a reply to:
F2d5thCavv2
The 'explanation' given in these kind of reports indicate the government is wary that someone might find a way to negate gravity
OK, that's a completely different critter. I was thinking psychic phenomena, not gravitational.
What you are describing is actually one of my oldest projects. It's not really "anti-gravity" as much as it is "artificial gravity." It requires a
specific field geometry between the electrical (not necessarily electrostatic) and magnetic fields. It also uses static fields, not oscillating
fields. This is, I'm pretty sure, what was being researched at Area 51 in New Mexico. It builds upon work done by both Einstein and Tesla, among
several others (Brown, Searle,
et. al.).
There is a danger from the government here: the field geometry is quite specific and would be easily detected if someone knew what to look for. There
is also a danger, since gravity defines the shape of space-time... the possibility does exist than an artificial gravity source in certain
configurations could create small black hole simulations and a 100% conversion of mass to energy... that's a very fancy way of saying "doomsday
weapon." I'm not sure about those configurations being possible to create, but the potential for both government intrusion and accidental catastrophe
is sufficient to cause me to be
very careful how I progress.
Not to mention, I do not exactly think having black limos pull up in the middle of the night is a good thing. As I said, the field geometry would
create an energy signature that could easily be tracked.
I hope we'll hear more from you on the projects you're working with.
Shortly after I first joined ATS, I made the decision to unveil any successful results I may achieve here. My hypotheses tend to take into account
phenomena that classical science has thus far been unable to prove exists and therefore has been purposely ignored. ATS is a venue that would gain
attention and at the same time is open-minded enough about subjects that seem to extend beyond traditional scientific thinking to be quite useful in
that respect. The revelation of success in my projects would also be a serious boon to ATS credibility in scientific circles. Win - win.
But understand there are two things working against me. I mentioned the concern about government intervention above, but there is also the fact that I
am dealing with new and largely unexplored technology. Any time that is the case, time is against the researcher. There are simply no guarantees in
research. It is a matter of hypothesize, experiment, fail, analyze, hypothesize, experiment, fail, analyze, hypothesize, experiment, and maybe...
finally... succeed. that success may be only verification that something has potential, so we're back to a new level of hypothesize, experiment, fail,
analyze, hypothesize, experiment, fail, analyze, hypothesize, experiment...
That's why I rarely mention exactly what i am working on. I still have much work to do. But the potential rewards are... impressive, shall we say.
TheRedneck