Electrogravitics: the REAL Reason It Went Into Black Ops

No I was referring specifically to "your" book which seems to me to be sad shades of bucky fuller's grunch of giants.

Bucky actually contended that we are already in an AGE OF PLENTY and that people need to just wake up and see it. He also designed everything from new housing concepts that would use less material and be more safe and efficient to a car that got 30 mpg while carrying 11 passengers in 1931 mind you!

And really it's not so much that I consider you a plagiarist more that others have written what you tried to write much more eloquently and much before you set about trying to do so.

I in no way object to standing on the shoulders of giants in the pursuit of intellectual greatness so to speak, but I do like to see people get credit when their ideas seem to be being leveraged fairly heavily in someone else's work.

And yes you do come across as isnufferably smug... as you are so fond of saying OWN your smugness!

reply to post by roguetechie

Bucky actually contended that we are already in an AGE OF PLENTY and that people need to just wake up and see it.

Go tell that to some starving africans

As for the alleged plagarism, i would have to read both works before commenting or taking sides.
But as i pointed out earlier, more than one person can have the same idea.

Getting back on topic;
The book does go into a lot more detail, both technical and concerning Brown's life, than i already had, thanks!
This chart showing speed vs. voltage is quite interesting, especially when you extrapolate it into the Gv range
Funnily enough, Searl knows this, too, but then he could of just read this book
Here is the chart;


This nonlinear relationship is well known among the Tesla/ Lifter community, but it's nice to see it being recorded in 1950!
For those of you Debunkers who would say it's just ion wind, as Mythbusters tried to do with the lifter in a vacuum chamber;
From what i understand from Brown's work, the effect takes place during charging, and at or near the dielectric breakdown point.
In other words, just before it sparks.
In the case of lifters, the dielectric is AIR, so if you put it in a vac chamber, you are removing the very material that is causing the effect.
The more rarefied the atmosphere, the more voltage you need, and because Brown used a solid dielectric, the thing should work just as well in space He even designed a neat flame ioniser, which is basicaly a hybrid jet engine/van de graaf generator.
This would be capable of generating several millions of volts, which would increase to billions at some distance from the craft. Coincidentally, Searl mentions that his IGV is charged to more than 6Gv, which is incidentally, 1/10 the mean charge of the Earth

This was also interesting, and leads some credence to the story that Brown himself was deeply involved in 'black ops';

More on that in the book, from page 76.

Originally posted by mileslong54\
Nuclear power accounts for only 20.2% of America's power but yet it is the most expensive way to produce power

No it isn't



world-nuclear.org...

Same goes for Tesla's free energy systems

Hmmm WHICH free energy systems of Tesla are you citing? Can you link me to those? Would love to compare them

reply to post by zorgon


Well,it gets expensive when you have an accident same goes for oil.
If every house had it's own power source, it would be less dangerous....

I have decided to combine Bearden's MEG with Searl's SEG.

I'm calling it the SMEG

I found this paragraph to be of particular interest;




Triangular UFO's

I am currently testing various dielectrics with 8Kv DC.

Styrene seemed a good idea, since it can store vast numbers of electrons, but it breaks down too easily, due to the big air pockets...

Will continue with various plastics, and i have some very good quality parrafin wax.

'Interesting, captain'

Oops, looks like styrene has a very low dielectric constant, guess i should have checked first...
Back to the barium titanate then....

I can't find any Hafnium, but i've got it's brother TantalumTantalum
A very interesting material

reply to post by Amaterasu

Did it ever occur to you that free energy is impossible? Not a science man, eh?

For the moment, lets assume that EASY and CHEAP energy is possible but was kept secret. Why? I think the best reasoning is that, given access to cheap and easy energy, humans would soon become totally reliant on it and would increasingly shelter themselves behind walls and computer consoles. Humankind would become a troglodyte. Their numbers would dwindle as they live longer and improve the sciences. Robots would explode and become overused. Humans would become too comfortable in these circumstances. We know from history what happens when humans indulge their desires and swim in luxury. Power would be handed off to machines and robots and artificial intelligence. This would lead to the irreparable decline of humanity until not even a speck of humans remain. Either we would be replaced by our machines or we would be overrun by an invading force of aliens whom did not themselves become victims of technology.

