collapse

Author Topic: Electrogravitics – A Simplified Description  (Read 34845 times)

Mikado

  • Guest
Re: Electrogravitics – A Simplified Description
« Reply #15 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

Offline Linda Brown

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 2282
  • Gold 52
    • The Cosmic Token
Re: Electrogravitics – A Simplified Description
« Reply #16 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

Offline Amaterasu

  • The Roundtable
  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 6646
  • Gold 275
  • Information Will Free Us
    • T.A.P. - You're It
Re: Electrogravitics – A Simplified Description
« Reply #17 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!)
« Last Edit: June 12, 2012, 11:23:16 PM by Amaterasu »
"If the universe is made of mostly Dark Energy...can We use it to run Our cars?"

"If You want peace, take the profit out of war."

deuem

  • Guest
Re: Electrogravitics – A Simplified Description
« Reply #18 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.




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


 
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

dcooper

  • Guest
Re: Electrogravitics – A Simplified Description
« Reply #19 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

Mikado

  • Guest
Re: Electrogravitics – A Simplified Description
« Reply #20 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".

Mikado

  • Guest
Re: Electrogravitics – A Simplified Description
« Reply #21 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

Offline Linda Brown

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 2282
  • Gold 52
    • The Cosmic Token
Re: Electrogravitics – A Simplified Description
« Reply #22 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

Offline Amaterasu

  • The Roundtable
  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 6646
  • Gold 275
  • Information Will Free Us
    • T.A.P. - You're It
Re: Electrogravitics – A Simplified Description
« Reply #23 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.
"If the universe is made of mostly Dark Energy...can We use it to run Our cars?"

"If You want peace, take the profit out of war."

Offline Amaterasu

  • The Roundtable
  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 6646
  • Gold 275
  • Information Will Free Us
    • T.A.P. - You're It
Re: Electrogravitics – A Simplified Description
« Reply #24 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'.
"If the universe is made of mostly Dark Energy...can We use it to run Our cars?"

"If You want peace, take the profit out of war."

Offline Littleenki

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 4015
  • Gold 202
Re: Electrogravitics – A Simplified Description
« Reply #25 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
Hermetically sealed, for your protection

dcooper

  • Guest
Re: Electrogravitics – A Simplified Description
« Reply #26 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.

Mikado

  • Guest
Re: Electrogravitics – A Simplified Description
« Reply #27 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

Offline Amaterasu

  • The Roundtable
  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 6646
  • Gold 275
  • Information Will Free Us
    • T.A.P. - You're It
Re: Electrogravitics – A Simplified Description
« Reply #28 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...?
"If the universe is made of mostly Dark Energy...can We use it to run Our cars?"

"If You want peace, take the profit out of war."

dcooper

  • Guest
Re: Electrogravitics – A Simplified Description
« Reply #29 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.

 


Wal-Mart.com USA, LLC
affiliate_link
Free Click Tracking
Wal-Mart.com USA, LLC

* Recent Posts

Re: bigfoot caught on sherrif's dashcam in Georgia by The Seeker
[Today at 01:00:14 PM]


Re: bigfoot caught on sherrif's dashcam in Georgia by space otter
[Today at 10:45:48 AM]


Re: bigfoot caught on sherrif's dashcam in Georgia by ArMaP
[Today at 09:29:01 AM]


Re: Immaculate Deception by astr0144
[Today at 07:19:02 AM]


Re: bigfoot caught on sherrif's dashcam in Georgia by The Seeker
[Today at 06:14:15 AM]


Re: Another Roswell program making conclusions of what really happened by astr0144
[Today at 05:49:49 AM]


Re: Immaculate Deception by astr0144
[Today at 05:19:55 AM]


Re: Another Roswell program making conclusions of what really happened by petrus4
[Today at 04:23:13 AM]


Re: Another Roswell program making conclusions of what really happened by ArMaP
[Today at 04:02:42 AM]


Re: Immaculate Deception by zorgon
[Today at 02:38:25 AM]


Re: Immaculate Deception by zorgon
[Today at 02:26:47 AM]


Re: Immaculate Deception by zorgon
[Today at 02:17:29 AM]


Re: bigfoot caught on sherrif's dashcam in Georgia by petrus4
[Today at 12:38:21 AM]


Re: bigfoot caught on sherrif's dashcam in Georgia by zorgon
[April 24, 2018, 11:41:46 PM]


Re: Another Roswell program making conclusions of what really happened by astr0144
[April 24, 2018, 06:10:16 PM]


Re: Another Roswell program making conclusions of what really happened by ArMaP
[April 24, 2018, 05:23:07 PM]


Another Roswell program making conclusions of what really happened by astr0144
[April 24, 2018, 05:10:56 PM]


Re: Immaculate Deception by astr0144
[April 24, 2018, 03:36:01 PM]


Re: Immaculate Deception by astr0144
[April 24, 2018, 03:15:50 PM]


Re: bigfoot caught on sherrif's dashcam in Georgia by dreb13
[April 24, 2018, 03:12:53 PM]