Will be releasing exact method of UFO propulsion very soon.

[Gambeir]

A magnet is the result of crystals forming an incoherent dielectic energy field into a coherent dielectric energy field, and which circulates through a point; whereas the field is introduced in to the magnet as an incoherent energy field by surrounding space, and which is all around us at all times and is everywhere in the Universe at the same time.

Thus the background of creation is the dielectric counterspatial energy field since it is only by the recirculation of this energy through a point source which brings about a magnetic field in all matter, however weakly it may be, and that quality of creating a condensed magnetic power is the result of cystalline structures and formations in specfic forms of matter.

In the video above, mutual mass attraction is formed by two point sources. The field does not have to be coherent for the mutal mass attraction to take place. Only the creation of source or foci point in mass is necessary. Eventually in matter a point sorce will open to create an organized coherent magnetic field. Understand? In other words, you do not have to have a special set of crystals to make a magnetic field, obviously, and you also do not need a coherent counterspatial field creating a mangnetic field for masses to have a point source that produces a coherent magnetic field either. All matter has a center point by geometry which is the point source (the point of foci for incoherent dielectric energies).

(Read Wheelers book) The incoherent dielectic field are the tublars of Michael Faraday. Conterspace moves through matter unimpeded as a form of superfluid, but like fluid it is perturbed by the presence of matter and creates vortices, which form inwards sprials (Carl Fredrik Krafft). This forms a foci point in all matter where dielectric energies are focused.That focui point is the center of mass. It is the center of mass because the perturbed energies of the dielectric field, which is a hyper velocity field billions of times faster than light sets up a recirculation cycle and begins to form lines of coherent dieletric energy.

So what Wheeler is talking about with the point source business is that the point source exists in all matter because all matter has a magnetic field of some kind, therefore it has a point source, and when two masses come with in range of each other's circulating dielectric fields (the magnetic fields) they will try to join just like any other magnet will want to link up. Put enough dirt together and pretty soon you've got a coherent magnetic field like earth's. So mutual mass attraction is really what we might simply call a magnetic field effect, but of course that's not really accurate which I took the trouble to expain this in detail.

 

[Dejan Corovic]

________________

 

[Gambeir]

Dejan, so you're not getting how this fits in? Is that it? Well you should see, at least if you want to, because you're mind is excellent and has already seen what it can based on your existing knowledge.

The way your groups is trying to find the solution is insanely complex, and it incorporates mistaken notions about gravity as a field; which is not a force according to Einstein, but which produces weight in matter. Wheeler as well as others have shown with complete logic, undeniably so, that the foundations of GTR are wrong. I already posted a video (I think) where Ken gives you five of the seven factors that can change weight in mass. Gravity is not a field and it does not create magnetism either. Magnetism is the product of a Dielectric Counter Spatial Field, and a field is by defintion a universal force. That is not what gravity is, it is not a universal force. Wheeler has proven beyond any possible doubt that the magnetic field is produced by a dielectric field which is the backdrop to creation.

Dejan;
" Now, my idea was that super fast rotation of molecules, at like 2.4GHz which is 2,400,000,000 times per second, general relativity would kick in and fast spinning atomic nuclei would invoke gravito-magnetic effects (predicted by GTR and confirmed by NASA with Gravitational Probe B satellite)."

Your own logic is precise and clear. It's logical and sensible in every way and shows you have a depth of knowledge. Einstein's is another matter, and that's what this information I've posted is intended to help you understand, and if you incorporate it into what you already know you're going to be way ahead of where you are right now. Even if you guys have succeeded, which I think possibly you have.

So I did think your thoughts on how this works was very interesting and perceptive on your part. Nothing wrong with your logic that I can see. So that's not the problem. Now I worked all AM to put this illustration together. The idea here is to show a simple projection of the path taken by the dielectric field through matter. Omitting electrical and magnetic effect's. I'm hoping this may spark some connections to your original deductions about accelerated energies.

 

[Gambeir]

Here, let Wheeler tell you what I think about Einstein's physics as well as a little more about what's wrong with it. Ken just kills me...Lol~

 

[Dejan Corovic]

I really can't comment. I am only human and my resources are very limited. I simply don't have so much time to go through that much material.

I much prefer sticking with Einstein because he had been tested to 1 part in 10,000, under wide variety of cirvumstances. GTR my not be the final answer, but it certainly can't be called "wrong".

There must be a link between GTR and quantum mechanics, because gravity clearly must have a source on atomic scale. That source is very likely atomic nuclei, because it is so heavy and dense. I guess that problem of linking GTR with a QM is purely a problem with currently used mathematical descriptions, not a problem of principle.

 

[Gambeir]

I really can't comment. I am only human and my resources are very limited. I simply don't have so much time to go through that much material.

I much prefer sticking with Einstein because he had been tested to 1 part in 10,000, under wide variety of cirvumstances. GTR my not be the final answer, but it certainly can't be called "wrong".

There must be a link between GTR and quantum mechanics, because gravity clearly must have a source. That source is very likely atomic nuclei, because it is so heavy and dense. I guess that problem of linking GTR with a QM is purely a problem with currently used mathematical descriptions, not a problem of principle.

