anti-gravity goes mainstream:
Scientists funded by the European Space Agency have measured the gravitational equivalent of a magnetic field for the first time in a laboratory. Under certain special conditions the effect is much larger than expected from general relativity and could help physicists to make a significant step towards the long-sought-after quantum theory of gravity.
https://www.sciencedaily.com/releases/2006/03/060325232140.htm
Behold the EM Drive which has been dubbed by most of the science press as the "the impossibilty drive":
https://www.universetoday.com/130649/nasas-em-drive-passes-peer-review-dont-get-hopes/
A Romanian dude running an EM Drive he made by soldering copper plate with a magnetron from a household microwave:
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Rbf7735o3hQ
Frankly the EM Drive is the electrogravitic equivalent of sitting in an office chair and flapping your arms faster in one direction than the other to scoot yourself along. Only in the EM Drive your arms are microwaves and the difference in friction is due to the density of space rather than the wheels of the chair. You can scoot off an office chair powered by a impulse-arm drive or use a microwave-impulse drive for your spaceship, but there are much easier and more efficient methods to get around. The only thing this has going for it is news coverage. It's essentially a really inefficient form of impulse drive from Star Trek from what I understand, similar in basic principle to the mechanical versions below:
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=1eQp4grGdqY
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=FjYtsLnTrx0 <-Short test of an asymmetrical capacitor being pulsed with ~16KV, rocking back and forth in mid-air
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=CGN65lse5yE<-Similar test with constant voltage in a vacuum, the linear laser line shows the displacement of the capacitor. Proof positive of electropulsive action.
The main point of opposition to the idea of electropulsive motion A.K.A. electrogravitics is the idea that it violates conservation of momentum / inertia. The general premise of this concept is that you cannot push or lift against oneself for propulsion.
Baron Munchausen demonstrating a distinct lack of understanding of conservation of momentum by lifting himself and his horse by his own hair.
For those who still have no idea what conservation of momentum is see below:
Okay, now we are all on the same page. Conservation of momentum is the basic premise behind a propeller, a jet, or a rocket - throw something away from you really fast to generate a thrust.
The reason that electrogravitics are thought to violate conservation of momentum is because this concept is most often viewed from the standpoint of the following concepts:
1. Space is empty, just look at the Wikipedia page about the Michaelson-Morely experiment and Relativity Theory. There is no ether of space to act upon (a common misconception).
2. Inertia is the resistance of a body to motion and cannot be induced, never-mind the cause.
3. Electromagnetic forces and gravity have no relationship whatsoever.
The Standard Model cannot derive the gravitational constant which is the ratio of electrostatic to gravitational attraction between the protons and electrons in an atom. Without knowing how several basic forces like momentum itself originate one cannot claim to have a complete theory. An incomplete theory means there will be things that cannot be accounted for by the theory. These are called anomalies.
Einstein believed there was a relationship between electromagnetism and gravity, that’s the bulk of what he tried for decades to unify in his unified-field theory and failed. I believe he failed because he essentially fixed space while allowing for curvature, which has been represented by a set of mathematical formulas which match observations to a degree, but lacked motion of an electromagnetic ether (although he did state that relativity was regarding a gravitational ether).
Note also that Michaelson (of the Michaelson-Morely Experiment that disproved the luminiferous ether) believed in ether-based physics until the day he died. To understand the basic differences in the understandings of ether I will paint in broad strokes:
A basic definition: Ether is the medium of light (electromagnetism), it is what the waves transverse through just as ocean waves are carried through water and sound is carried through air.
Luminiferous Ether:
Think of a cosmic block of granite as representing space, a rigid transducer of electromagnetic waves While the motion of a rigid ether was disproved by the Michaelson-Morely experiment it did not disprove a motion in a dynamic ether which these experimenters recognized at the time. This interpretation was not held by Einstein who considered it a fundamental experiment under-girding relativity which lacks etheric motion.
Relativistic Ether:
The fabric of space-time that current scientific thinking espouses (the "fabric" would be more of a spatial gelatin when you really think about it) with the curvature of the medium dictated by gravity because of Einstein's interpretation of the Michaelson-Morely experiment that there is no etheric drift and therefore no motion of the ether. This is where the concept of gravitational lensing comes from.
