ANTIGRAVITY

Science and Technology News, Advanced Military Projects and Space Exploration

Moderators: ryguy, chrLz, Zep Tepi

ANTIGRAVITY

Postby oboe » Thu Mar 17, 2011 10:45 pm

I’m currently reading “Secrets of Antigravity Propulsion: Tesla, UFOs, and Classified Aerospace Technology”. I'm no techno-geek, just interested in this kind of stuff. (I would have been a physicist but I can't do the math.) This book I find fascinating because of its implications, anti-gravity travel and nearly free energy.

From the cover: "In Secrets of Antigravity Propulsion, physicist Paul LaViolette reveals the secret history of antigravity experimentation - from Nikola Tesla and T. Townsend Brown to the B-2 Advanced Technology Bomber. He discloses the existence of advanced gravity-control technologies, under secret military development for decades, that could revolutionize air travel using renewable energy. Included among the secret projects he reveals is the research of Project Skyvault to develop an aerospace propulsion system using intense beams of microwave energy similar to that used by the strange crafts seen flying over Area 51.

Using subquantum kinetics, the science behind antigravity technology, LaViolette reveals numerous field-propulsion devices and technologies that have thrust-to-power ratios thousands of times greater than that of a jet engine and whose effects are not explained by conventional physics and relativity theory. He then presents controversial evidence about the NASA cover-up in adopting these advanced technologies. He also details ongoing Russian research to duplicate John Searl’s self-propelled levitating disc and shows how the results of the Podkletnov gravity beam experiment could be harnessed to produce an interstellar spacecraft.”

The book is based mainly on the research and patents of Thomas Townsend Brown, an American physicist and inventor, but also on Tesla’s work because of his research into high-voltage shock discharges. Brown’s first inventions are listed as British patent 300,311 in 1928 and US patent 1,974,483 in 1934, both for gravitators. Initially, Brown’s work was dismissed by many of his colleagues (translated; not accepted in trade journals) because his research violated or challenged many of the main-stream accepted theories and laws of physics, particularly Newton’s third law of motion, Einstein’s laws of gravitation and relativity, and the first law of thermodynamics.

Before any of you dismiss this book as total nonsense, perhaps a bit of Brown’s career highlights may give you pause for reconsideration. In 1930, Brown was referred to Colonel Edward Deeds. Brown left his position at Swazey Observatory for a job at the Naval Research Laboratory in Washington, DC. He was assigned to the Navy-Princeton International Gravity Expedition to the West Indies on the US submarine S-48. Admiral Hyman Rickover, then a lieutenant, was the executive officer. Brown’s findings were summarized in a study titled “Anomalous Behavior of Massive High-K Dielectrics”. That study is still classified.

In 1933, Brown was given temporary leave to serve on the Johnson-Smithsonian Expedition on Eldridge Johnson’s yacht, the Caroline. While on the expedition, Brown had the opportunity to meet Johnson, Leon Douglass (McDonnell Douglass), and British master spy William S. Stephenson, who may have recruited Brown into his intel operations. In 1938, Brown was assigned to the maiden voyage of the USS Nashville as an assistant engineering officer, which carried $50 million in gold bullion from the Bank of England to Chase Manhattan Bank in New York. During that voyage, an electrogravitic research laboratory was established for him at the University of Pennsylvania, funded in part from the money on the USS Nashville. In 1939, Brown left the UofP to work as a material and process engineer at Glenn Martin Company (Lockheed Martin).

In 1940, the Navy called him back to head up a “mine sweeping research and development project” under the Bureau of Ships in Washington, DC, where he directed a staff of fifteen PhDs and had a budget of (coincidentally) nearly $50 million. Following the attack on Pearl Harbor, Brown was assigned to the Naval Operating Base in Norfolk, VA, as officer in charge of the Atlantic Fleet Radar Material School and Gyro-Compass School. In 1942, he was assigned to disassemble his equipment at the UofP and transfer it to Norfolk.

However, before his assignment to the Atlantic Fleet Radar School, Brown was assigned to the Philadelphia Navy Yard as an assistant machinery superintendent for “outfitting new ships”. This would have placed him in Philadelphia during the time when the USS Eldridge DE 173 was being outfitted for the infamous Philadelphia Experiment. When asked about his involvement in the experiment later in life, Brown said he “was not permitted to talk about that part of his work” and “much of what has been written about the project is grossly exaggerated”. Brown “retired” from the Navy in late 1943 due to a “nervous collapse”. One has to wonder if the collapse was due to the reportedly tragic events of the Philadelphia Experiment.