Ah...Yea...gravity has a source...what do you think I'm trying to show you? Just forget this other nonsense until you have a foundation to look upon those things like quantum whatevers because they are not accidental creations. You're living in a criminally operated reality right now. If you can succeed in breaking how AG works that reality will collapse. Now do you think those ruling elites want that? That's why there's a GTR, that' why they don't teach any science history, that' why when you look up Oleg D. Jefimenko - Wikipedia you're going read derogitory insulting and degrading things about him, now it's a little better, but it was truly offensive a while back.

You don't need to forget or relearn anything, everything you know outside of GTR is basically right, and besides it's all we have right now, but GTR is corrupt and wrong. It's not going to help but exactly the opposite.

Look, you have to realize that GTR was created to obscure how gravity is created, and that's just one part of a cavalcade of lies that have been told to maintain the illusion that GTR is rational and explains gravity. If you would just listen to wheeler instead of a Nazi stooge then you would understand where gravity comes from. GTR ties in with national security as a means to deny anti-gravity technology. The Germans had this worked out, and the theories underlying how it works were formed around the turn of the century. All you have to do is to follow the historical research going from first efforts to creat helium then to liquid cooled magnets and then to cyclotrons/microwave.

Liquid helium because the theory of counterspace was that it was a fluid, a superfluid because of the way matter behaves, and so work began on creating liquid helium in large quanties, and all that began before 1900. By the 1920's Tesla had announced that he had created an antigravity saucer but was bankrupted by J.P. Morgan and being kept penniless.

The historical evidence supporting that this technology was fully realized by no later than the mid 1950's in the US is beyond reasonable doubt. It wasn't done with GTR theory, it was done just using Ether Theory, the theory which predates Einsteins overthrow of ether physics with the help of the accomplice education system and mass media.

Besides that, creating a gravity field, assuming you can do it somehow, is only a small part of the battle. You have to figure out how to vector the field or use it as a repulsion field and how you could that with what you're working with is beyond me.

 

[Gambeir]

I'll tell you what, you can PM me when you have some questions why such and such isn't working and if I can help I will, but right now I don't think I'm helping you. I think you're going to beat your heads on this until youre ready to listen to reason.

 

[Shadowprophet]

I will say this about Antigravity then I'm out,

The problem we have with Discussing Antigravity here at these forums is Everyone thinks they have the answers, But no one is sighting legitimate math on the subjets. Don't' get me wrong, I'm not saying people don't understand the math, What I'm saying is, Without that math, No theory, No doohicky No thingamabob will cut it. The math must be intact to explain how the task is carried out

The closest we have ever come empirically to Antigravity is well documented A Kinemassic field generator does what it says, It generates a secondary gravitational field in an effort to cancel out gravity.

Henry Wallace: Kinemassic Force Field

"kinemassic field" generator from U.S. Patent 3,626,605:

You can look that number up here, patft » Page 1 of 1

Now, this is a patented product, However, It's never surfaced or even seen the light of day. Maybe it's top-secret, Maybe it doesn't work, maybe it was another failed idea. But if Thomas has Taught me one thing Really well, It's that before you accept something as an empirical fact, You need empirical proof. And No such proof of antigravity exists on this planet. What I have displayed in this post is as close to empirical evidence of antigravity that exists. And This isn't empirical. This is an Equation, You can say anything in mathmatical form, And a functioning Kinemassic field generator has never surfaced. I'm sorry, I don't say a lot on this topic, Because I don't like killing peoples idea of fun.

Done deal, I'm done with antigravity.

 

[Shadowprophet]

I will add this if anyone wants to hear it, This is an opinion, To counteract the earth's gravity, would require more power than it's realistically possible at a local source, See one wouldn't have to compensate for the Object they are trying to negate, No, They would have to Match and negate the entire earth's gravitational force to be able to push away from the object. Hear me out, Imagine a black hole, This black hole pulls everything in even light, So, The gravitational force the Blackhole is exerting is from an unimaginably dense force, Mass and density are important concepts to antigravity I'd imagine. Now, What Kind of Force would a craft have to exert to escape a black hole? More than counteracting its own weight. It would have to outpower the gravitational pull of that black hole in its totality to escape it.

So no matter what force is used to counteract an objects own weight it's not really negating the gravitational pull of that black hole. To achieve antigravity we would have to be able to completely counteract gravity which means matching the density of an object and counteracting it. You show me an object on this earth that possess the total density of our planet and it's people then take this object and move it to another place, Then the earth would follow the gravitational pull of this object. Until mankind can harness this kind of power, we will be flying plains and drones and jets and rockets to get places.


For a scientist and a ufologist, There are "strangelets" Strangelet - Wikipedia These are tiny hypothetical microscopic black holes that form inside particle accelerators, So, It's possible that a mass of energy could be cycled at an acceleration speed to match such a gravity. But, such technology I can't possibly imagine Such technology would be possible by us humans. Not at this stage in our development, Whatever UFO's are using to achieve their flight, It's As far beyond us as a Quantum computer is to a caveman.

 

[Gambeir]

I will add this if anyone wants to hear it, This is an opinion, To counteract the earth's gravity, would require more power than it's realistically possible at a local source, See one wouldn't have to compensate for the Object they are trying to negate, No, They would have to Match and negate the entire earth's gravitational force to be able to push away from the object. Hear me out, Imagine a black hole, This black hole pulls everything in even light, So, The gravitational force the Blackhole is exerting is from an unimaginably dense force, Mass and density are important concepts to antigravity I'd imagine. Now, What Kind of Force would a craft have to exert to escape a black hole? More than counteracting its own weight. It would have to outpower the gravitational pull of that black hole in its totality to escape it.

