 |
There are currently, 148 guest(s) and 0 member(s) that are online.
You are Anonymous user. You can register for free by clicking here
| |
| |
Patent issued for anti gravity device!
Posted on Friday, November 11, 2005 @ 16:09:52 GMT by vlad
|
|
Dr Jack Sarfatti writes: He has something like my idea in my 3 books,
but I doubt that what he has will actually work. But he is seeing part
of what I am seeing.
[Eric Taber] Apparently the USPTO has violated its rules and
guidelines, patenting a device that defies the known laws of physics.
Patent Number 6,960,975 was issued to Boris Volfson of Huntington, IN,
wherein the device is described: quote: A cooled hollow superconductive
shield is energized by an electromagnetic field resulting in the
quantized vortices of lattice ions projecting a gravitomagnetic field
that forms a spacetime curvature anomaly outside the space vehicle.
[Jack Sarfatti] That has to be shown in detail with the equations of GR. Is there such an effect? And how strong is it?
[Eric Taber] The spacetime curvature imbalance, the spacetime curvature
being the same as gravity, provides for the space vehicle's propulsion.
[Jack Sarfatti] Badly said. They are groping for the idea of geodesic
warp drive. That is, changing local curvature field at the ship in such
a way as to shape the timelike geodesic, with small tidal geodesic
deviation over the scale of the ship, as desired.
[Eric Taber] The space vehicle, surrounded by the spacetime anomaly,
may move at a speed approaching the light-speed characteristic for the
modified locale.
[Jack Sarfatti] Meaningless sentence.
[Eric Taber]
Anti-gravity device patent
Wow! What do you think? /Eric
[Jack Sarfatti] Glimmer of correct idea, but wrong implementation. I am pretty sure it won't fly...
[Read all Sarfatti comments on the text of the patent in our Forum ...Vlad]
-------
UPI news: The journal Nature said
patent 6,960,975 was granted Nov. 1 to Boris Volfson of Huntington,
Ind., for a space vehicle propelled by a superconducting shield that
alters the curvature of space-time outside the craft in a way that
counteracts gravity.
One of the main theoretical arguments against anti-gravity is that it implies the availability of unlimited energy.
"If you design an anti-gravity machine, you've got a
perpetual-motion machine," Robert Park of the American Physical Society
told Nature.
Park said the action shows patent examiners are being duped by false science.
Copyright 2005 by United Press International
---------
Bill Alek writes:
"Abstract of US6960975
A space vehicle propelled by the pressure of inflationary vacuum state
is provided comprising a hollow superconductive shield, an inner
shield, a power source, a support structure, upper and lower means for
generating an electromagnetic field, and a flux modulation controller.
..."
"... [0022] By creating a spacetime curvature anomaly associated with
lowered pressure of inflationary vacuum state around a space vehicle,
with the lowest vacuum pressure density located directly in front of
the vehicle, a condition could be created where gravity associated with
lowered vacuum pressure density pulls the vehicle forward in modified
spacetime.
[0023] By creating a spacetime curvature anomaly associated with
elevated pressure of inflationary vacuum state around the space
vehicle, with the point of highest vacuum pressure density located
directly behind the vehicle, a condition could be created where a
repulsion force associated with elevated vacuum pressure density pushes
the space vehicle forward in modified spacetime. From the
above-mentioned cosmological constant equation, re-written as:
[mathematical formula - see original document] it is clear that the
increase in the vacuum pressure density could lead to a substantial
increase in the light-speed. If the space vehicle is moving in the
anomaly where the local light-speed is higher than the light-speed of
the ambient vacuum, and if this vehicle approaches this local
light-speed, the space vehicle would then possibly exceed the
light-speed characteristic for the ambient area. ..."
This sounds like the Alcubierre Warp Drive from the mid '90s.
"... [0025] The levitating and rotating superconductor disk, which
Podkletnov used to protect the object of experiment from the attraction
produced by the energy of the vacuum, was externally energized by the
externally-powered solenoid coils. Thus, Podkletnov's system is
stationary by definition and not suitable for travel in air or space.
Even if the superconductive disk is made part of the craft, and if it
is energized by the energy available on the craft, the resulting
anomaly is one-sided, not enveloping, and not providing the variable
speed of light (VSL) environment for the craft. ..."
This patent reads more like a paper than a patent.
Bill
William S. Alek
FREE ENERGY, Antigravitational, and Time Travel Technologies http://groups.yahoo.com/group/intalek
--------
Garry Voss writes: See Paul Potters UFO Propulsion Drive Ilistrations by clicking on: UFO Physics. I think there is a connection here.
--------
Robert Neil Boyd writes: Dear Sirs,
"Vacuum pressure density" is a contradiction in terms.
In a supposed vacuum, there is nothing existing which can cause
pressure, by definition of the term "vacuum". The pressure of nothing
is zero. The density of nothing is zero. The term is pure BS.