In 1944, Brown went to work for Lockheed Vega Aircraft in the Advanced Projects Unit (Skunk Works). In his spare time, he continued to conduct research with funding from his Townsend Brown Foundation. In 1952, he wrote a proposal urging the Navy to fund a highly secret project to develop a manned flying saucer as the basis of an interceptor aircraft with Mach 3 capability, Project Winterhaven. That proposal was never funded, probably due to highly classified work on electrogravitics already in progress.
oboe
On A Quest for Reality
On A Quest for Reality
 
Posts: 146
Joined: Tue Jun 29, 2010 10:04 pm


Re: ANTIGRAVITY

Postby oboe » Fri Mar 18, 2011 5:38 am

"Imagine a spaceship that could alter the ambient gravitational field, artificially producing a matter-attracting, gravity-potential well that was just beyond the ship's bow. The gravity well's attractive force would tug the ship forward just as if a massive planet-sized body had been placed ahead of it. The ship would begin to "fall" forward and, in doing so, would carry its self-generated gravity well along with it. The gravity well would continually draw the ship forward, while always staying ahead. Through such a carrot-and-stick effect, the ship could accelerate to nearly the speed of light, or maybe even beyond, with essentially no expenditure of energy other than that needed to generate the gravity well.

Is such gravity control possible? Would it be possible to construct a spaceship with small enough propulsion power requirements that interstellar travel could be achieved? The answer is yes. For the past several decades, highly classified aerospace programs in the United States and in several other countries have been developing aircraft capable of defying gravity. One form of this technology can loft a craft on matter-repelling energy beams. This exotic technology falls under the relatively obscure field of research known as electrogravitics."

From "Secrets of Antigravity Propulsion", pages 1-2.

As Will Smith's character said in the film "Independence Day", "I gotta get me one of those!"
oboe
On A Quest for Reality
On A Quest for Reality
 
Posts: 146
Joined: Tue Jun 29, 2010 10:04 pm

Re: ANTIGRAVITY

Postby Buckwild » Fri Mar 18, 2011 8:48 am

Hi there,

OMG, this goes from the Befield-Brown effect and probably the Lifter's experiments (by J.L Naudin) to the B-2 conspiracy theories...Too bad he didn't mention MHD propulsion systems and Aurora secret plane with the donuts on a rope contrails... :mrgreen:

There's no such thing as antigravity ! Read this document and you'll undestand :

Conclusions

A series of careful tests have been performed on Asymmetrical Capacitor Thrusters
(ACTs). In the past, several mechanisms have been proposed for the thrust that they produce.
These mechanisms were considered, both on theoretical grounds and by comparison with test
results. All of the mechanisms considered were eliminated except one. A simple model was
developed of ions drifting from one electrode to the other under electrostatic forces, and
imparting momentum to air as they underwent multiple collisions. This model was found to be
consistent with all of our observations. It predicted the magnitude of the force (thrust) that was
measured. It also predicted how the direction of the thrust changed when the location of the
ground wire changed. Furthermore, it also predicted that the direction of the thrust was
independent of the polarity of the applied voltage. Finally, it qualitatively predicted how the
magnitude of the thrust varied as the design of the ACT (its shape, etc.) varied, over many
such design changes. It may be concluded that that the ion drift model explains how a thrust is
developed by ions pushing on air. Tests were also performed in nitrogen and argon, and were
performed at reduced pressures. A thrust was also produced at moderately reduced pressures,
when the ACT produced a current flow without causing a breakdown of the air or other gas. In
spite of decades of speculation about possible new physical principles being responsible for the
thrust produced by ACTs and lifters, we find no evidence to support such a conclusion.
On the
contrary, we find that their operation is fully explained by a very simple theory that uses only
electrostatic forces and the transfer of momentum by multiple collisions.


Source : http://ntrs.nasa.gov/archive/nasa/casi. ... 178266.pdf

Cheers,
Buck
User avatar
Buckwild
On A Quest for Reality
On A Quest for Reality
 
Posts: 127
Joined: Thu Jan 13, 2011 1:01 am

Re: ANTIGRAVITY

Postby nablator » Fri Mar 18, 2011 12:39 pm

Buckwild wrote:Hi there,
There's no such thing as antigravity ! Read this document and you'll undestand :

Hi,

This does not disprove antigravity, as it is not the principle behind lifters (ACTs).