So no matter what force is used to counteract an objects own weight it's not really negating the gravitational pull of that black hole. To achieve antigravity we would have to be able to completely counteract gravity which means matching the density of an object and counteracting it. You show me an object on this earth that possess the total density of our planet and it's people then take this object and move it to another place, Then the earth would follow the gravitational pull of this object. Until mankind can harness this kind of power, we will be flying plains and drones and jets and rockets to get places.


For a scientist and a ufologist, There are "strangelets" Strangelet - Wikipedia These are tiny hypothetical microscopic black holes that form inside particle accelerators, So, It's possible that a mass of energy could be cycled at an acceleration speed to match such a gravity. But, such technology I can't possibly imagine Such technology would be possible by us humans. Not at this stage in our development, Whatever UFO's are using to achieve their flight, It's As far beyond us as a Quantum computer is to a caveman.

Well, I'm glad you are saying what you think but you're wrong on some prime points Shadowprophet. So unless Corovick feels otherwise I don't think you don't need to shut up, what you need to do is to just open up. Now to Corovic I want him to know I'm trying to bring someone here so that all the electron suckers can hold hands and sing Kumbaya: Couldn't hurt is my feeling.

Look, I've been down the Einsteinain Path. Don't ya think I've been down that road? I'm retired now from a couple carriers, but with a lifetime of working around cops, and the ABC agencies: You guys aren't experienced dealing either with criminals or with systems of power. I am and you have problems. As judge Judy said; Listen to me, if a story doesn't make sense than it's not true.

Anti-gravity machines don't make sense to you because they are judged on the basis of their relationship to GTR. Yet again, look at it from my perspective; if you robbed a bank, and I have you in an interview room and you're claiming it's not you, then I show you the video and you still claim it's not you, then what am I to conclude?

OK, either it is you or it isn't you right? GTR is a bank robber and that's all there is to it. The fact that it all seems so logical and mathematically proveable doesn't prove it's anything more than another complex criminal scheme. I don't imagine you can see that and it's ok if you don't, but you cannot deny reality either. UFO's are real and some form of physics must explain them right? Don't you think I've tried six ways to Sunday and back to figure out some way to explain how to create one with conventional ideas? Thousands, if not millions of others have done the exact same thing and all have failed misserably. Yet again; look, there goes another UFO. Now do you understand?

I'm telling you to stop being pigheaded and to start listening to Wheeler. You're going to regret it if you don't. Trust me, I only wish I'd have known about him sooner, would have saved me one heck of alot of late night hours.

So now I showed you Ken's video where he shows and tells you a little bit about his devices, which are protected, but I think with a little study would make you realize what this is about and give meaning and understanding where right now there appears to be none at all and that almost criminal with so much potential sitting here spinning it's wheels in the exact same location that it's been in for at least 100 years.

Math: Nobody sat down and started making mathematical calculations to make model airplanes Shadowprophet. Most times that's not where the beginng begins. Models have always been the first steps. There has been at least one antigravity model which has been shown on Youtube: A lot of deniers but then so what? Again all the deniers understand is GTR.

Math may be pure but humans aren't and there's the rub. Again, no experience dealing with crafty criminals is all I can say. I repeat, anti-gravity does not work off of the ideas and sets of rules imposed by GTR and I can say that complete confidence since obviously there are UFO's and since GTR cannot explain these without resorting fantastical explanations which are just absurd.

Even Corovic stated that what they were working with would impose significant modifications on GTR. I said that the way they were going about this was insanely complex and I stand by my words.

If you want to see what a black hole really is then get a ferrocell viewer. I don't see anyone being sucked into magnets.
This idea that there's black holes isn't fantasy, but it's not what you think it is either, again go back to criminally operated for profit educational system directed under national secruity and directly linked to UFO technology. UFO's and the National Security State.

I'm sure youre all aware of Alexey Chekurkov
Alexey Chekurkov
This video is over a year old now. Splain this? Of course strings right? Why didn't I think of that.

 

[Shadowprophet]

Well, I'm glad you are saying what you think but you're wrong on some prime points Shadowprophet. So unless Corovick feels otherwise I don't think you don't need to shut up, what you need to do is to just open up. Now to Corovic I want him to know I'm trying to bring someone here so that all the electron suckers can hold hands and sing Kumbaya: Couldn't hurt is my feeling.

Look, I've been down the Einsteinain Path. Don't ya think I've been down that road? I'm retired now from a couple carriers, but with a lifetime of working around cops, and the ABC agencies: You guys aren't experienced dealing either with criminals or with systems of power. I am and you have problems. As judge Judy said; Listen to me, if a story doesn't make sense than it's not true. Anti-gravity machines don't make sense to you because they are judged on the basis of their relationship to GTR. Yet again, look at it from my perspective; if you robbed a bank, and I have you in an interview room and you're claiming it's not you, then I show you the video and you still claim it's not you, then what am I to conclude?

