The B2 Must have Anti Gravity Propulsion

China has copied the B-2.
www.defenceaviation.com...

But it is absolutely sure that the B-2 uses plasma ionization.

www.wpafb.af.mil...
Above model shows:
High electrical voltage applied between metal electrodes on a model in the plasma channel ionizes the air between the electrodes and creates plasma

reply to post by hawk123


Does that mean we have officially caught a "debunker" in the act so to speak?

The guy who said he built the wings but there was no such thing and the other people who swear no anti grav???

Originally posted by davesidious
reply to post by nsaeyes

 

No, it's a pseudoscience book. It has as much to do with science as Star Trek. The guy's a crack-pot. According to you he has classified plans in a book, and you think they're legit.

One of the sure signs that an author is trying to foist a crackpot thesis onto the gullible general public is the use of a 'PhD' appended to his name on the book-cover. This author is no exception. The book is devoted to the non-science of 'electrogravitics'; the concept that electricity can negate gravity. This term is unknown to real physicists, and has only ever appeared once in Physics Abstracts (where it was used in a derogatory sense). Given that there is no bona fide scientific proof supporting the concept of antigravity, the author has fallen back on the usual rag-bag of pseudoscientific claims which pervade the 'disinformation super-highway' known as the internet. Indeed, gullible readers who haunt antigravity-related web-pages will find that they have paid to read again what they have probably already read online.

The author ticks all of the 'usual boxes': Tesla, T.T.Brown, John Searl, etc. The Searl chapter is particularly dismal, given that one has to be especially soft-headed to believe any his fantasies. The author even manages to identify the wrong person as being Searl in one of the photographs. He also mentions the so-called confirmatory experiments of Godin and Roschin, but fails to record that the experiments have been disowned by the head of the institute to which the inventors supposedly belong.

Such books as this would be harmless if they merely served to satisfy the need, of a certain class of consumer, to believe in 'suppressed science' and conspiracies. However, there are growing signs that the cancer of pseudoscience is invading the real world and wasting real resources. NASA, it will remembered, wasted millions of dollars on trying unsuccessfully to develop the so-called Podkletnov Effect. Real physicists had declared from the outset that this was certainly an artefact. They were ignored. One suspects that the NASA fiasco will not be the last, if scientifically ignorant decision-makers read superficially persuasive books such as the present one.

reply to post by JIMC5499

 

The fuel that apparently isn't there, DUH! Or unicorn farts. I forget which.

Well explain this old video then smarty pants:

Originally posted by minkey53
Does that mean we have officially caught a "debunker" in the act so to speak?

The guy who said he built the wings but there was no such thing and the other people who swear no anti grav???

No you caught a bullsh*tter. The guy who wrote that article. The photo shown is a B-2, not a Chinese bomber.

reply to post by nsaeyes



So does that mean if i place run a positive charge at my front bumper and a negative charge at my rear bumper I'll get anti-gravity?

reply to post by davesidious

Interesting idea - what evidence did you base it (TR-3B hypothesis) on?

For the most part my TR-3B hypothesis is speculation as I have only heard one supposed witness' testimony on its operation, Edgar Fouche.

I came across Extended Heim Theory about 6 months or so ago and have come to believe it is the real deal in terms of generating FTL gravitational propulsion. I wrote a post on it titled: Faster than Light Travel and Black Holes - 2 Examples of the Same Underlying Physics Phenomenon. Since then I have come to think that the gravitational gravitophotons hitting the flywheel's protons (as mentioned in the above post) create a dent in spacetime and the quintessence expansion force gravitophotons hit electrons in a capacitor below the electromagnetic coil create a hill in spacetime. This I think results in something akin to the alcubierre warp drive idea where a craft falls down spacetime. I believe this is how the McCandlish ARV was propelled.

If the McCandlish ARV is real and was propelled in this fashion it stands to reason that the newer TR-3B would use the same underlying physics phenomenon for its propulsion, just with more advanced parts.

The only direct testimony I have heard as I said was from Edgar Fouche who said that the TR-3B accelerates a mercury based plasma around a toroid in the center of the craft at about 60000 rpm to reduce gravity's effects and uses a chemical rocket in each corner of the craft for propulsion.

However no eyewitnesses to the TR-3B have heard anything that sounds like a rocket when the TR-3B is flying overhead, just silence or a hum. I do not think our government would take a step back going from full gravitational propulsion technology to reduced gravitational propulsion that needs rockets to actually move.


I combined my view of how the ARV works with some of Edgar Fouche's details. I figure the center does contain the craft's main engine: a very large very powerful electromagnetic coil and above that coil is the toroid rotating the mercury based plasma. This would definitely be an upgrade to an aluminum flywheel for a rapidly rotating mass. I figure there is also a very large flat parallel plate capacitor, or stacks upon stacks of them, underneath the center magnetic coil. Light has been seen coming from the center of the bottom of the craft on occasion so it is possible a gravitational engine is there transforming light to gravitational energy but is only on a low setting in our atmosphere which is why it is flying slowly and the light is often not seen.

