Anti-Gravity: Solved! (not kidding)

Originally posted by zsdfsartzs
Since you're looking more for advice on bringing this to fruition rather than discussing the actual breakthrough, I would recommend you not trust patent offices or non-disclosure agreements. Patents and NDA's have a long history of being easily and quickly ripped off or stolen in some form or another, and if most food companies won't even patent their recipes or agree to NDA's with chemists that should give you insight into the danger of sharing information.

Since you seem interested in starting via the cymatics route I would suggest using a Quartz Opto-acoustic modulator to build your waveform. It's a standard piece of optical communication equipment used for relays that goes for around $100 and can generate several Mhz of waveform bandwidth modulation. If you had the money, a Lithium niobate modulator that can do 10 Ghz of mod bandwidth runs for about $5k. They're used for vibrationally modifying laser signals but they double as piezo-transductive signal generators.

You can generate the electrical control signal with a standard DAC (Analog.com sells them and the amplifiers rather cheaply, an SPI to USB interface is only around $5-20 depending on speed and the card even cheaper.) I've been looking into this for another project related to reservoir computation, an entirely new framework for computation that can be run in something as simple as a bucket of water (or something as complicated as a 'laser storm' confined to a modulated fiber cable.)

You might find it interesting since it can outperform silicon at certain machine learning tasks by a factor of ~1000 or more, and using a standard algorithim can re-create universal digital computation (although at most tasks underperforming silicon.) It was inspired by an understanding / modeling of the human brain and is one of the most promising new areas of research into cheap, low cost computing. (The modulators / fiber that it runs on has a capital investment cost many factors below integrated circuit fabrication.)

Just on the off chance that you find this information useful.

arxiv.org...
arxiv.org...

thank you for this. and you know.. u tease me with mhz and then tempt me with Ghz as tho i would not love to have the Ghz version.. lol. but 5k is not cheap. i shall hope i do not need to monitor such frequencies to achieve a working prototype. ill build what i can and do what i can and present what i could do on my own. then ill state what i need to further it because by that time ill need funding FOR SURE!

please dont tantalize me with expensive equipment i may or may not be able to obtain. i mean u can tell me about it, but dont tell me the price if it's expensive. i have minor electronics background. i can fix stuff here and there and troubleshoot. but this will be larger than anything ive ever undertaken to build a cymatics device as well as the acoustic levitation chamber.. i want the Ghz version

ok dont depress me i need to figure this out with limited financing. but thanks for your suggestions.

my other options is to build the engine blindly.. which is fine.. just i will have no data to present. just a working prototype where i can describe how it functions using pretty much the same setup in the kid's video for monitoring frequencies, but provide no actual sound scientific data to go with it. i suppose they can take my prototype to a full fledged lab to do that later?

Originally posted by filledcup

my other options is to build the engine blindly.. which is fine.. just i will have no data to present. just a working prototype where i can describe how it functions using pretty much the same setup in the kid's video for monitoring frequencies, but provide no actual sound scientific data to go with it. i suppose they can take my prototype to a full fledged lab to do that later?

Most labs have extra equipment laying around and if your prototype is cheap and simple enough you might be able to convince them to allow you to temporarily build a small set up. I know at least one of the places I've interned for had literally tons of old equipment from the 60's used to build particle accelerators that is just sitting gathering dust. Some of it worth 10's of thousands of dollars in aggregate. You might have to use old interfaces and be willing to accept/fix broken equipment but it's at least a start. Most labs won't let you leave with it, and you'd have you find a sympathetic professor in the first place who believes in a least a portion of your idea, but it is possible. If you can produce an anomalous result larger labs will be forced to take interest / you might even be able to get a grant through said prof.

I too would love to have a giant array of LiNb transducers cooled with liquid helium to perform some experiments but that kind of grant money is hard to come by even for the most legitimate and non-speculative experiments. Some of the effects of interest would require literally thousands of LiNb cells and corresponding detectors in order to see anything, so I understand your frustration.

Since you'll probably be stuck in the Mhz range like I am, the closest we can get to that is slowly tuning through different spectra with mixers / frequency up/down converters. There are a few papers on new experimental ultra-wideband signal generators that (promise) to yield Thz of bandwidth for less than the cost of LiNb but they are still a few years out from commercial development. Worth keeping an eye out though in the future.

As far as generating the waveforms, you might be interested in using a whole slew of publicly available machine learning techniques / genetic algorithms to 'tune in' to cymatic patterns of interest to help establish your technique. mloss.org... is a good place to start. mlpy Machine learning python or something like it is straightforward and easy to start with. LHC and other experiments use human operators in conjunction with neural networking techniques / real time parameter adjustment for final signal 'locking' / and/or for generating the topologies for the Lagrangian integral boundaries.

Another paper that you might find interesting related to my work: arxiv.org...
Generalizes the process of clustering using the same equations as fundamental physical law. Has use in weather forecasting, stock predictions, etc. Bob Coecke and Steven Luttrell have applicable writings that connect to this as well. (Strangely shows up in Game Theory as well.) Strong connection to cymatic systems. I don't have time to do a full write up but it's definitely related to what you're working on.


