Electrogravitic Propulsion

Electrogravitic Propulsion
by dcooper » Tue Nov 20, 2012 9:33 am

In Browns 1st patent # 300,311 Brown states " linear force or motion which is believed to be independent of all frames of reference save that which is at rest relative to the universe taken as a whole, and said linear force or motion is furthermore believed to have no equal and opposite reaction that can be observed by any method commonly known and accepted by physical science to date."

Here Brown states that it violates Special Relativity, and violates Newton's 3rd law of motion. But does it truly violates SR...........Well let's investigate further.

Mason Rose in his " The Flying Saucer" article says " This field [Electrogravity] acts like a wave, with the negative pole at the top of the wave and the positive pole at the bottom, the saucer travels like a surfboard on the incline of the wave that is kept continuously moving by the saucer's electrogravitational generator."

Also in that article it says "The second objection concerned the tremendous accelerations which on the basis of previous technology, would subject any animal occupants to unbearable stresses. But, says Brown, the occupants of one of his saucers would feel no stress at all, no matter how sharp the turn or how great the acceleration."

I don't know about you guys, but it seems to be that electrogravitic propulsion is very similar to Warp Drive . You see Warp Drive is explained as above quotes. It is known that Warp Drive seems to violate SR, but it does not. Because space-time fabric is moving ( not you or the ship) then it will seem to violate SR. In fact no SR effects will not be present.
Because space time is moving, then it would make sense that it would seem to violate Newton's 3rd law of motion (in fact it is known that warp drive violates Newton's 3rd law of motion), meaning that no matter how great the accretion, stop or turn, you will not feel no stress at all. This is because the ship is not moving, but space is.

Because of this analogue between Electrogravity propulsion and Warp Drive, it is possible that it to can warp space ( we will get to that later). In fact Einstein tried to "unify" electrostatic with gravity, so that it to can share the space time fabric/ geometry, meaning electricity analogue of creating a gravitational field, so it to can warp space time. But Einstein failed to finish his unified field theory (but it does not create a gravitational field, but creates an analogue to a gravitational field, it's likea gravitaional field but electrical in nature , for if it did create a real gravitational field it would move mass ( this has nothing to do with the coupling effect).

If EG does indeed warp the fabric of space, and if, (which it is ) analogue to gravity then it should be analogue to warp drive, then it would make since that EG will SEEM to violate SR and Newton's 3rd law of motion but it is space that is moving not the ship.
So this means that the (+) charge would contract space, while (-) charge would expand space, making space to move and not the ship, Which makes the illusion that the craft is moving to both people on board and watching the craft, and thus SR effects will not be present.






Figure 1 (says fig8) is a Drawing that Thomas Brown Made in his "Structure of Space II" (The drawing is explaining it in ether/aether, But we can see we can even explain it in space-time fabric) He shows the action taking place of Electrogravitic propulsion and the movement. Know look at the simularities between what Brown drew and the action of a Warp Drive. Do you see the similarities. Not the field shape But the arrows showing the action and the movement (the longer arrows repesents the direction while the little arrows repersents the field force direction. So the (-) charge or energy will expand space while the (+) charge or energy will contract space.
The shape of Warp drive field and Electrogravity drive field will differ but will work on the same principle. You see you can't store negative and positive energy on the ship's hull but you can put it around the ship with out it touching it. Electrogravity uses charges so you have to put it on the ships hull, you can't have it not touching the ship. But one would ONLY be able to do this in air but not in a vacuum. So the Fields will differ in shape BUT they will still use the same principles. -dcooper

Electrogravity is when a electric charge creates a field analogue to gravity, think of It as a electrical gravitational field meaning its gravity but electrical in nature. So if it is a gravitational field but electrical in nature then it should be analogue to warpdrive but electrical in nature.......so Electrogravitic propulsion is an electrical warp drive. -dcooper

dcooper said:

Electrogravity is when a electric charge creates a field analogue to gravity, think of It as a electrical gravitational field meaning its gravity but electrical in nature. So if it is a gravitational field but electrical in nature then it should be analogue to warpdrive but electrical in nature.......so Electrogravitic propulsion is an electrical warp drive. -dcooper

Click to expand...

Too conclusive without any laboratory proof.

In your first post, you start with Brown's first patent and by the second/third paragraph, you are talking about Mason Rose and the occupants in a craft and you jump to the comparison of it being similar to Warp Drive and you do all this without even truly understanding what EG is and it's relationship to electricity and magnetism.

Let's go back to Mason Rose's comment that it is riding on a wave. A wave of what...water?