OK, either it is you or it isn't you right? GTR is a bank robber and that's all there is to it. The fact that it all seems so logical and mathematically proveable doesn't prove it's anything more than another complex criminal scheme. I don't imagine you can see that and it's ok if you don't, but you cannot deny reality either. UFO's are real and some form of physics must explain them right? Don't you think I've tried six ways to Sunday and back to figure out some way to explain how to create one with conventional ideas? Thousands, if not millions of others have done the exact same thing and all have failed misserably. Yet again; look, there goes another UFO. Now do you understand?

I'm telling you to stop being pigheaded and to start listening to Wheeler. You're going to regret it if you don't. Trust me, I only wish I'd have known about him sooner, would have saved me one heck of alot of late night hours.

So now I showed you Ken's video where he shows and tells you a little bit about his devices, which are protected, but I think with a little study would make you realize what this is about and give meaning and understanding where right now there appears to be none at all and that almost criminal with so much potential sitting here spinning it's wheels in the exact same location that it's been in for at least 100 years.

Math: Nobody sat down and started making mathematical calculations to make model airplanes Shadowprophet. Most times that's not where the beginng begins. Models have always been the first steps. There has been at least one antigravity model which has been shown on Youtube: A lot of deniers but then so what? Again all the deniers understand is GTR.

Math may be pure but humans aren't and there's the rub. Again, no experience dealing with crafty criminals is all I can say. I repeat, anti-gravity does not work off of the ideas and sets of rules imposed by GTR and I can say that complete confidence since obviously there are UFO's and since GTR cannot explain these without resorting fantastical explanations which are just absurd.

Even Corovic stated that what they were working with would impose significant modifications on GTR. I said that the way they were going about this was insanely complex and I stand by my words.

If you want to see what a black hole really is then get a ferrocell viewer. I don't see anyone being sucked into magnets.
This idea that there's black holes isn't fantasy, but it's not what you think it is either, again go back to criminally operated for profit educational system directed under national secruity and directly linked to UFO technology. UFO's and the National Security State.

I'm sure youre all aware of Alexey Chekurkov
Alexey Chekurkov
This video is over a year old now. Splain this? Of course strings right? Why didn't I think of that.

Well, of course, I have to read, what you are witnessing is called the Biefeld–Brown effect Biefeld–Brown effect - Wikipedia What you are witnessing is, in fact, a real phenomenon, but you have to understand why it does this, This video is an example of the air being polarized around the object this object is using great electricity, To generate an ionic thrust. The problem with this method is the payout, To lift, an object in this methods requires a lot of energy, You will notice they never touched the craft in levitation, this was because they would have literally burst into flames and died if they had. The problem with this effect it, To understand it, What's happening here is the atmosphere around the object is being ionized so dramatically that it's creating an uplift.

It seems like antigravity, But no this isn't, This is air propulsion. There would be a lot of ionic wind, The distinction between Baifeld Brown and antigravity must be noted. These ionic updrafts Must be considered in resources spent. The kind of energy needed to allow a craft the size of a plain to achieve this ionic updraft would be the output of the sun bro. This kind of technology will only ever lift small drones. maybe road signs, It's not the kind of technology that would make a great propulsion system, Imagine the energy we would need to create ionic drift at an output capable of levitating heavy objects. we would have to be able to harness lightning. Look people may think this is practical for application on spacecraft, but we are talking Nuclear reactors would not be able to output the kind of power we would need to power something like that for practical application.

This guy is floating aluminum cans using enough electricity to fry a chicken nugget the size of a bus instantly.

This technology is neat, but it's not going to be powering transportation for a long long time.

 

[Thomas R. Morrison]

I will say this about Antigravity then I'm out,

The problem we have with Discussing Antigravity here at these forums is Everyone thinks they have the answers, But no one is sighting legitimate math on the subjets. Don't' get me wrong, I'm not saying people don't understand the math, What I'm saying is, Without that math, No theory, No doohicky No thingamabob will cut it. The math must be intact to explain how the task is carried out

That's why I won't debate the aether theory - without an equation which replicates the same (confirmed to within observational precision) predictive successes as GR, there's nothing to debate; a narrative is no substitute for a mathematical equation.

This is the wrong equation for this discussion: this is the second Friedmann equation, which predicts cosmological evolution from the isotropic fluid density of the universe.

This is the correct equation for discussing gravitation - the Einstein field equations, which are summarized by this form:


I don't usually cite the mathematical equations in these forum discussions because nobody here knows tensor calculus or differential geometry, so it's pointless. But there are some interesting features of the stress-energy-momentum tensor that we can sometimes talk about in conceptual terms, and shed light on the mechanisms that make GR and its predictions so interesting.

The closest we have ever come empirically to Antigravity is well documented A Kinemassic field generator does what it says, It generates a secondary gravitational field in an effort to cancel out gravity.

Henry Wallace: Kinemassic Force Field

"kinemassic field" generator from U.S. Patent 3,626,605:

You can look that number up here, patft » Page 1 of 1

Now, this is a patented product, However, It's never surfaced or even seen the light of day. Maybe it's top-secret, Maybe it doesn't work, maybe it was another failed idea. But if Thomas has Taught me one thing Really well, It's that before you accept something as an empirical fact, You need empirical proof. And No such proof of antigravity exists on this planet. What I have displayed in this post is as close to empirical evidence of antigravity that exists. And This isn't empirical. This is an Equation, You can say anything in mathmatical form, And a functioning Kinemassic field generator has never surfaced.