There is a REAL substance making a REAL pressure and a REAL density,
which factors result from the measurable activities of the consituent
subquantum particles comprising the aether plenum.
What exactly is this so-called "Inflationary vaccum state"? Where is
this term defined? And what causes it? And where is there any
reproducable physical evidence for this fictional entity? Why do we
need it in the first darn place?
And by what means does a supposed "inflationary vacuum state" create a supposed "lowered pressure" ? Lowered pressure of what?
The expression of "space-time curvature", since it is implied by the
expression to be a localized space time curvature, is in direct
contradiction to Einstein's Relativity Theory, where Einstein insisted
for the last 30 years of his life that any curvature of space, could
only occur at cosmological scales. Then, given the additional fact that
the universe is infinite in volume, if there were indeed any curvature
to space at the cosmological scale, such curvature would be perfectly
immeasurable. Thus, this is an unprovable hypothesis, with no more
validity than pink elephants.
This is all delusionary gobbledegook designed to confuse and mislead the readers regarding the actual facts of the situation.
There is no "vacuum", by definition of the term. There does exist a
plenum filled with subquantum particles, which is inhabited by
creatures of all velocities, from zero velocity to infinite velocity,
and everything in between.
We can create density gradients in this media by various means, and
generate propulsion, by various means. But the descriptions in this
document are not at all accurate descriptions of any of any the correct
means of attaining propulsion in interstellar space.
The document is purely misleading deception, in my opinion, based on
elephants of various colors, rather than on reproducably observable and
instrumentable facts.
That being said, there is some grain of truth in it, that can only be
discovered when one knows the actual physics involved, which are in
fact, aether physics. None of this "inflationary vacuum state pressure
density" nonsense.
Get the idea of a plenum of subquantum particles, which can vary in
local density and velocity, then look at the text again. Substitute the
correct understandings and dispense with the misleading lables created
in the text, and you might see something of what they are attemoting to
describe.
One more thing. Their evaluation of Podkletnov's super conducting disk
propulsion method is perfectly wrong. Such a method can be perfectly
well applied and will function perfectly well.
The difficulty with this method is in the hazard resulting from any
exposure to the back-acting beam, which results after some delay in
time, after the initiating high power electrical impulse. Any organic
Life which happens to be in physical contact with any inorganic object,
at the time the back-acting beam passes through the vicinity, will find
themselves inextricably welded to the inorganic object.
An inconvenience, to say the least. I have brought several suggestions
to Podkletnov regarding various means to eliminate this hazard. But
until the problem is solved, this means of propulsion will have
severely limited applications. It appears to me that two of my
suggestions will resolve the problem. The problem is that it requires a
lot of money to implement either of them, something which Podkletov's
team has a lack of. Give them more money, and I'll bet the problem will
be solved shortly.
Neil
|
| |
|
Don't have an account yet? You can create one. As a registered user you have some advantages like theme manager, comments configuration and post comments with your name.
| |
Average Score: 5
Votes: 1
| |
|
|
No Comments Allowed for Anonymous, please register |
|
Re: Patent issued for anti gravity device! (Score: 1)
by nanotech on Friday, November 11, 2005 @ 17:53:33 GMT
(User Info | Send a Message) | I agree with what Neil said completely.
For accuracy and consistency we MUST GET RID OF THE TERM VACUUM! The only reason why people such as Bearden and others use terms like "energy from the vacuum" is because vacuum is accepted by the mainstream estalishment. The term PLENUM is FAR more accurate! It is energy from the quantum aether plenum.
|
Re: Patent issued for anti gravity device! (Score: 1)
by guest on Friday, November 11, 2005 @ 20:10:50 GMT
(User Info | Send a Message) | | Potentia might work better than aetheric plenum, since the latter reduces the inner workings to a vague definition without any mathematical accountability. The plenum carries energy, it is more than energy itself. It has geometric and informational self-consistency above all. |
]
|
|
Not Antigravity (Score: 1)
by hackwrench on Sunday, November 13, 2005 @ 16:47:29 GMT
(User Info | Send a Message) | I keep saying that, as it is described, my theory as to how it works is closer to current theory, which is:
Collapse the space between you and a gravitational body far away from
you relative to one that is close. This puts you in the shared
gravitational well between the two, and decreases the distance you have
to travel, to boot.