Dynamic Ether:
The concept of the dynamic ether is that space can flow and is the medium electromagnetic and gravitational tranmission. Based on the range of frequency conduction for electric signals the ether is a compressible fluid like a gas, but can still act like a liquid or solid at if the time for the induced displacement is short enough. Space and time are still interacting with the ether. Lensing would be accounted for by the etheric drift inherent to rotating massive objects.
Dayton Miller followed up on the recommendations made by Michaelson and Morely in their paper for a measurement at altitude, in a less substantial structure than a basement, and with more than 36 datapoints. Dayton Miller’s Mt. Wilson experiments with hundreds of thousands of data-points laid the foundation for the physics which will be eventually adopted based on a dynamic ether (compressible) which acts as the “electric fluid” going back to Faraday’s experiments.
"My opinion about Miller's experiments is the following. ... Should the positive result be confirmed, then the special theory of relativity and with it the general theory of relativity, in its current form, would be invalid. Experimentum summus judex. Only the equivalence of inertia and gravitation would remain, however, they would have to lead to a significantly different theory."
— Albert Einstein, in a letter to Edwin E. Slosson, 8 July 1925 (from copy in Hebrew University Archive, Jerusalem.)
Despite arguments to the contrary, I believe there is ample evidence from subsequent measurements that support Dayton Miller's experiments as seen below:
http://www.helical-structures.org/new_evidences/modern-ether-drift-exp/ether-drift-exp.pdf
Why is motion of the ether so important? Because if the ether can move it will take things with it. In a complete Dynamic Ether theory atoms themselves are comprised of miniature etheric vortices imparting spin, frequency, ect. comprising the full array of phenomena seen at the subatomic level. Nikola Tesla seems to be one of the first to conceptualize using such forces for flight among other uses and is reported to have developed a dynamic theory of gravity which has yet to see the light of day the details of which was a closely guarded secret of Tesla's.
The below is paraphrased from this link: http://nexusilluminati.blogspot.com/2012/04/teslas-dynamic-theory-of-gravity.html
"The Faraday effect — the rotation of the plane of polarization of radiation in a dielectric medium (such as the atmosphere, space, and certain solid materials) in a magnetic field — stated that the angle of rotation of radiation is proportional to the magnetic field strength and the length of the path in the medium in the field. These early experimenters knew there was a connection between the rotatory motion and momentum, and sought to find it.
The rotatory (versus the linear) character of magnetic phenomena was strengthened by Thomson’s experimentally verified conclusions on the magnetic rotation of light. This rotatory character not only influenced Tesla’s discovery of the rotating magnetic field, but is also fundamental to inertia and momentum, as I will later explain, since movement of a charged body constitutes a current which creates a magnetic field which creates the rotatory motion which “bores” through the ether like a drill to create momentum.
Thomson’s system was later investigated by C.A. Bjerknes between 1877 and 1910. Bjerknes showed that when two spheres immersed in an incompressible fluid were pulsated, they exerted a mutual attraction which obeyed Newton’s inverse square law if the pulsations were in phase, while if the phases differed by a half wave, the spheres repelled. At one quarter wave difference, there was no action. Where pulses were non-instantaneous at distances greater than a quarter wavelength, attractions and repulsions were reversed (Repertorium d. Mathematik I [Leipzig, 1877], p. 268; Proc. Camb. Phil. Soc. iii [1879], p. 276; iv [1880], p. 29).
The publishing of these researches and experiments in the physical journals of Europe were available to Nikola Tesla, during his student days at the Polytechnic Institute in Graz, Austria, and at the University of Prague, in Czechoslovakia. Tesla could read and understand all these pertinent journals in their original languages."
A quote from "Tesla's New Monarch of Machines", New York Herald Tribune Oct.15 1911:
“When I found that I had been anticipated as to the flying machine, by men working in a different field, I began to study the problem from other angles, to regard it as a mechanical rather than an electrical problem. I felt certain there must be some means of obtaining power that was better than any now in use. And by vigorous use of my gray matter for a number of years, I grasped the possibilities of the principle of the viscosity and adhesion of fluids and conceived the mechanism of my engine. Now that I have it, my next step will be the perfect flying machine."
