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
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?
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
Humans have been twisted, subverted, abused, tormented, and maligned by powers very likely NOT Human...through money, propaganda, bad education, and direct mind control.
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.
How do you know that the maligning in our history and currently was NOT Human? You seem so sure.
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
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.
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.
Electrogravitics – A Simplified DescriptionIf, 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.
by Amaterasu Solar
I liked and enjoyed reading your post.
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.
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.
"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
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
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
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
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.
: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
scientist don't belive in ether thus SQK, im not in favor of SQK either but i can see were you are coming from.
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..
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.
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
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
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
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'.
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.
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
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
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 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.
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
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
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
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
NOTE: apparently the font to support "micro" or "mu" is not available. The current should have read as "542 microamps" and not "?A".
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.I intend to ;)
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.
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
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
It's probably from Roschin & Godin's experiment;
Not sure what this shows. Didn't watch, but I thought it might interest many here: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!
[youtube]http://www.youtube.com/watch?feature=player_embedded&v=yUHxuqoUOas[/youtube]
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!
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!
LOL! Yeah, hope You're keeping dry.Oh dear, I have to work with electricity in there? LOL!
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 guess Your property value just trebled! Waterfront AND tornado-resilient!
Keep plugging on that device.
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
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
ETA: Dave, maybe you should think about a hydro-electric scheme for the hobbit hut?...
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
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.
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!
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?
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! DeuemWow, D!
Ouch, can you say foaming at the mouth?
55 it is!
Shall we share one in four winds someday?:-):-):-)
Le
.............................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 :)
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
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-electrograviticslooks damned stretched :) what about... hmmmm.... Neutron? ::)
That's easy. They are gravitationally neutral.in theory ;) but any theory is Nothing w/o solid proof :)
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.what about colliders? ::) the greater speed makes the greater mass. this fact too contradicts such conjecture :)
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 :)
Um... "Colliders?" Forgive Me...but I'm not sure what You're on about.
OHHH. Right right right. Long day, rather tired.why particle's charge doesn't increase with greater velocity?
So You're saying that the greater speed makes the greater mass, and this fact too contradicts such conjecture of LaViolette's work or...?
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
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
what about colliders? ::) the greater speed makes the greater mass. this fact too contradicts such conjecture :)
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 ;)
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
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......
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.
Anyway, i'd like to see well-orchestrated experiment, but not torrential hail of theories ::)
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].
(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.
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....
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 ;)
;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 ::)