Extinction. That's what cheap and easy energy would do.

One of the other mechanisms for this to come about is not related to complacency or our selfish desires. Instead, it's our genetics. We've evolved for millions of years. Right now, our genetics are probably better suited for a wandering tribe or an agricultural community with hunters and craftsmen and artisans. Our genetics were not prepared for this modern world. Evolution was not fast enough. Epidemics of obesity, racism, war, addictions, riots, and other such things have resulted from this. We cannot adapt to a rapidly changing world without vastly changing our own genetics. The problem with this is it's virtual suicide. To manipulate our own genetics would be to trump nature and claim ourselves to be of a higher order. This could not lead to anything good, in my mind. Eugenics was bad enough. This takes the cake. I predict we'd destroy ourselves within a century. Either that or we'd be so changed that we'd be reduced to tribes of violent warring mutants, barely keeping our heads above water. The earth would be completely destroyed of its life in our attempts to engineer it. It'd be straight out of any apocalypse story.

I see a lot of people sneering after reading that. Apparently, you haven't heard of the many stories across the world of extinction and habitat loss and pollution and so on. You have a lot to learn. Humanity is far from being able to live sustainably on this planet. Our technology has outpaced our ability to adapt to it. Our knowledge is lagging behind. Our greed is ever hungry. There're very few safe exits. In fact, many very accomplished people believe that the extinction of our species is possible in this new human-driven epoch. Not a single word is exaggerated.

We're not even able to properly handle computers, machines and other things, RIGHT NOW. The idea that we can add to the problem and this would help is absolutely blockheaded.

We need to reconnect with nature. It's the best teacher. We have to stop this madness.

If I had possession of cheap and easy energy I'd destroy it immediately for the survival of our species. I'd take full responsibility for this action. I'd even be a martyr. Just let me drink some fine wine before you kill me. I'd do all of this happily. Not because I'm a mean or bitter spirit.

Common sense is just not common. Our species is slow learning.

Originally posted by jonnywhite
If I had possession of cheap and easy energy I'd destroy it immediately for the survival of our species. I'd take full responsibility for this action. I'd even be a martyr.

You are a threat to human kind and need to be shipped off to the Mars colony ASAP

:shk:

reply to post by jonnywhite

If I had possession of cheap and easy energy I'd destroy it immediately for the survival of our species. I'd take full responsibility for this action. I'd even be a martyr. Just let me drink some fine wine before you kill me. I'd do all of this happily. Not because I'm a mean or bitter spirit.

Yes, i daresay the PTB think the same way.
That mindset is exactly what is killing us.
At least even you can see that Eugenics is a disaster.

What you don't seem to appreciate is that free energy would change us drastically, but it would also liberate us to be even more productive & inventive, and certainly more moral, because there would be very little crime.
This along with antigravity, would mean our progression from a 'type 0' civilisation to a 'type 1'

I pity your arrogance that leads you to take full responsibility for mankind, how wonderful of you to condescend to 'help' us poor mortals.....

Gaping Hole In Physics number two;

2) The Work formula:

When all else fails, we are told not to worry about the
gravitational power source because gravity never does any
work throughout the universe. According to today’s science,
all of the gravity-driven dynamics in our universe occur without
any work being done, therefore there is no reason to expect
energy expenditure from any power source – no power is
required for any of it. We are told that objects are pinned
forcefully and continually to the planet by gravity, but since
they just sit there, even though forcefully pinned down, no
energy source is required to explain this. How can such a claim
be justified? Simple – ignore the physical gravitational energy
expenditure and recast it as a formal Work scenario. Why does
this suddenly seem to solve such a deep physical problem?
Because the formal definition of Work in physics is: (force
applied) x (distance moved). Note: this is not the form of
work that we all relate to, where expending energy is doing
work

reply to post by jonnywhite

For the moment, lets assume that EASY and CHEAP energy is possible but was kept secret. Why? I think the best reasoning is that, given access to cheap and easy energy, humans would soon become totally reliant on it and would increasingly shelter themselves behind walls and computer consoles.