I haven't read the book yet, (but I will). So far there has been a lot of empty claims, empty promises and pseudoscience associated with antigravity. I'll believe antigravity propulsion is possible when I see a working craft, not just an experiment that is supposed to show a slight discrepancy with expected results.

The (unreplicated) results (by Eugene Podkletnov, Ning Li, Martin Tajmar) might indicate that GR is broken (entirely possible, and replacements have been proposed), but not necessarily that useful applications can be devised.
User avatar
nablator
On A Quest for Reality
On A Quest for Reality
 
Posts: 148
Joined: Wed Dec 08, 2010 9:44 am

Re: ANTIGRAVITY

Postby Buckwild » Fri Mar 18, 2011 3:28 pm

Hi Nab',

Basement physicists think that the Befield-Brown effect is Anti-gravity, I did not make it up, see for yourself :
http://freeenergynews.com/Directory/Lifter/

Anti-gravity is a generic term for these people and when I say that there's no such thing as anti-gravity, I am saying that there are theories out there, but nothing has given good experimental results. At least, not that I know of. People that do not agree (conspiracy theories folks) will sure say that I am wrong.

Cheers,
Buck
User avatar
Buckwild
On A Quest for Reality
On A Quest for Reality
 
Posts: 127
Joined: Thu Jan 13, 2011 1:01 am

Re: ANTIGRAVITY

Postby nablator » Fri Mar 18, 2011 4:22 pm

I know. But this is different. Educated crackpottery. Yummy. :mrgreen:

This LaViolette is an interesting character. Fringe physics and CT claims. Reminds me of our national hero Jean-Pierre Petit.
User avatar
nablator
On A Quest for Reality
On A Quest for Reality
 
Posts: 148
Joined: Wed Dec 08, 2010 9:44 am

Re: ANTIGRAVITY

Postby oboe » Sat Mar 26, 2011 6:51 am

Buckwild wrote:Hi there,

There's no such thing as antigravity ! Read this document and you'll undestand :

Source : http://ntrs.nasa.gov/archive/nasa/casi. ... 178266.pdf

Cheers,
Buck


I read the article. Is the article supposed to disprove antigravity theory, any of them? If so, the author didn't do a very good job.

If the Biefield-Brown models aren't antigravity, why did the US (and quite possibly British) government spend so much money on antigravity research? It was openly talked about in the 40s and most of the 50s, whether or not a company had a government contract, until there was a breakthrough in the research. Then, sometime around 1959, it all went hush-hush and none of the government-contracted companies doing research openly talked about it anymore.
oboe
On A Quest for Reality
On A Quest for Reality
 
Posts: 146
Joined: Tue Jun 29, 2010 10:04 pm

Re: ANTIGRAVITY

Postby chrLz » Sat Mar 26, 2011 10:29 pm

oboe wrote:If the Biefield-Brown models aren't antigravity, why did the US (and quite possibly British) government spend so much money on antigravity research?

Errr, perhaps because they thought there might be some way of 'doing' antigravity, and felt it was worth a few dollars to investigate?

It was openly talked about in the 40s and most of the 50s

So were fairies, elves, Donald Duck, dragons...

whether or not a company had a government contract, until there was a breakthrough in the research.

Which breakthrough was that, then? Please give all of your evidence for making that claim.

Then, sometime around 1959, it all went hush-hush

How do you tell the difference between going 'hush hush' and the project being wound down as it was unsuccessful and they figured that eventually - if there was something to it - that other research might lead to it? If you have evidence for something being found and then covered up, please supply it.

and none of the government-contracted companies doing research openly talked about it anymore.

How do you tell the difference between that, and the projects being wound down... and science as a whole better understanding how gravity works and what it actually is.. and how it *isn't* just a matter of finding some amazing 'secret'.

BTW, all objects that move up and away from our planet (even me as i get up from this seat..) use one or more of the many *existing* A-G techniques...
"To wear the mantle of Galileo, it is not enough that you be persecuted by an unkind establishment. You must also be right." - Robert L. Park (..almost)
User avatar
chrLz
Moderator
 
Posts: 258
Joined: Tue Nov 09, 2010 9:47 am

Re: ANTIGRAVITY

Postby Buckwild » Sun Mar 27, 2011 9:55 am

oboe wrote:I read the article. Is the article supposed to disprove antigravity theory, any of them? If so, the author didn't do a very good job.