This would allow the craft to go straight but not steer (the ARV had its capacitor sliced into many thin slices like a pizza pie which is why it could steer with just the main engine).

Then with smaller gravitational propulsion engines in each corner the TR-3B craft could steer using those which is probably a lot simpler to wire up and control then 40 odd capacitor slices.


Admittedly a lot is speculation as no one, even Edgar Fouche, has claimed to see the inside of the TR-3B but I think it is fairly well grounded in EHT and the ARV's tech if in fact I am right on how the ARV was propelled.

reply to post by abecedarian



Doubtful. The wingbox is the structure that holds the wing to the plane bounded by the spars.

Originally posted by CaptChaos

Well explain this old video then smarty pants:

Your video contained an extra "=" so it was malformed. Good video, this is where some of this tech originated.



[edit on 27-1-2010 by Freezer]

Originally posted by JIMC5499
I'm not saying a word about the construction. Last I heard that information was still classified.

It is, VERY much so. I was on the network and information security team out at Tinker when we were developing the navigational software.

Originally posted by minkey53
reply to post by JIMC5499

 

Do you really think your ex boss is reading your posts here on ATS??

Not his boss per-say - and probablly not a person.

Originally posted by davesidious
reply to post by JIMC5499

 

How do you know that? What would the FBI, or anyone acting in an official capacity other than Google Analytics, care about who's reading what on ATS? I've yet to see any material dangerous to anyone, be it private individual or government agency, released on ATS.

Think of the google search engine, amp it up to a much higher degree. Keywords, phrases and combinations thereof will raise a flag at which point someone would look over the material.

This is referred to "traffic" or "chatter" if you are a 24 fan.

Originally posted by The Wave
reply to post by minkey53

 

c) Via direct monitoring if a) and b) give sufficient reason to turn their attention on you;
Peace!
[edit on 26-1-2010 by The Wave]

Close, but not exactly.

reply to post by pacific_waters


hah!! that's funny....what a wonderful, albeit chaotic world that would be.

Jetsons here we come.

Originally posted by pacific_waters
reply to post by abecedarian

 

Doubtful. The wingbox is the structure that holds the wing to the plane bounded by the spars.

The wingbox contains a center fuel tank on most large aircraft.

reply to post by CaptChaos


It's a video. Videos are not evidence of anything, other than a video existing. The book you say is not pseudoscience is talking about a field of science that has never, ever been demonstrated to exist. That is by the very definition of the word pseudoscience. If this guy can't be bothered to actually demonstrate what he's talking about, in a peer reviewed paper, he's not a scientist but a kook.

Nice try - ha!

In the Fire fighters manual, it shows the option for Engine Shutdown.
Unfortunately there is no option to Shutdown the Anti-gravity switch.

Page 42 on link:
0x4d.net...


[edit on 29-1-2010 by hawk123]

Originally posted by hawk123
In the Fire fighters manual, it shows the option for Engine Shutdown.
Unfortunately there is no option to Shutdown the Anti-gravity switch.

Page 42 on link:
0x4d.net...


[edit on 29-1-2010 by hawk123]

The anti-gravity (which isn't there) is smart enough to shut itself down in the event of a fire. It has it's own AI system that is made from a cybernetic monkey brain.

reply to post by JIMC5499
Cybernetic monkey brain, hmmm, sounds good to eat. When I sneak up to a B-2 at night, which panel do I need to pry off to get at the brains? Assuming that the antigravity gizmos don't get in my way, I am going to try dem brains parboiled, rolled in flour and fried in butter.

reply to post by butcherguy


If you hit the right button on the RAD ALT you can microwave them right there under the aircraft.

Originally posted by minkey53
reply to post by hawk123

 

Does that mean we have officially caught a "debunker" in the act so to speak?

The guy who said he built the wings but there was no such thing and the other people who swear no anti grav???

No, it doesn't. How do you figure that it does?

The article posted by hawk123:
www.wpafb.af.mil...
is about plasma actuators. It has nothing at all to do with anti-grav.

An actuator is the device that moves a plane's control surfaces (flaps, etc.). A modern jet's computer is constantly make many tiny corrections in these control surafces every second to keep a plane flying. Without this computer correction, a modern jet would be uncontrollable -- a human pilot is not able to make the constant and continuous corrections necessary to keep the plane in a controlled flight.

The actuator is the motorized device that actually moves those flaps based commands from the computer (and the pilot). Presently, these actuators are mechanical devices. Plasma actuators would be non-mechanical (i.e., no moving parts).

Plasma actuators have absolutely nothing at all to do with anti-gravity propulsion.

Here's more information about plasma actuators. These can someday replace the mechanical actuators planes use today:
aarls.eng.ohio-state.edu...
shyylab.engin.umich.edu...