Mikado

Mikado I think you know what I'm saying......you are a smart man.-dcooper

Here an experiment done by mainstream scientist on one of Thomas Browns work from http://www.space-mixing-theory.com/article2.pdf . if you want just read the Abstract, Introduction and the background.....and the conclusion which is on page 21 (near at the end of the page. There results came out positive check it out TickFox and Linda I want to know what you think of it.-dcooper

dcooper said:

Mikado I think you know what I'm saying......you are a smart man.-dcooper

Click to expand...

If I were to "think" I know what you are saying then that would be an assumption and I could be wrong. I wouldn't be smart for that would be a stupid action and I see that enough from others.

A wave of what?

Mikado

Mikado said:

Too conclusive without any laboratory proof.

In your first post, you start with Brown's first patent and by the second/third paragraph, you are talking about Mason Rose and the occupants in a craft and you jump to the comparison of it being similar to Warp Drive and you do all this without even truly understanding what EG is and it's relationship to electricity and magnetism.

Let's go back to Mason Rose's comment that it is riding on a wave. A wave of what...water?

Mikado

Click to expand...

But for those who don't then when Mason Rose said like riding on a wave meaning the positive charge creates a field to a gravitational well and the negative charge creates a field that is a hill which looks like a wave, know because warpdrive is using gravity for propulsion and Electrogravity is analogue to gravity but electrical in nature so it to can be use as a electrical gravity propulsion which if it is analogue to gravity it to should warp space so we can use it for propulsion as an electrical warpdrive which looks like a wave.....don't confuse a gravitaional wave with this it's the fields that looks like a wave. (+) charge acts like a well, and (-) charge act like a hill and when you combine them it LOOK like a wave.

dcooper said:

Here an experiment done by mainstream scientist on one of Thomas Browns work from http://www.space-mixing-theory.com/article2.pdf . if you want just read the Abstract, Introduction and the background.....and the conclusion which is on page 21 (near at the end of the page. There results came out positive check it out TickFox and Linda I want to know what you think of it.-dcooper

Click to expand...

You asked that question of me as well.

Here is a link to my response:

The Quonset Hut • View topic - Confirming Earth's polarity

Mikado

(Tickfox? hey Linda, remember when you made fun of my farm calling it a tick infested place since Kim and I contracted Lyme disease?...Tickfox...lol)

dcooper said:

But for those who don't then when Mason Rose said like riding on a wave meaning the positive charge creates a field to a gravitational well and the negative charge creates a field that is a hill which looks like a wave, know because warpdrive is using gravity for propulsion and Electrogravity is analogue to gravity but electrical in nature so it to can be use as a electrical gravity propulsion which if it is analogue to gravity it to should warp space so we can use it for propulsion as an electrical warpdrive which looks like a wave.....don't confuse a gravitaional wave with this it's the fields that looks like a wave. (+) charge acts like a well, and (-) charge act like a hill and when you combine them it LOOK like a wave.

Click to expand...

So, if the (+) is a well and the negative (-) is the hill, what is pushing it up the hill?

Mikado

Mikado said:

If I were to "think" I know what you are saying then that would be an assumption and I could be wrong. I wouldn't be smart for that would be a stupid action and I see that enough from others.

A wave of what?

Mikado

Click to expand...

A wave of an electrical gravitational field meaning a gravitaional field that's electrical, (-)charge creates a field that acts like a hill and (+) charge creates a field that acts like a well and when combine it looks like a wave.

Mikado maybe the images up above would help, have you read "secrets of anti-gravity propulsion" that might help. A negative gravity will expand space and positive gravity would contract space causing Spacetime to move, so if Electrogravity is analogue to gravity then it should be analogue to warp drive so Electrogravitic propulsion should run on the same principle. -dcooper

dcooper said:

A wave of an electrical gravitational field meaning a gravitaional field that's electrical, (-)charge creates a field that acts like a hill and (+) charge creates a field that acts like a well and when combine it looks like a wave.

Click to expand...

You have only repeated yourself.

What is pushing it UP the hill?

Mikado

It is moving up by expanding space, a repulsive force. -dcooper

Wouldn't anti-gravity and gravity cancel out the way anti matter and matter do, thereby leaving you hanging?

:soap:

Gravity Wave

A gravity wave or gravitation wave is a curve in space time as explained by Einstein’s theory of relativity. Normally gravity just distorts space time slightly. However thanks to the Theory of Relativity physicists now know that really massive objects cause ripples or “waves” in space. Inherently, the greater the mass of an object the greater the gravitational wave it produces. Before relativity, classical physics viewed gravity as simply a force. While this properly explained its effects it did not full explain its nature.Einstein proposed that gravity is not simply a force but actually a curve in space time. The gravitational wave also is said to emit a special form of radiation called gravitational radiation.

Click to expand...

