point. The mass/charge relationship is very complex & indeed i believe they may be treated as being of 2 different dimensions.

Think of uncharged Mass, charged Mass, and Massless charge......
 

real relations of Mass/Charge/Magnetism/... we'll extract with HD - Physics (hd == hyperdimensional).
Title: Re: Electrogravitics – A Simplified Description
Post by: arc on July 03, 2012, 04:44:59 pm
Linda, thank ye very much 4 warm words.  :)
Arc, a little remark: magnetic field doesn't accelerate particles, it controls radius of beam's orbit.  other moments ain't Nothing, but about Conservation Law.

Yes SarKOY. On re-reading my post I see that my stream of thoughts did not fill in the details between.   When mentioning the magnetic torus I should have stated that the particles "ions" (protons, and heavy nuclei ) are traversing the B field (both dipole and quadrupole) but being accelerated by another additional field supplied by the multiple "kick" sections of the device. 

Quote
Anyway, i'd like to see well-orchestrated experiment, but not torrential hail of theories ::)

You are not the only one...   there are others here who agree with your statements



A question for you SarKOY.  Is the TTB effect only an internal effect manifesting within the physical device itself...


arc 

Title: Re: Electrogravitics – A Simplified Description
Post by: PLAYSWITHMACHINES on July 04, 2012, 01:03:08 pm
sarKOY, Podkletnov did shield (or tried to shield) his experiments, these were done in buildings with thick walls, & in one case underground;
Quote
Indirect evidence for a gravitational effect comes from the fact that any kind of
electromagnetic shielding is ineffective. Note that if one can explain in some way the
anomalous generation of a gravitational field in the superconductor, its undisturbed propagation
follows as a well-known property of gravity (see Section 4.2). Indirect support for
the gravitational hypothesis also comes from the partial similarity of this apparatus to that
employed by Podkletnov for the stationary weak gravitational shielding experiment [1].

Given that he admitted a 7% error, his resullts are still fairly conclusive.
Podkletnov also writes;

Quote
(a) Weakness of the standard coupling with gravity. Anomalous coupling.
The standard coupling of matter to gravity is obtained from the Einstein equations by
including the material part of the system into the energy-impulse tensor. Since the coupling
constant is G/c4, very large amounts of matter/energy, or at least large densities, are always
necessary in order to obtain gravitational effects of some importance. This holds also at
the quantum level, in weak field approximation. It is possible to quantize the gravitational
field by introducing quantum fluctuations with respect to a classical background, and then
calculate the graviton emission probabilities associated to transitions in atomic systems.
These always turn out to be extremely small, still because of the weakness of the coupling.

What we proved in our cited works is that a peculiar “anomalous” coupling mechanism
exists, between gravity and matter in a macroscopic quantum state. In this state
matter is described by a collective wave function. Also in this state the energy-impulse of
matter couples to the gravitational field in the standard way prescribed by the equivalence
principle. However, the new idea is that besides this standard coupling there is another
effect, due to the interference of the Lagrangian L of coherent matter with the “natural”
vacuum energy term /8G which is present in the Einstein equations. The two quantities
have in fact the same tensorial form but possibly different sign, and it turns out that their
interference can lead to a dramatic enhancement of vacuum fluctuations.

"Vacuum fluctuations" indeed :)

From what i have read & observed, the T.T.B. gravitor does not show any external forces, although my next experiments will have to allow for this.
Podkletnov's 'gravity wave' is the opposite, it is all external, but he also admits, he used very small masses (10-50 grams) and if he had used a much bigger device against a much bigger mass, he might have seen a 'reaction force' on the device....

Yes, more science & less theory, there will be more experiments...
I will post the 'gravity workshop' thread soon, i promise ;)
Title: Re: Electrogravitics – A Simplified Description
Post by: Littleenki on July 04, 2012, 01:08:12 pm
Good post, PWM, looking forward to that thread!
Le
Title: Re: Electrogravitics – A Simplified Description
Post by: dcooper on July 04, 2012, 01:20:54 pm
PWM does this mean that the gravitator shows no EG force or did you mean something else when you said it shows no extrenal forces -dcooper
Title: Re: Electrogravitics – A Simplified Description
Post by: PLAYSWITHMACHINES on July 04, 2012, 01:33:04 pm
It showed a force alright 8) it moved.

But i did not notice, nor was i looking for, any external forces like a 'gravity wave'.

I did notice that the sharp field gradient charged almost the entire room, even the earthed parts, so i was forced to connect extra earthing cables from outside. I put this down to ionisation of air etc, even so in previous HV projects the field was much more localised...

The next series will be at higher power & frequency, it will be interesting to see if there is any truth in the reported 'time forwarding' of electrons :o

ETA: before everyone shouts 'ion wind' i had it enclosed on 3 sides, it weighed 50 grams, and i calculated the power input at about 18 watts.
 Ion wind takes time to build up, this effect was instant. There wasn't even the slightest breeze anywhere.
Title: Re: Electrogravitics – A Simplified Description
Post by: Mikado on July 04, 2012, 01:36:43 pm

Podkletnov's 'gravity wave' is the opposite, it is all external, but he also admits, he used very small masses (10-50 grams) and if he had used a much bigger device against a much bigger mass, he might have seen a 'reaction force' on the device....


You must have something wrong. 10 - 50 grams is a measure of weight and not mass.

Could you recheck?