"An aeroplane driven by your engine?" I asked.
"Not at all," said Dr. Tesla. "The aeroplane is fatally defective. It is merely a toy — a sporting play-thing. It can never become commercially practical. It has fatal defects. One is the fact that when it encounters a downward current of air it is helpless. The "hole in the air" of which aviators speak is simply a downward current, and unless the aeroplane is high enough above the earth to move laterally it can do nothing but fall."
"There is no way of detecting these downward currents, no way of avoiding them, and therefore the aeroplane must always be subject to chance and its operator to the risk of fatal accident. Sportsmen will always take these chances, but as a business proposition the risk is too great."
"The flying machine of the future—my flying machine—will be heavier than air, but it will not be an aeroplane. It will have no wings. It will be substantial, solid, stable. You cannot have a stable airplane. The gyroscope can never be successfully applied to the airplane, for it would give a stability that would result in the machine being torn to pieces by the wind, just as the unprotected aeroplane on the ground is torn to pieces by a high wind."
"My flying machine will have neither wings nor propellers. You might see it on the ground and you would never guess that it was a flying machine. Yet it will be able to move at will through the air in any direction with perfect safety, higher speeds than have yet been reached, regardless of weather and oblivious of “holes in the air�? or downward currents. It will ascend in such currents if desired. It can remain absolutely stationary in the air, even in a wind, for great length of time. Its lifting power will not depend upon any such delicate devices as the bird has to employ, but upon positive mechanical action."
“You will get stability through gyroscopes?" I asked.
“Through gyroscopic action of my engine, assisted by some devices I am not yet prepared to talk about", he replied.
To a Westinghouse manager, Tesla wrote 'You should not be at all surprised, if some day you see me fly from New York to Colorado Springs in a contrivance which will resemble a gas stove and weigh as much. ... and could, if necessary enter and depart through a window.' (7-7-1912) ( it will be a small box, not a huge "cigar" ) pg. 198 Tesla: Man Out of Time by Margaret Cheney
Professor Francis E. Nipher subsequently demonstrated electrogravitic action in 1916.
Reproduced from the above Literary Digest dated December 22, 1917:
“Experiments recently reported by Prof. Francis E. Nipher of Washington University, St. Louis, indicate that gravity depends to some extent upon electrical charge and that in certain cases it’s sign may even be altered sot that it becomes negative and the bodies concerned repel each other instead of attracting. It would seem to follow that if Professor Nipher’s experiments could be carried out on a sufficiently huge scale the weight of objects on or near the earth’s surface might be increased, lessened, or abolished, and that they might even be caused to fly off into space. . .”
“gravitational attraction between masses of matter depends on their electrical potential due to charges upon them”
Prof. Nipher stated in his paper printed in The Transactions of The St. Louis Academy of Science: “Every working-day of the following college year has been devoted to testing the validity of the above statement. No results in conflict with it have been obtained. Not only has gravitational attraction been diminished by electrification of the attracting bodies when direct electrical action has been wholly cut off by a metal shield, but it has been made negative. It has been converted into repulsion. This result has been obtained many times throughout the year. On one occasion during the latter part of the year this repulsion was made somewhat more than twice as great as normal attraction.”
The Foo Fighters seen by the Allies at the end of WWII were most likely unarmed prototype electrogravitic craft developed by Germany. This is a very interesting thread to follow if you google: Viktor Schauberger, Wilhelm Reich, Nikola Tesla, and Project Paperclip. Do not believe everything you read on this subject, but understand this is due to substatial propoganda to muddy the water from mulitiple sources, which makes the water all the muddier. Understand that while the Schauberger device relies on atmospheric flow it creates a kind of localized plasma which is what truly propels the device.
Thomas Townsend Brown's work on electrogravitics followed in the 50's and 60's, which went black after a few years (gobbled and classified by the military) is shown below:
The way that TT Brown described the action of the craft is essentially that it creates it's own etheric pocket in what might be called an inertia-less drive. Now that actually does violate conservation of momentum, oops.