First of all, we have indisputable empirical proof of antigravity via the cosmological acceleration, which is usually attributed to "dark energy." So there's zero doubt that antigravity (which should be called "negative gravitation") exists in this universe, and it's blowing the cosmos up at ever faster rates.

Second, we've known since at least 1963 (via Robert L. Forward's landmark paper "Guidelines to Antigravity") that negative gravitation is an intrinsic feature of general relativity, and in that paper Dr. Forward even described a simple method for generating a dipolar gravitational field. So it's not some weird or mysterious type of field - it's every bit as natural as the ordinary positive gravitational fields that we're all familiar with. In fact you can't have one without the other - gravity is dipolar just as electricity is dipolar (and that's not all they have in common - mathematically they behave as analogues, at least in the weak field limit).

Finally - a patent is meaningless: the USPTO doesn't verify the theory behind a device. They're happy to take your money if you submit a properly fill-out patent application, regardless of the claims you're making for your proposed invention. The patent description of the device's operation reads like gibberish to me, and there's zero empirical evidence to support his claims.

I will add this if anyone wants to hear it, This is an opinion, To counteract the earth's gravity, would require more power than it's realistically possible at a local source, See one wouldn't have to compensate for the Object they are trying to negate, No, They would have to Match and negate the entire earth's gravitational force to be able to push away from the object. Hear me out, Imagine a black hole, This black hole pulls everything in even light, So, The gravitational force the Blackhole is exerting is from an unimaginably dense force, Mass and density are important concepts to antigravity I'd imagine. Now, What Kind of Force would a craft have to exert to escape a black hole? More than counteracting its own weight. It would have to outpower the gravitational pull of that black hole in its totality to escape it.

Sure, but the gravitational field of the Earth is pitifully weak - an ordinary magnet can overcome the gravitational field of the entire Earth.

But, such technology I can't possibly imagine Such technology would be possible by us humans. Not at this stage in our development, Whatever UFO's are using to achieve their flight, It's As far beyond us as a Quantum computer is to a caveman.

You're grossly overstating the disparity. In fact we already have two distinct gravitational field propulsion concepts which are couched in the mathematics of the general theory of relativity - the concepts are physically valid. It's only a matter of time before we figure out how to increase the coupling constant between mass-energy and spacetime, or to exploit some other means of manifesting significant gravitational field effects, so that we too can produce craft like these AAVs which have been reported all around the globe for many decades.

In my opinion it probably rests upon a single as-yet undiscovered breakthrough, akin to the discovery of ferromagnetism which launched the entire electronic revolution and spawned global civilization as we know it today.

 

[Shadowprophet]

That's why I won't debate the aether theory - without an equation which replicates the same (confirmed to within observational precision) predictive successes as GR, there's nothing to debate; a narrative is no substitute for a mathematical equation.

This is the wrong equation for this discussion: this is the second Friedmann equation, which predicts cosmological evolution from the isotropic fluid density of the universe.

This is the correct equation for discussing gravitation - the Einstein field equations, which are summarized by this form:
View attachment 7588

I don't usually cite the mathematical equations in these forum discussions because nobody here knows tensor calculus or differential geometry, so it's pointless. But there are some interesting features of the stress-energy-momentum tensor that we can sometimes talk about in conceptual terms, and shed light on the mechanisms that make GR and its predictions so interesting.


First of all, we have indisputable empirical proof of antigravity via the cosmological acceleration, which is usually attributed to "dark energy." So there's zero doubt that antigravity (which should be called "negative gravitation") exists in this universe, and it's blowing the cosmos up at ever faster rates.

Second, we've known since at least 1963 (via Robert L. Forward's landmark paper "Guidelines to Antigravity") that negative gravitation is an intrinsic feature of general relativity, and in that paper Dr. Forward even described a simple method for generating a dipolar gravitational field. So it's not some weird or mysterious type of field - it's every bit as natural as the ordinary positive gravitational fields that we're all familiar with. In fact you can't have one without the other - gravity is dipolar just as electricity is dipolar (and that's not all they have in common - mathematically they behave as analogues, at least in the weak field limit).

Finally - a patent is meaningless: the USPTO doesn't verify the theory behind a device. They're happy to take your money if you submit a properly fill-out patent application, regardless of the claims you're making for your proposed invention. The patent description of the device's operation reads like gibberish to me, and there's zero empirical evidence to support his claims.


Sure, but the gravitational field of the Earth is pitifully weak - an ordinary magnet can overcome the gravitational field of the entire Earth.


You're grossly overstating the disparity. In fact we already have two distinct gravitational field propulsion concepts which are couched in the mathematics of the general theory of relativity - the concepts are physically valid. It's only a matter of time before we figure out how to increase the coupling constant between mass-energy and spacetime, or to exploit some other means of manifesting significant gravitational field effects, so that we too can produce craft like these AAVs which have been reported all around the globe for many decades.

In my opinion it probably rests upon a single as-yet undiscovered breakthrough, akin to the discovery of ferromagnetism which launched the entire electronic revolution and spawned global civilization as we know it today.