Gravity Wave

No EG just quantum physics

But seriously if you want to learn about real gravity Waves you should study Dr Robert Baker's work on HFGW. he has Buzz Aldrin on his team and working on anti gravity and gravity waves with the Chinese... and I don't see EG mentioned

Gravwave LLC

Gravwave Team


Now these guys are getting some real work done, not chasing a fantasy

Now these guys are getting some real work done, not chasing a fantasy
Thats an astute observation from someone who wouldn't recognize EG if it was right in front of her, and hasn't read enough to have the foggiest notion of what she is talking about.... Read a little more before you discount the work of others Exterminator.

Keep going Dylan.

An old saying in the horse world sort of applies here.

Those that can.... RIDE
Those who can't ride..... teach....

Or in this case.... try to teach....Mikado has a point though. You have to be able to explain this field to even the most ignorant people around.... because they will be your most vocal critics. <g> Linda

Exterminator said:

Wouldn't anti-gravity and gravity cancel out the way anti matter and matter do, thereby leaving you hanging?

:soap:

Click to expand...

In a manner of speaking, it could but then there are magnitudes of reference.

Mikado

EG is not Warp Drive.

I sort of like your pictures. I see you copied from Wiki: Warp drive - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia and the fact that you are using a fictional starship to explain your hypothesis.

Warp Drive is the bending of space and or space/time. There is no real warp drive unless you are referring to the Alcubierre drive. In recent years, there is renewed interest in this by NASA.

I can assure you that in my tests, no warp field was created.

If you wish to call it warp drive, go ahead, however, you have claimed that there is a potential hill that causes the negative (-) to travel down a potential gradient toward a positive (+)( this raised an entirely new question about all of this because the energy used to create the hill has to be expended by the negative charge as it travels down the gradient but I will not go into this at this moment), then how is this in relation to any ambient gravity field? In other words, would this be affected by any local gravity field?

Since you are comparing EG to Warp Drive, are you saying that this is FTL? Afterall, that is what Warp Drive is about, warping the surrounding space of a craft to allow it to operate outside of normal space. Are you saying that EG will also counter time dilation if used in a craft?

Mikado

Dylan.

This is copied from an old ttbrown.com forum exchange of messages. You might find bits and pieces that might be interesting to you. Note that Mikado was being " difficult" here too so maybe you need to remember thats just the way he is...

"by natecull on Sat Jul 19, 2008 8:13 am

Here's Stan Deyo's chapter 'Electro-Dynamic Propulsion' from Cosmic Conspiracy:

http://au.geocities.com/psyberplasmic/ccX-6.html


9. Partially due to hot spots in the shell circuit, and 'laminar fluid lock' at the boundary layer on the surface-to-fluid interface, a pulse rate has to be induced into the transfer circuit.

For example, if the fluid flow rate were 1000 fps and the radius of the craft were such that the arc of the radius was 20 feet, then a pulse rate of 50 hz would give a circuit power wavelength of 20 feet or the exact length of the area (d) to the rim arc length. By peaking the power wave at the three points on the underskirting's periphery, the turn (or curl) in the wave can be quite readily conducted to area (e) by the three variable resistors. As the fluid flow rate increases, the field pulse frequency must increase to maintain the same wavelength.

10. An effect that is the electrical equivalent of the "correolis effect" that make, water swirl one way going down a drain will cause the electrical field transfers of the craft to form a vortex as it moves from top to rim to area (e). Also, due to ionization potentials of the particular fluid in which the craft is travelling, there may be visible evidence of the swirling vortex. It will make the craft spin unless contra-torque is applied to hold the craft stable... This contra-torque is supplied by the returning ions on the underside of the craft. (There is, however, a great deal of contra-torque available in the secondary, energy storage mechanism of the air turbine in the practical craft).


Pulsed field, spiralling electrons, vortex. Reminiscent of the cyclotron/magnetron, no?

A lot of this stuff seems to vibe with Brown's 1958 tri-arcuate saucer model. Note the one electrode on top and three electrodes below (hope deep-linking an image from Geocities isn't illegal or just plain impolite - if so I'll remove these links):



and this picture is a similar one that haunted my dreams as a kid:



PRACTICAL ION CRAFT
Let us now look at the practical craft. In figure (11) is a cutaway of the craft showing: the airflow, electric ion flow, field focus ball and rod, turbine tan, plasmoid ion source, field coils, cathode ring, directional anode, navigational ion collectors, landing rods, and crew quarters, etc.




This writeup *seems* to be describing something almost identical to Brown's configuration. But the problem is I can't make head nor tail of the jargon. It's alternately 'real' physics and 'weird' physics, sounding authoritative, and mixed seemingly without regard to what is currently regarded as 'real'.