A Wired article on The Antigravity Underground:
http://archive.wired.com/wired/archive/11.08/pwr_antigravity.html
A NASA paper on Asymmetrical Capacitors for Propulsion:
http://ntrs.nasa.gov/archive/nasa/casi.ntrs.nasa.gov/20040171929.pdf
2003 US Army report on Force on an Asymmetrical Capacitor.
http://arxiv.org/ftp/physics/papers/0211/0211001.pdf
Mohaha ha ha ha
I keep reiterating, "anti-gravity," as the term is generally conceived and used, is a misnomer. Our publicly known flight systems of today are truly anti-gravity. Electro-gravitation is gravity itself, not anti-gravity.
As to the ether findings of the Michelson-Morley interferometer experiments, I have long said that it very well did prove the non-existence of a stationary ether in space, as the experiment was not stationary at all, but moving parallel to the ethers it was enveloped within.
Quite right!
I've been reading William M. Tompkins' book Selected by Extraterrestrials about his life and work at Douglas Aircraft Company (DAC) during the 50s and there are astonishing insights into the works that went on regarding non-conventional propulsion systems, including ionic thrust. Suffice to say, the scope and depth of the work that took place in this highly secret compartmentalized Think-Tank within DAC, with what looks like the brightest minds of the time, is miles ahead of what we're told exists. I highly recommend it to those interested in the topic.
Meanwhile, there are numerous references to a classified DAC 5-part document named MTM-622 from 1954 (Unconventional Propulsion Schemes). I've been able to find 4/5 of the document online here for your viewing.
I thought here would be a good place to share this information. Thanks for the great posts!
Been thinking of assembling my own ferrocell to personally observe the rotating magnetic fields of magnets in real time, holographically.
Where you guys go? Keep talking, I was loving this thread.
Looks like someone else agrees with me:
https://www.extremetech.com/extreme/227146-a-new-theory-of-inertia-could-explain-the-em-drives-anomalous-thrust
I think this may be a good opportunity to look at the recently released patents of the TR-3B Triangular craft. The mysterious inventor John St Clair has lots of other, very intriguing patents that I recommend checking out, including but not limited to: "Rotating electrostatic propulsion system", "Remote Viewing Amplifier", "Walking Through Walls Training System" or even "Full Body Teleportation System". This may be the start of previously-classified patents from the MIC.
PS: A lot of this has to do with Tetrahedral geometry. This was discussed in Wisdom Teaching's latest episode and I think is a fundamental property of these phenomenons. Feel free to watch the video for more information!
Photon Propulsion Spacecraft
PS2: For anyone familiar with Mark McCandlish, a former illustrator for Northrop if I remember, and as one who has disclosed many important details on the fluxliner. The latest Cosmic Disclosure (transcript here) has amazing insights on the materials used, such as quartz, to insulate the stacked-+/-plates. And nice illustrations as well!
EDIT 20/5: This was on the front cover of RT (From New Scientist publication)
https://www.rt.com/viral/389066-plasma-jet-engine-breakthrough/
Drip disclosure happening.
Thank you all for the links. This is wonderful information. I stumbled on a rather large folder of electrogravitic and aethrokinetic theory texts through exploration of them.
https://mega.nz/#F!5YUhBD6R!AwrEou0nR6RcUipIOrOQ2g
That being said, I have some questions which I find unanswered in all of what I've read so far. To start with, the Dynamic Ether highlighted by the Michaelson-Morley experiment is in fact a Motionless Ether that we move through at cosmic rates, correct? If this is the case, and all other forces can be expressed as movement relative to the Motionless Ether, wouldn't time simply be the collision of the Motionless Ether with the Ether bound into "matter" arrangements? Time flowing at a seemingly constant rate that seems to be correlated with the speed at which you are moving, in a single perceivable direction, with an inability to return to points past which we have hurled through at mind-shattering speeds. Time being measured only by movements or rates of movement. Perhaps electricity is not the only force that is created through interactions between free and bound Ether. If so, personal experience could be broken down into which section of the Ether you are flung through, relative to the grander scheme of the Free Ether's pattern. Consciousness and thought are certainly structured on geometry and angles, or potentially the collisions and interactions aforementioned, as experienced by the Bound Ether itself. The rest of our senses are certainly funneled through the Ether to even be recognizable, so the system on which it all feeds into would similarly have to be Ether based, it seems to me. Am I understanding the basis and implications of the theory correctly, or am I entirely off base?