Yea, That equation wasn't antigravity, IT was an acceleration of the universe. But, It was pretty and had great descriptors, I don't dispute at all that Dark matter is Antigravity, But it's not exactly a technological marvel of man either, We, Cant exactly, "Do Dark energy technologically" IS what I was meaning by that.

Those ordinary magnets that overcome the earth gravitational field, Are usually Rare earth magnets, Incradibally strong, Not refrigerator magnets. And I think they have to be cooled to near absolute zero, This causes a change in the state of the matter somehow, and it must also have a metal surface to interact with to achieve this.

I think this is the one you were meaning, I could be wrong.

Robert L. Forward's landmark paper "Guidelines to Antigravity" <--- This sounds awesome, I think I will look this up, Thank you, bro,

 

[Shadowprophet]

I will give you that point though Thomas, That magnet under those conditions does in fact counteract the earth's gravity. It's simply an amazing experiment.

 

[Gambeir]

Well, of course, I have to read, what you are witnessing is called the Biefeld–Brown effect Biefeld–Brown effect - Wikipedia What you are witnessing is, in fact, a real phenomenon, but you have to understand why it does this, This video is an example of the air being polarized around the object this object is using great electricity, To generate an ionic thrust. The problem with this method is the payout, To lift, an object in this methods requires a lot of energy, You will notice they never touched the craft in levitation, this was because they would have literally burst into flames and died if they had. The problem with this effect it, To understand it, What's happening here is the atmosphere around the object is being ionized so dramatically that it's creating an uplift.

It seems like antigravity, But no this isn't, This is air propulsion. There would be a lot of ionic wind, The distinction between Baifeld Brown and antigravity must be noted. These ionic updrafts Must be considered in resources spent. The kind of energy needed to allow a craft the size of a plain to achieve this ionic updraft would be the output of the sun bro. This kind of technology will only ever lift small drones. maybe road signs, It's not the kind of technology that would make a great propulsion system, Imagine the energy we would need to create ionic drift at an output capable of levitating heavy objects. we would have to be able to harness lightning. Look people may think this is practical for application on spacecraft, but we are talking Nuclear reactors would not be able to output the kind of power we would need to power something like that for practical application.

This guy is floating aluminum cans using enough electricity to fry a chicken nugget the size of a bus instantly.

This technology is neat, but it's not going to be powering transportation for a long long time.

Nope~ Now I realize you did say you have to read about it, but that explanation is utterly ridiculous- So now I'm to believe that while the best T. Townsend Brown could do was to drive some saucers around plyons on strings, suddenly here we have a self sustaining levitation device using the same principle, and evidently mixed with some sort of contrived half backed explanation about ion lifters? Please, I'm not entirely stupid.
An Inquiry in to the Alien Reproduction Vehicle - Energetic Forum

I like you too much, but that explanation was a complete and total fail, and no that's not what's happening. I realize you did say you would have to read it. So I have provided a link where you can find more information in English along with schematics. Of course there's many others in complete denial as well so you're not alone.
An Inquiry into Alexey Chekurkov’s Flying Discs and Replications - Energetic Forum


Our test pilot, head of an alternative energy group elsewhere on the planet, the one who was making the replication found at the above link is now disturbingly MIA. Not a stupid person I assure you. Probably now living in the forbidden zone of Pine Gap under lock and key most likely. After all Australia is now virtually a totalitarian police state so I wouldn't be surprised if that was actually true.

Assuming that we take what we are shown for face value, then once agin your programming has lead to basically a ridiculous explanation. I'm being totally honest with you about my impression of your explanation as well being gentle because it's actually far worse. Better me saying this to you now than having it rear up and bite you in the ass somewhere else. No, this is not ion propulsion, and it's not a biefeld brown drive, and the energy it uses comes from a 12 volt battery, in addition to a temporary hook up with a Tesla Coil, which is subsequently removed. I don't want to get too diverted here with Alexey but I presented it incase you folks had missed this.

Your ideas about the way this works are of course based on knee jerk reaction reply and you said so, but do not let it stop with that, you cannot continue to believe that is a viable explanation and still be taken seriously. It's absurd. I won't even address the ion explanation. Christ, I 've talked with people who have patents on ion drives, running successful businesses, who have spent their entire lives dedicated to trying to deciper how UFO's work using convention, unfortunately they are exactly like you and Morrison, completely brainwashed with GTR.

Morison says he won't debate the ether theory without a mathematical equation which only proves he is not qalified to judge the validity of anything. The math can be right and the whole theory can still be wrong. Please don't ever try to be a policeman as obviously simple crimes are far too complex to recognize. Christ almighty, I'ver heard stupid from lots of people but he can just piss off until he can figure that one out.

Shadowprophet if the underlying assumption that pins the foundation is itself wrong then the whole thing is wrong.