Mikado
Title: Re: Electrogravitics – A Simplified Description
Post by: PLAYSWITHMACHINES on July 04, 2012, 01:41:03 pm
Sorry, i will rephrase;

'Various masses with a weight between 10-50 grams'
Title: Re: Electrogravitics – A Simplified Description
Post by: dcooper on July 04, 2012, 01:47:01 pm
I believe you PWM, I don't think it's Ion wind, can't be :) -dcooper
Title: Re: Electrogravitics – A Simplified Description
Post by: PLAYSWITHMACHINES on July 04, 2012, 02:05:07 pm
Nor do i :D
There was no direct ionisation as such, no visible corona, hardly any ozone, and certainly no 'wind'.
I will tape streamers all around the next one, just to make sure ;)

This was a 50g lump of wax, iron oxide, aluminium & it jumped when it recieved a 50Kv pulse. It jumped in the direction of - to + as predicted LOL
Gravitors are not an exact science, the exact role of the dielectric medium is not always clear.
It seems as though the dielectric constant & density of the material are paramount, as is the field gradient.
Title: Re: Electrogravitics – A Simplified Description
Post by: deuem on July 05, 2012, 02:02:50 am
Nor do i :D
There was no direct ionisation as such, no visible corona, hardly any ozone, and certainly no 'wind'.
I will tape streamers all around the next one, just to make sure ;)

Hello, I am interested in this. The jump!. If possible, can you contain the jump to a known distance. Exactly. Say 1/2 meter or more. 1 meter would be best. I would like to see just the lift off jump several times and see if we can measure the speed. You have the weight, we need the speed. If you can tape the lift off from the side several times maybe we can catch both ends. Up and stop. How much time for the travel? At least we can get the amount of frame time vs height. Even if you can't post the video, could you post the results?  We might also be able to tell rather it is accelerating or constant. Maybe for that test a longer 2 meters would be better, more frames to work with. If you can't catch that then maybe a test where it goes between two flags is OK. Like arrows on the side. The arrows being the exact distance. Maybe an arrow every 10cm.
 
I am very fascinated with this work and daydreaming about what can be done with it. I think that we need to prove once and for all if it is the wind. Your tell tale strips would also help. ( streamers ) A smoke test will also show your results. I am off to try and work this out on a video I have. Post when done.
 
I have been on line trying my best to see if I could find these results. No luck so far. If the aluminum had an airfoil shape, well then that might say something but a strip has zero aerodynamics to play off of hence my reluctance to the Ion flight of wind.
 
Next test, will it fly sideways. Hey lift is lift? Will it run a horizontal center string or just sit there? IMHO if it is lift it should run the string. If it is another force, say gravity, what would it do, try to turn? But it should just sit there unless the string was going uphill.
 
Thanks PWM.
 
Deuem
Title: Re: Electrogravitics – A Simplified Description
Post by: PLAYSWITHMACHINES on July 05, 2012, 03:15:52 pm
Thanks for that reply ;D
But it only jumped a few millimeters :o

Enough to show the force, to get it to jump 2 metres would mean millions of volts & a much bigger gravitor that could handle it.

However, it's a start, and the next series of experiments will involve high frequencies, which i will attempt to 'tune' to the correct f for that particular dielectric.

I have also thought of simply reproducing these 'cones' and arranging them on a platform, like a flying bed.... 8) a few hundred should provide plenty of lift ;D
More to come....
Title: Re: Electrogravitics – A Simplified Description
Post by: SarK0Y on July 05, 2012, 04:22:40 pm
PLAYSWITHMACHINES

i don't think his experiment was something greater than it's been  :)

[youtube]m-xw_fmB2KA[/youtube]
Title: Re: Electrogravitics – A Simplified Description
Post by: PLAYSWITHMACHINES on July 05, 2012, 08:58:25 pm
 ;D

The frog is a fine example of magneto-hydro-dynamics, showing that water is partially magnetic.

I'm not trying to build a spaceship (though that would be nice) i am trying to validate Brown's work.

This has for the most part already been done, now we want to move on & see if we can improve on it, learn the theory etc.
Thank you all for your input, if i had posted this on Agents, Trolls & Sycophants i would have to spend 200 pages arguing the case ::)
Title: Re: Electrogravitics – A Simplified Description
Post by: SarK0Y on July 06, 2012, 10:03:42 am
PLAYSWITHMACHINES

No the least evidence ever's been seen by me to say of Podkletnov's findings as an AG effect: looks magnetic glider, none of more. if ye put apparatus onto LEO, you'd get opportunity to measure magnetic forces to detect any anomalous deltas. ;) 'tis been well-known 4 hella yrs that we can interact with Earth's M-field to run levitation the way the seen. but, frankly, strong M-field always no's something easy to deal with :) Anyway, M-gliders're worthy to be R&D'ed  :) 
Title: Re: Electrogravitics – A Simplified Description
Post by: Mikado on July 06, 2012, 12:23:51 pm
;D

The frog is a fine example of magneto-hydro-dynamics, showing that water is partially magnetic.

I'm not trying to build a spaceship (though that would be nice) i am trying to validate Brown's work.

This has for the most part already been done, now we want to move on & see if we can improve on it, learn the theory etc.
Thank you all for your input, if i had posted this on Agents, Trolls & Sycophants i would have to spend 200 pages arguing the case ::)

I like you. Aspects have been proven.

Mikado