Excellent deduction, see a related exerpt from the below article on Dr Nikolai Kozyrev's thoughts on time.
http://blog.hasslberger.com/2007/05/kozyrev_aether_time_and_torsio.html
After pondering this for a while, we see that time is ultimately nothing but pure, spiralling movement. We know that we are tracing a complex spiralling pattern through space thanks to the orbital patterns of the Earth and solar system.
And now, "temporology", or the science of time, is under continual active investigation by Moscow State University and the Russian Humanitarian Foundation, inspired by Dr Kozyrev's pioneering work. On their website, they state:
"In our understanding, the 'nature' of time is the mechanism
This may seem strange at first glance, since a tree falling in your yard could be seen as a result of a strong wind, not of the "flow of time". However, you must then ask yourself what caused the wind to blow. Ultimately, the motion of the Earth on its axis is most responsible. Hence, all changes are caused by some form of movement, and without movement there can be no time.
http://www.arl.army.mil/arlreports/2003/ARL-TR-3005.pdf
From above:
Appendix B
.
Force on Asymmetric Capacitor in Vacuum
*
Enclosed below is a copy of my email correspondence with Jean-Louis Naudin (JLN Labs) [1], who hosts a Web site on “Lifters.” In this correspondence, Naudin quotes a letter, purportedly signed by T. Townsend Brown, in which Brown discusses the question of whether an
asymmetric capacitor has a net force on it in vacuum under high voltage.
T. Townsend Brown’s letter, as provided by J. Naudin:
Dear ....,
You have asked several question which I shall try to answer. The experiments in vacuum were conducted at "Societe Nationale de Construction Aeronautique" in Paris in 1955-56, in the Bahnson Laboratories, Winston-Salem, North Carolina in 1957-58 and at the "General Electric Space Center" at King of Prussia, Penna, in 1959. Laboratory notes were made, but these notes were never published and are not availible to me now. The results were varied, depending upon the purpose of the experiment. We were aware that the thrust on the electrode structures were caused largely by ambiant ion momentum transfer when the experiments were conducted in air. Many of the tests, therefore, were directed to the exploration of this component of the total thrust. In the case of the G.E. test, cesium ions were seeded into the environment and the additional thrust due to seeding was observed. In the Paris test miniature saucer type airfoils were operated in a vaccum exceeding 10-6mm Hg.Bursts of thrust (towards the positive) were observed every time there was a vaccum spark within the large bell jar.- These vacuum sparks represented momentary ionization, principally of the metal ions in the electrode material. The DC potential used ranged from 70kV to 220kV. Condensers of various types, air dielectric and barium titanate were assembled on a rotary support to eliminate the electrostatic effect of chamber walls and observations were made of the rate of rotation.Intense acceleration was always observed during the vacuum spark (which, incidentally, illuminated the entire interior of the vacuum chamber). Barium Titanate dielectrique always exceeded air dielectric in total thrust. The results which were most significant from the -standpoint of the Biefeld-Brown effect was that thrust continued, even when there was no vacuum spark, causing the rotor to accelerate in the negative to positive direction to the point where voltage had to be reduced or the experiment discontinued because of the danger that the rotor would fly apart. In short, it appears there is strong evidence that Biefeld-Brown effect does exist in the negative to positive direction in a vacuum of at least 10-6 Torr. The residual thrust is several orders of magnitude larger than the remaining ambient ionization can account for.Going further in your letter of January 28th, the condenser "Gravitor" as described in my British patent, only showed a loss of weight when vertically oriented so that the negative-to-postive thrust was upward. In other words, the thrust tended to "lift" the gravitor. Maximum thrust observed in 1928 for one gravitor weighing approximately 10 kilograms was 100 kilodynes at 150kV DC. These gravitors were very heavy, many of them made with a molded dielectric of lead monoxide and beeswax and encased in bakelite. None of these units ever "floated" in the air. There were two methods of testing, either as a pendulum, in