 

[Shadowprophet]

Nope~ Now I realize you did say you have to read about it, but that explanation is utterly ridiculous- So now I'm to believe that while the best T. Townsend Brown could do was to drive some saucers around plyons on strings, suddenly here we have a self sustaining levitation device using the same principle, and evidently mixed with some sort of contrived half backed explanation about ion lifters? Please, I'm not entirely stupid.
An Inquiry in to the Alien Reproduction Vehicle - Energetic Forum

I like you too much, but that explanation was a complete and total fail, and no that's not what's happening. I realize you did say you would have to read it. So I have provided a link where you can find more information in English along with schematics. Of course there's many others in complete denial as well so you're not alone.
An Inquiry into Alexey Chekurkov’s Flying Discs and Replications - Energetic Forum


Our test pilot, head of an alternative energy group elsewhere on the planet, the one who was making the replication found at the above link is now disturbingly MIA. Not a stupid person I assure you. Probably now living in the forbidden zone of Pine Gap under lock and key most likely. After all Australia is now virtually a totalitarian police state so I wouldn't be surprised if that was actually true.

Assuming that we take what we are shown for face value, then once agin your programming has lead to basically a ridiculous explanation. I'm being totally honest with you about my impression of your explanation as well being gentle because it's actually far worse. Better me saying this to you now than having it rear up and bite you in the ass somewhere else. No, this is not ion propulsion, and it's not a biefeld brown drive, and the energy it uses comes from a 12 volt battery, in addition to a temporary hook up with a Tesla Coil, which is subsequently removed. I don't want to get too diverted here with Alexey but I presented it incase you folks had missed this.

Your ideas about the way this works are of course based on knee jerk reaction reply and you said so, but do not let it stop with that, you cannot continue to believe that is a viable explanation and still be taken seriously. It's absurd. I won't even address the ion explanation. Christ, I 've talked with people who have patents on ion drives, running successful businesses, who have spent their entire lives dedicated to trying to deciper how UFO's work using convention, unfortunately they are exactly like you and Morrison, completely brainwashed with GTR.

The math can be right and the whole theory can still be wrong Shadowprophet if the underlying assumption that pins the foundation is itself wrong. You're ideas about what causes gravity are fundamentally in error. It's a proven fact so far as I'm concerned and I'm not alone.

I'm telling you, brother, That's ionic wind propulsion, However, the guy touched the craft while in flight, So, I'm assuming he was standing on a rubber platform, or something, That is an example of Beifeild Brown effect brother. if you watch the video he explains how he's using a car battery and a power supply with a voltage regulator, the power is sent through the wire into the craft.

This is an electric Kite, That's what it is bro.

 

[Shadowprophet]

Nope~ Now I realize you did say you have to read about it, but that explanation is utterly ridiculous- So now I'm to believe that while the best T. Townsend Brown could do was to drive some saucers around plyons on strings, suddenly here we have a self sustaining levitation device using the same principle, and evidently mixed with some sort of contrived half backed explanation about ion lifters? Please, I'm not entirely stupid.
An Inquiry in to the Alien Reproduction Vehicle - Energetic Forum

I like you too much, but that explanation was a complete and total fail, and no that's not what's happening. I realize you did say you would have to read it. So I have provided a link where you can find more information in English along with schematics. Of course there's many others in complete denial as well so you're not alone.
An Inquiry into Alexey Chekurkov’s Flying Discs and Replications - Energetic Forum


Our test pilot, head of an alternative energy group elsewhere on the planet, the one who was making the replication found at the above link is now disturbingly MIA. Not a stupid person I assure you. Probably now living in the forbidden zone of Pine Gap under lock and key most likely. After all Australia is now virtually a totalitarian police state so I wouldn't be surprised if that was actually true.

Assuming that we take what we are shown for face value, then once agin your programming has lead to basically a ridiculous explanation. I'm being totally honest with you about my impression of your explanation as well being gentle because it's actually far worse. Better me saying this to you now than having it rear up and bite you in the ass somewhere else. No, this is not ion propulsion, and it's not a biefeld brown drive, and the energy it uses comes from a 12 volt battery, in addition to a temporary hook up with a Tesla Coil, which is subsequently removed. I don't want to get too diverted here with Alexey but I presented it incase you folks had missed this.

Your ideas about the way this works are of course based on knee jerk reaction reply and you said so, but do not let it stop with that, you cannot continue to believe that is a viable explanation and still be taken seriously. It's absurd. I won't even address the ion explanation. Christ, I 've talked with people who have patents on ion drives, running successful businesses, who have spent their entire lives dedicated to trying to deciper how UFO's work using convention, unfortunately they are exactly like you and Morrison, completely brainwashed with GTR.

Morison says he won't debate the ether theory without a mathematical equation which only proves he is not qalified to judge the validity of anything. The math can be right and the whole theory can still be wrong. Please don't ever try to be a policeman as obviously simple crimes are far too complex to recognize. Christ almighty...just piss off will you jackass gatekeeper.

Shadowprophet if the underlying assumption that pins the foundation is itself wrong then the whole thing is wrong.

Morrison is the Most Qualified man here when it comes to Engineering, Particle physics, Astrophysics, And mathematics, And ironically enough, sculpting, At this point, I've spoken to him for over a year. I've learned a lot from Thomas.

I can Vouch for the man, He knows his Physics, Give it time brother, You will see, None of us are really here to Argue physics, It's a place to learn... I promise one could learn a lot from Thomas if they would give him their Ear.

Consider for a moment, The person that was never listening never learned anything new, How Wise is it to listen?