If you are truly interested in learning and not just spouting off, do some research on Tesla and many of his inventions, in particular, Wardenclyffe in New York. J.P. Morgan was financing construction on the tower for the purposes of wireless communication. As the project neared completion Tesla revealed that it would also be able to transmit energy anywhere wirelessly, a free energy source. Morgan was documented to have said that if you couldn't put a meter on it, it was useless-not because he wanted to save the world from being the victim of its own sloth but because he couldn't make money from it. He immediately ceased funding of Wardenclyffe and Tesla was unable to find any other source of finance, no doubt closed out.

This shows that free energy is possible, that it is not creating something from nothing, but rather tapping into the everything that is already there.

Originally posted by coyotepoet
If you are truly interested in learning and not just spouting off, do some research on Tesla and many of his inventions, in particular, Wardenclyffe in New York. J.P. Morgan was financing construction on the tower for the purposes of wireless communication. As the project neared completion Tesla revealed that it would also be able to transmit energy anywhere wirelessly, a free energy source.

Instead of just spouting off, please enlighten us where Tesla's tower got the energy FROM that he could transmit wirelessly. Yes it could be transmitted as MIT is doing now, but you still need to generate that power... So please show us where Tesla got that 'fre energy' from

Thanks

reply to post by zorgon

please enlighten us where Tesla's tower got the energy FROM that he could transmit wirelessly. Yes it could be transmitted as MIT is doing now, but you still need to generate that power... So please show us where Tesla got that 'fre energy' from

Tesla's theory on how the tower would work was that, "By using two type-one sources positioned at distant points on the Earth’s surface, it is possible to induce a flow of electrical current between them." The inventor also believed that the earth was a charged source (which we know today to be true). His tower would work by combining these two principals and creating powerful disturbances in Earth's natural electric charge which could then be harnessed. Users of the power would receive it by burying one end of a wire in the ground, and then putting a large conductive sphere on their roof with another wire. One would serve as a negative power source, and the other positive. Tesla called it the "disturbed charge of ground and air method."

www.junkworthknowing.com...

The key point is that the mathematics, taken in conjunction with the evaluation of the Colorado Springs site, is highly suggestive of the fact that there was a deliberate intention by Tesla to position the tower such that the ratio between its elliptical arc length latitude and the full equatorial circumference of the earth was 99 / 875. And that such a ratio was critical to its proper functioning, in allowing it to be able to correctly interact with the earth via resonance to tap into its energies.

www.ancient-world-mysteries.com...

In other words, he generated it from the earth, no external power source needed, just a way to tap in and transmit.

reply to post by coyotepoet


He could of have been using the Schumann cavity, the way HAARP does

ETA; And who said Tesla didn't know what Radar was?
He specialized in HF AC with very high potentials, and multiple frequencies.
In his own notebooks, he describes tracking thunderstorms down the east coast, using his equipment, at least 30 years before 'radar' was invented (by a scotsman, as i recall).
He taught Marconi a few things, too, only Marconi had buisness sense & Tesla was a humanitarian.

The first 'bedspring' radar used by the Royal Navy in the 40's was in fact built by Marconi company.
The modern microwave 'cheese' antenna-i cant remember, but he was probably a Scotsman, too

In fact, its amazing how many great inventors were scots it must be something in the whiskey......

reply to post by jonnywhite


Though I replied in U2U when I was post-banned, I'll make a quick add here:

My father, an electrical engineer, said We have this tech and He was successfully testing it. So, no. I will not consider that free energy is impossible. I KNOW it is.

We swim in a sea of vast energy. Why wouldn't We be able to extract some?

As for Your view of Humanity... We ALL do things (when We can afford them) to follow Our bliss. That includes solving problems, building robots, researching, painting, and so on.

So what You describe is a fallacy. We would follow Our bliss, throw parties, attend parties, and do things to make the planet better without regard to profit. Witness Linux.

reply to post by Amaterasu

My father, an electrical engineer, said We have this tech and He was successfully testing it. So, no. I will not consider that free energy is impossible. I KNOW it is.

No you don't. Your belief is based of second hand hear say from a family member. Which only could impair your judgement.

If you knew... it means you would have some knowledge of this system you claim is real. Which means you would either be capable of building one yourself, or instructing someone else to. And when it was finished it would work. Because you would have done this before, giving you the title of "knowing" it's real.

You believe it's real.

That's it.