In a conductor as the voltage and current frequency are raised over a certain value the current is observed to travel mostly in the surface of the conductor. This is commonly referred to as 'the skin effect'. Now in the craft the voltage levels will be in excess of 15,000,000 volts at frequencies up to 150khz... (more than ample to generate the skin effect). If the shell is a high-voltage semiconductor then the current will travel along the outside of the surface and even in the fluid medium in proximity to the surface. Once a current at such a high voltage is started in a particular direction the current tends to be very reluctant to turn sharp corners... because it is starting to have high inertial values. Since the crew and the entire craft are part of the circuit, whenever a direction change is made every molecule of the entire polarized (unified) field is accelerated at such a high rate of change into the new vector that the change appear, uniform, thus bypassing the problem of structural fatigue due to non-uniform inertial shifts. This means that the crew could be having morning tea break and the pilot could turn a corner at 25,000 mph without spilling a drop of tea.





Throughout this exercise in building a hydrodynamic craft the fluid has not been called 'air' for the simple reason that this craft can sail in air, water, or even the fluid of space (often referred to as 'the ether or the fine structure or the quanta sea'). By varying the frequency, power, and voltage levels on an electro-dynamic craft, so-called 'anti-gravity', invisibility, and light-speed translation from point to point are now conceivable. Gravity has frequency... but that is another discussion all unto itself. Another discussion will detail the process for generating and storing extremely high voltage power in the form of plasmoids... (or self-containing plasmas), voltage transforming capacitors, and the rudiments of wireless broadcast of electricity to users around the entire planet... through the use of overlapping VLF standing wave power broadcast network.

Time permitting, this author will later release his papers on the order and origin of electron 'shells' and planetary orbits as functions of convergent and divergent vortexial wave forms in 'fluid space'. As a clue to those who would be interested in such a discussion, the reason that electron shell orbital radii do not apparently follow a progressively greater dimension outward from the nucleus is that they are the sum of two opposed progressions...; one toward the nucleus (as a space-reflected, inertial wave form) and one away from the nucleus (as an energy-centre reflected inertial wave form). These papers will discuss the application of resonating magnetic fields to use the magnetic fields of the Earth and any other rotating magnetic body as not only sources of energy, but also new means of propulsion.
[/quote]

Deyo never did release those follow-up papers, of course. Leastways not publically. Possibly his Halo Project might. I wouldn't hold my breath. But he certainly writes as if he knows *something*.

Is it possible that these diagrams are from some technical documents developed during that crucial 'missing' 1958-1967 period? When the saucers 'went black'? But what on earth happened to them? Why wouldn't you use this technology, if you had it?

It could just be a clever fake. But my gut sense is that this diagram and description 'feels' like it came from that early 1960s period. It's got a sort of 'analog' hardware feel to it, like a Lockheed or NASA technical study. It's advanced, jet-age, but still pretty clunky: fans, rubber seals, recirculating air. It's for an advanced atmosphere craft, not an interplanetary ship. But presumably it could be adapted to both. Whether Deyo wrote this or whether Brown did or someone else I have no idea. Do these passages (and the rest of that page) read like Brown's writing?

I was sure Deyo somewhere compared the workings of 'his' saucers with the magnetron or cyclotron, but I can't find it online - I guess it wasn't in Cosmic Conspiracy, possibly it was in Vindicator Scrolls.

This is possibly the source of part of my weird feeling toward Dr Brown's vortex diagram. But it's not just that I've seen it before and puzzled over it for years. I seem to feel a pull toward that diagram, most especially Brown's one and not Deyo's one, because it seems to be implying something different and deeper than 'just' an exotic means of propulsion.

I get a sense of a space-time bubble 'pinching off' and somehow becoming its own 'pocket universe', for as long as the field/vortex persists. A sort of tame singularity - that such a ship, if fully powered up, would literally vanish not because it was bending light or was plasma-sheathed, but because it literally *would not exist* in our normal kind of space. Where it would 'go', I don't know. That idea is something that I don't think either Brown or Deyo are saying in their diagrams here, so why I feel that I don't know either. But it's very strong and it's there. I also have no idea what that means in real physics, or frankly how to make *any* of these descriptions add up with either conventional physics or any of the other fringe physics models I've studied.

The language resonates with other fringe writings and 'feels' authentic, but I can't really parse it - it's written assuming a whole body of knowledge I don't have. Even now. Anyone wanna try and crack the riddle?

Edit: Looking at Deyo's 'HALO Orbital' site - Welcome to HALO orbital Technologies - I see the logo is a set of two concentric 'shells' at 90 degrees about a 'nucleus'. Is that a reference to his 'sum of two opposed progressions' orbital shell model he mentions above?
It's a big ball of wibbly-wobbly timey-wimey stuff.natecull
Senior Cadet

Posts: 273
Joined: Sat Mar 22, 2008 10:35 am
Location: New Zealand Top
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------