This study & experiments demonstrated that :

In spite of decades of speculation about possible new physical principles being responsible for the
thrust produced by ACTs and lifters, we find no evidence to support such a conclusion. On the
contrary, we find that their operation is fully explained by a very simple theory that uses onlyelectrostatic forces and the transfer of momentum by multiple collisions.


Lifters for basement physicists = anti-gravity. Now, tell me why do you think they "didn't do a very good job". Are you gonna present a rebuttal or should we just trust/believe you without any demonstration ?


Cheers,
Buck
User avatar
Buckwild
On A Quest for Reality
On A Quest for Reality
 
Posts: 127
Joined: Thu Jan 13, 2011 1:01 am

Re: ANTIGRAVITY

Postby Access Denied » Tue Mar 29, 2011 5:40 am

oboe wrote:I’m currently reading “Secrets of Antigravity Propulsion: Tesla, UFOs, and Classified Aerospace Technology”. I'm no techno-geek, just interested in this kind of stuff. (I would have been a physicist but I can't do the math.) This book I find fascinating because of its implications, anti-gravity travel and nearly free energy.

From the cover: "In Secrets of Antigravity Propulsion, physicist Paul LaViolette reveals the secret history of antigravity experimentation...

[sigh]

A little research on your part would go a long way towards avoiding being taken in by the charlatans who promote these kind of psuedoscientific antigravity fairy tales. From the September 2002 issue of The Newsletter of The North Texas Skeptics for example…

http://www.ntskeptics.org/2002/2002sept ... er2002.htm

[quoting Bob Park’s former What's New column at the APS]

Book review: "The Hunt for Zero Point," by Nick Cook
If this book is about controlling gravity, what's with the "zero point"? The confusion is natural; both lie within the province of fringe scientists who haven't a clue of where the real world stops and the fantasy world of Atlantis and UFO's begins. Cook is not a scientist of any sort; in his world, these guys are the insiders. Don't look for them in the pages of Phys Rev; they're not a bunch of pointy-headed academics. They are part of the black world of really important top secret stuff like — well, electrogravitics. So who exactly fed Nick Cook this enormous pile of horse manure? If you're a regular reader of WN, you've already met them all.

Cook book: "fresh air" offers a recipe for stale baloney.
Two weeks ago, WN dumped as much cold water as one page can hold on the anti-gravity nonsense stirred up by Nick Cook's goofy book, "The Hunt for Zero Point." We braced for sensational stories in the National Enquirer and on Art Bell, but where does Cook turn up? Gasp, on NPR's Fresh Air. "I am not a scientist," Nick Cook admits in a brilliant understatement, "but I enlisted some help." So who did he enlist? "There are scientists working right on the cutting edge...Dr.Hal Puthoff is pioneering this whole zero point energy field..." Well, there's a name we know. One of the first scientists to vouch for spoon-bender Uri Geller, Puthoff headed the CIA's remote viewing program, and is said to have sent his own mind to explore the surface of the planet Mercury (WN 11 Mar 94). Guest host Barbara Bogaev, who also is not a scientist, asks how anti-gravity machines work? They all spin, Nick Cook explains. "Some theories say if you spin this zero point energy field that exists all around us, some weird and magical things start popping out, one of which is an anti-gravitational effect." There you have it — an authoritative explanation on NPR.

Anti-gravity: A gravity shield would be very nice, but...
Never has an idea with no prospect for success so captivated corporate research managers who either never studied or never understood the most basic laws of physics. Both Boeing in the US and BAE Systems, the British aerospace giant, are trying to make the Podkletnov gravity shield work. BAE has already been at it for two years (WN 31 Mar 00), with no success. When NASA couldn't make the Podkletnov shield work, they invested another million dollars (WN 22 Jan 99). When it still didn't work, they decided the tests were "inconclusive" and sank another mil into it (WN 12 Oct 01). I have identified seven warning signs of bad science http://www.bobpark.org/ [dead link from original article updated -AD]. The Podkletnov gravity shield fits all seven. So why would Boeing choose to spend millions to test a ridiculous claim by an obscure Russian physicist that has failed every test and is a physical impossibility to begin with? OK, so the Pentagon is paying for it. But there's also this goofy book by Nick Cook, who writes for Jane's Defense Weekly.