which the angle of rise against gravity was measured and charted against the applied voltage, or, as a rotor 4ft. in diameter, on which four "gravitors" were mounted on the periphery. This 4 ft. wheel was tested in air and also under transformer oil.The total thust or torque remained virtually the same in both instances, seeming to prove that aero-ionization was not wholly responsible for the thrust observed.Voltage used on the experiments under oil could be increased to about 300kV DC and the thrust appeared to be linear with voltage. In subsequent years, from 1930 to 1955, critical experiments were performed at the Naval Research Laboratory, Washington, DC.; the Randall-Morgan Laboratory of Physics, University of Penna., Philadelphia; at a field station in Zanesvill, Ohio, and two field stations in Southern California, of the torque was measured continuously day and night for many years. Large magnitude variations were consistenly observed under carefully controlled conditions of constant voltage, temperature, under oil, in magnetic and electrostatic shields, not only underground but at various elevations. These variations, recorded automatically on tape, were statistically processed and several significant facts were revealed. There were pronounced correlations with mean solar time, sideral time and lunar hour angle. This seemed to prove beyond a doubt that the thrust of "gravitors" varied with time in a way that related to solar and lunar tides and sideral correlation of unknown origin. These automatic records, acquired in so many different locations over such a long period of time, appear to indicate that the electrogravitic coupling is subject to an extraterrestrial factor, possibly related to the universal gravitational potential or some other (as yet) unidentified cosmic variable.In response to additional questions, a reply of T.T. Brown, dated April, 1973, stated :"The apparatus which lifted itself and floated in the air, which was described by Mr Kitselman, was not a massive dielectric as described in the English patent.Mr Kitselman witnessed an experiment utilising a 15" circular, dome-shaped aluminum electrode, wired and energized as in the attached sketch. When the high voltage was applied, this device, althrough tethered by wires from the high voltage equipment, did rise in the air, lifting not only its own weight but also a small balance weight which was attached to it on the underside. It is true that this apparatus would exert a force upward of 110% of its weight. The above experiment was an improvement on the experiment performed in Paris in 1955 and 1956 on disc air foils. The Paris experiments were the same as those shown to Admiral Radford in Pearl Harbor in 1950. These experiments were explained by scientific community as due entirely to "ion-momentum transfer", or "electric wind". It was predicted categorically by many "would-be" authorities that such an apparatus would not operate in vaccum. The Navy rejected the research proposal (for further research) for this reason. The experiments performed in Paris several years later, proved that ion wind was not entirely responsible for the observed motion and proved quite conclusively that the apparatus would indeed operate in high vacuum. Later these effects were confirmed in a laboratory at Winston-Salem, N.C., especially constructed for this purpose. Again continuous force was observed when the ionization in the medium surrounding the apparatus was virtually nil. In reviewing my letter of April 5th, I notice, in the drawing which I attached, that I specified the power supply to be 50kV. Actually, I should have indicated that it was 50 to 250kV DC for the reason that the experiments were conducted throughout that entire range. The higher the voltage, the greater was the force observed. It appeared that, in these rough tests, that the increase in force was approximately linear with voltage. In vaccum the same test was carried on with a canopy electrode approximately 6" in diameter, with substantial force being displayed at 150 kV DC. I have a short trip of movie film showing this motion within the vacuum chamber as the potential is applied."
Kindest personal regards,
Sincerely,
T.Townsend Brown
Try Plus Membership
- Access To The Full 2-Hour THC+ Episodes
- Dedicated THC+ RSS Feed
- Exclusive Bonus Shows
- Exclusive THC+ Videos
- Lifetime Forum Access
- Discounts on THC Merch
Listen & Review on:
Subscribe To The Higherside Newsletter
Be The First To Get Updates, Previews, & Comments.