For me, Pride in debates and arguments means nothing because of Three weeks from now, no one will remember today. Everyone knows me, Yeah, I am sometimes proud, Yeah I do think I know a lot about physics, It's because I really do, But, Thomas, Knows more than me. And I can say that proudly Because He knows a lot, That I get remotely similar regard to him in scientific endeavors, is frankly an honor, He's a hell of a Guy,

 

[Dejan Corovic]

a narrative is no substitute for a mathematical equation.

I second that, or even one better experiment (physics) trumps paperwork (maths).

Maths is a language and a lot gets lost in translation. As far as I am concerned GTR is sacred cow. But it's maths brakes down in a quantum world. So we need some new maths, aka Quantum Gravity.

Alzofon-Hutchison effect might be just that. They both did successful experiments, plus Dr Alzofon, who was reputable GTR specialist did the maths that completely agrees with GTR. Let's not forget that any new theory of gravity would first have to be in agreement with Newton, second with Einstein and third with experiment.

Dr Alzofon, who was one of the top 100 US physicists during whole of his carrier, takes his math all the way down to the quantum level.

 

[Gambeir]

Morrison is the Most Qualified man here when it comes to Engineering, Particle physics, Astrophysics, And mathematics, And ironically enough, sculpting, At this point, I've spoken to him for over a year. I've learned a lot from Thomas.

I can Vouch for the man, He knows his Physics, Give it time brother, You will see, None of us are really here to Argue physics, It's a place to learn... I promise one could learn a lot from Thomas if they would give him their Ear.

Consider for a moment, The person that was never listening never learned anything new, How Wise is it to listen?

For me, Pride in debates and arguments means nothing because of Three weeks from now, no one will remember today. Everyone knows me, Yeah, I am sometimes proud, Yeah I do think I know a lot about physics, It's because I really do, But, Thomas, Knows more than me. And I can say that proudly Because He knows a lot, That I get remotely similar regard to him in scientific endeavors, is frankly an honor, He's a hell of a Guy,

Yea the both of you need to learn how to listen for Christ Sakes.

The information was/is being ignored, degraded, and treated horribly plain and simple. Don't expect me to be polite when the responses are both arrogant and offensive. When I want to hear stupid I'll visit the county jail.

When someone says; I won't listen to anyone who doesn't have an equation, then that is someone who has a complete inability to make rational judgements. If you think I'm going to listen a nut job decribing my reality you've another thing coming.

The video's I posted do contain equations and cite sources so there's really nothing to that arrogant reply other than to smoke screen the whole issue; I'm seriously beginning to wonder if I'm talking to someone sitting in cubicle at homeland security or fort upchuck because that's how stoogey it feels.

I will repeat the basics one more time; if the underlying assumption is incorrect; than the whole is incorrect. If what you're saying doesn't make sense then it isn't true. The math can be all right and still be wrong: An equation only proves what the assumption presupposes exists.
Police Science 101.

See you guys have math equations and the police have another kind of equation. Both kind make proofs. The difference is that you have no experience in falsifying proofs, or in uncovering them either, so you're like these mind controlled cultists that need to have an interdiction. Somehow you think that mathematical proofs are divine and uncorruptible, well they aren't, and I've explained why several times now. Sure the math might be right, but what about the assumption that forms the basis for it?

You can't tell me that you both know everything on one hand, and then turn right around and say,will yes of course we can explain it, but it's impossible for our present technology. Oh, so history then has no value as well then huh? That too has to be all be false then as well. There's no way the Germans made any UFO's or that the US made them, or the Russians either. All those reports have to be fantasy huh?

I don't care what you think about relativity or Einstein, all I care about is what's correct, and there I find the explanations wanting. All I did was try to help you, but you're quite sure how correct your idea's are. Fine, I don't need you, I can hear Einsteinian BS anywhere. It's obviously not right no matter how much you try to convince me to the contrary.

You want to subcribe to a corrupted science, ignore other data, sources and ideas, well so be it. Christ sakes, a person comes here hoping they will find open minds receptive to original thought but no. Same old crap.

Here you are, you've spent your lives dedicated to physic's and now, just when you have the opportunity of a life time what are you doing with your knowledge? Oh, ya know, you're going to defend Einstein's mistakes. I think that's called being a Gate Keeper. You have the opportunity of your life right before you and what do you do with it?

 

[Gambeir]

I second that, or even one better experiment (physics) trumps paperwork (maths).

Maths is a language and a lot gets lost in translation. As far as I am concerned GTR is sacred cow. But it's maths brakes down in a quantum world. So we need some new maths, aka Quantum Gravity.

Alzofon-Hutchison effect might be just that. They both did successful experiments, plus Dr Alzofon, who was reputable GTR specialist did the maths that completely agrees with GTR. Let's not forget that any new theory of gravity would first have to be in agreement with Newton, second with Einstein and third with experiment.

Dr Alzofon, who was one of the top 100 US physicists during whole of his carrier, takes his math all the way down to the quantum level.

Yes but you don't know any better so it's forgiveable. Thats why I said I didn't think I was helping out in your case and was going to just leave it alone, but then...oh hell no...we are back to how great Morrison is which is entirely true, at least if you're wearing purple robes that are emblazoned with GTR on them.

You go ahead and worship that robe. See how far that get ya. He's why I left and he will be why I leave again. Can't stand his BS lies myself and if what I've said doesn't mean anything to you then I really am wasting my time.