A problem I see increasingly is that people build devices and come up
with poor theories to describe the device's workings, then established
scientists come in and say that the theory is unworkable, which it is,
but then falsely conclude that the device isn't doing anything
significant of study. Then there are the "testers" of devices that come
in, find a part that doesn't work like they expect, falsely conclude
the part is faulty, repace the part with a conforming part, and of
course the device doesn't work like it would if they ran it as it was,
and then they declare, "See, the device doesn't work!"
|
|
|
Re: Patent issued for anti gravity device! (Score: 1)
by DoItDontJustWriteAboutIt on Friday, November 18, 2005 @ 16:02:54 GMT
(User Info | Send a Message) | | There are two obvious faults in this patent that render the invention unuseable: the device has no minibar, and no restrooms. Personally I'm waiting for version 2 at least. |
|
|
Re: Patent issued for anti gravity device! (Score: 1)
by vlad on Tuesday, November 22, 2005 @ 19:53:28 GMT
(User Info | Send a Message) http://www.zpenergy.com | Warp-drive spaceman from Indiana opens up a can of wormholes
Tom Spears
Ottawa Citizen
[Extract] ...
And finally, here's Rob Lipson, head of the chemistry department at
the Universityu of Western Ontario. Has twin PhDs in chemistry AND
physics. Yeesh.
Dear Tom,
Sorry to take so long to respond to this article. My computer
crashed. It strikes me a lot of baloney, but it is so outside the realm
of chemistry ( and probably science) that it difficult to know where to
begin. I am not an expert on string theory or general relativity. That
said, consider the "gravitomagnetic field". Consider the definition
from Stuart Shapiro, on the web: http://www.aip.org/pnu/1996/split/pnu295-2.htm [www.aip.org]:
"A GRAVITOMAGNETIC FIELD , according to the theory of general
relativity, arises from moving matter (matter currents) just as an
ordinary magnetic field arises from moving charges (electrical
currents). The analogy is so apt that the equations describing this
"magnetic" component of gravity can essentially be adapted from
Maxwell's equations for electromagnetism by replacing the charge
density with the mass density and the charge current with the mass
current. The rotating Earth, containing a lot of matter in motion, is
the source of such a very weak gravitomagnetic force. Indeed, measuring
this field is one of the tasks of the upcoming Gravity Probe B a
satellite. Near a rapidly rotating black hole the gravitomagnetic force
is much more potent and rivals the static gravitational field in
strength. Stuart Shapiro of the University of Illinois asserts that in
analogy with the Faraday effect, whereby a changing magnetic force can
induce electrical currents, a changing gravitomagnetic force emanating
from a rapidly rotating black hole can induce matter currents inside a
nearby object---say, a neutron star spiraling in toward the hole. This
induced vorticity will influence the spin of the star, its internal
structure, and its orbital motion. These effects in turn might be
discernible in gravitational waves reaching the future LIGO and VIRGO
detectors on Earth. (Phys.Rev. Lett., 18 November; figure available on
11/14 at www.aip.org/png [www.aip.org].)
"This definition suggests that the conditions necessary to produce a
gravitomagnetic force outside of a black hole would be impossible to
generate by an earth made instrument. Hard to believe you can curve
space time sufficiently. Even if you could, the tidal forces on an
occupant would probably be lethal. This problem has been recognized by
many sci-fi writers over the years.
"The part that really caught my attention was the author's reference
to vacuum fluctuations. In the quantum theory of light the energy
(Hamiltonian) operator has the same form as that of quantum harmonic
oscillator. This is the standard approximate model for vibrating
molecules. One of the interesting non classical results is that even in
the lowest energy state of the vibrator there is still a so called zero
point energy; that is, even if you could cool the vibrating species to
absolute zero, the molecule will never stop vibrating. The analogy to
light fields is similar. Even when there are no photons in the light
field, there is still a zero point energy. This means that there is
energy in the vacuum BUT its average value is zero. What is not zero is
the root-mean square deviation of the energy. This means that there is
an energy uncertainty around the average value of E =0 . These are
referred to as vacuum fluctuations of the electromagnetic field. From a
strictly quantum electrodynamical point of view, fluorescence
(spontaneous emission) can be viewed as stimulated emission by the
vacuum fluctuations. What is proposed here by Mr. Volfson is to
capitalize on those fluctuations to produce a gravitomagnetic field
that will curve space. I imagine that the energy required would be
enormous. What Mr. Volfson forgets is that the energy uncertainty and
time duration obey a Heisenberg Uncertainty Principle. This means that
the higher the energy you require from the vacuum fluctuations, the
shorter the time it will last.
"Consider the following trivial calculation. Suppose we need to
create the environment of a black hole that corresponds to 10 x mass of
the sun.
"This corresponds to m = 20 x 10^(13) kg. Since E = mc^(2) (it's the
100th anniversary of Einstein's miracle year), then E = ~ 1.8 x 10^(31)
joules.
"The Heisenberg Uncertainty Principle states: delta E x delta (time)
~ 1.05 x 10^(-34) joule-sec. This means the uncertainty in time, delta
(time) would be ~ 6 x 10^(-66) seconds. This is really very short. Even
if there are general relativity effects which I don't know about, this
suggests Mr. Volfson is not going anywhere, and neither is his plan for
interstellar space travel.
"Nevertheless, thanks for the laugh.
"Rob" |
|
|
|
|