Fringe: Where everything is secret, and nothing is impossible.
When Cook set out on his search for "the biggest secret since the atom bomb," he went straight to the Integrity Research Institute, in Washington, DC, where you can buy books and videos with titles like "Holistic Physics and Consciousness" (WN 5 Mar 99). IRI is really Tom Valone, a former patent examiner who lost his job in the fallout from the Conference on Free Energy (WN 21 May 99). He had recruited Paul LaViolette, who claims the B-2 uses anti-gravity, reverse engineered from a crashed flying saucer. He was also fired (WN 18 Aug 00). They sent Cook to the Institute for Advanced Study. Not the one in Princeton; the one in Austin, TX. It consists of Harold Puthoff, who wants to extract energy from the zero point of the vacuum. He used to run the CIA's "remote viewing" program, which was inspired by "Mind Reach," a book he wrote with Russell Targ (WN 11 Mar 94). Finally, Cook sought advice from Charles Platt, founder of CryoCare, a company that keeps human heads bobbing in liquid nitrogen until scientists can figure out how to restart them (WN 21 Jul 00).

If I said it once, I said it a million times… all roads lead to Scammers Inc.

[for those who don’t know, Hal Puthoff’s Aviary name, given to him by Bill Moore as one of his “anonymous insiders” during the MJ-12 hoax à la Serpo, is “Owl”]

AD

P.S. And so as not to reinvent the wheel, I suggest you read the Gordon Novel's RAM thread starting at the bottom of the first page and let us know if you still have any questions when you’re done.
Men go and come but Earth abides.
User avatar
Access Denied
1 of the RU3
 
Posts: 2740
Joined: Tue Jan 09, 2007 7:32 am
Location: [redacted]

Re: ANTIGRAVITY

Postby jjflash » Wed Apr 06, 2011 12:39 pm

Access Denied wrote:If I said it once, I said it a million times… all roads lead to Scammers Inc.


True enough, AD, true enough. While a reasonable argument can be made that all things out of the ordinary cannot yet be easily explained, your statement is nonetheless accurate enough, for all practical purposes, in its implications that ufology and Scammers Inc. are currently rather synonymous.
jjflash
 
Posts: 39
Joined: Sat Oct 09, 2010 7:40 pm

Re: ANTIGRAVITY

Postby savvys84 » Sat May 14, 2011 8:48 am

In my opinion Anti Gravity is possible, based on my own research in this field.
savvys84
 
Posts: 4
Joined: Tue Apr 12, 2011 7:58 am

Re: ANTIGRAVITY

Postby Access Denied » Sat May 14, 2011 8:42 pm

What research would that be?
Men go and come but Earth abides.
User avatar
Access Denied
1 of the RU3
 
Posts: 2740
Joined: Tue Jan 09, 2007 7:32 am
Location: [redacted]

Re: ANTIGRAVITY

Postby RICH-ENGLAND » Sat May 14, 2011 9:19 pm

that would be this research wouldn't it savvys84.....

a word of advice before you start with your ridiculous bs, this is not ATS, you will be very swiftly removed from this site if you fail to answer questions and back up your claims....

a couple of pictures of savvys84's (supposed) anti gravity free energy teleportation time warp device...(thats before we get onto the stargates, scalar weapons and LIZARDS)...

ps) have you learned the difference between mass and weight yet?....

thanks

rich
Attachments
905ba95d840f.jpg
905ba95d840f.jpg (45.33 KiB) Viewed 5610 times
fa35bde28552.jpg
fa35bde28552.jpg (52.12 KiB) Viewed 5610 times
ATS HAS TURNED INTO A "BALLOONATIC" ASYLUM
User avatar
RICH-ENGLAND
Focused on Reality
Focused on Reality
 
Posts: 343
Joined: Mon Nov 29, 2010 4:06 am

Re: ANTIGRAVITY

Postby Access Denied » Sat May 14, 2011 10:35 pm

Oh my, looks like an accident waiting to happen...
Men go and come but Earth abides.
User avatar
Access Denied
1 of the RU3
 
Posts: 2740
Joined: Tue Jan 09, 2007 7:32 am
Location: [redacted]

Next

Google

Return to Science & Technology

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 7 guests

cron