*Edit, another cheap alternative to piezo-cymatics is using cheap analog vacuum Klystrons to produce pure HF radio-cymatic waveforms at high power. They require a DAC feed signal to amplify off of but it can be cheaper and higher power than piezo-amplification.

reply to post by zsdfsartzs


my friend, the universities here are so lame, you would not believe. im on my own with this. the fanciest thing we've got here is a 3d printer.. and as far as i know.. only ONE university currently has one. i've spent many years abroad visitting foreign countries and indulging in their cultures etc. 1st world countries. i always felt i fit in better there. conversations had more meaning with ppl. there was always alot to learn and knowledge to share. the minds of the ppl were significantly more evolved than those of the average in my home country. we have put forth our share of brilliant minds to the world, but as it may seem, there have been very few brilliant and everyone else.. really doesnt care about anything in particular. sex, partying and alcohol is the general culture here. a paradise island in the tropics. our leaders dont even yet understand the full importance of technology. mehh let me stop myself there.

i will avoid all that i cannot obtain and work with what i have. when i show the prototype in operation everyone will be able to see the game and understand why this is the way forward.

I just wanted to add two things real quick.

The first is, sometimes new discoveries are made through just finding out how to build and test something! A good course of action, which I am sure you are aware of, is to build a testing platform and then a prototype application. Some reading may not know this, but I think the more people actually participating in this sort of activity (applied science, basically), the better! In building the testing platform, sometimes you can come up with some really cool things. Its always good to remember things like the video of the guy moving massive objects though; sometimes high tech and expensive machinery can be replaced by cleverness and dedication.

The second is, when you post something on the internet, the IP rights can get a little strange. I dont know how it exactly pertains to ATS, but it might not be a bad idea to create a website for yourself, where you can link and copy/paste from. It can also be used to host the applicable pictures for presentations, etc. Ideally, the website can also act as a storefront when that time comes.

Originally posted by Serdgiam
reply to post by filledcup

 

In time, you will see the relevance. Or not.

I am interested to see what you come up with.

I am as well and I also offer you a "fair enough".

Originally posted by Serdgiam
I just wanted to add two things real quick.

The first is, sometimes new discoveries are made through just finding out how to build and test something! A good course of action, which I am sure you are aware of, is to build a testing platform and then a prototype application. Some reading may not know this, but I think the more people actually participating in this sort of activity (applied science, basically), the better! In building the testing platform, sometimes you can come up with some really cool things. Its always good to remember things like the video of the guy moving massive objects though; sometimes high tech and expensive machinery can be replaced by cleverness and dedication.

The second is, when you post something on the internet, the IP rights can get a little strange. I dont know how it exactly pertains to ATS, but it might not be a bad idea to create a website for yourself, where you can link and copy/paste from. It can also be used to host the applicable pictures for presentations, etc. Ideally, the website can also act as a storefront when that time comes.

edit on 15-7-2013 by Serdgiam because: (no reason given)

thanks again. u have taken the best lead in the real direction of discussion this thread was intended. all things to consider. i have been careful about how ive structured my thread in this avenue. ATS can have the snowflake formation, if anyone wants it. which is why it was presented the way it was.

but this.. heh.. if anyone can figure out how it's done from the things ive said in this thread id be rather amazed. but will also respect them for that ability. if they were to discover it and bring it to the fore of public knowledge before me, believe me i would have no envy, but will be quite happy that it was accepted. they did all their own work, probably taking minor clues and put it all together. u know.. if jim invents the wheel in france and jack invents it in australia and the two men have never met, but drew their conclusions from their own observations.. they are both inventors in my book.

i have attempted to contact rodin, when i first saw his video. but i got his voice mail. i left a gracious thank you for him on voicemail. and i hate voicemail! i had hoped to work with him. then i saw nassim haramein also working with him at conferences and lectures and maybe i was a little jealous(the good funny kind). have you ever been brought to tears by a scientific lecture? rodin's lecture on VBM did that for me. i wanted to be in there, travelling with them, experimenting with them. but the story goes how the story goes. these men have made invaluable contributions to science. science just doesnt know quite how yet.

reply to post by filledcup

Build it, show it, prove it.

Until then stop spouting unproven bunk.

reply to post by PheonixReborn


fair enough.. but am i allowed to have conversation surrounding it to help fill in some blanks that fall outside of my own expertise? i can learn things and decipher things and solve problems. but i have to apply my energy wisely, and reduce effort as much as possible. marketing for instance.. boy do i not have time for that crap. advice and expectations when presenting new technologies. what paths can be taken etc. this is the information i want out of the thread. interested parties etc. i may well bypass my own country and release this from a foreign source.

im getting an idea of some equipment i have never used before, but only understood how they operate.. now i have to build them myself with just minor electronics background etc. im here because i will need help.. your help!

Originally posted by filledcup
reply to post by PheonixReborn

 

fair enough.. but am i allowed to have conversation surrounding it to help fill in some blanks that fall outside of my own expertise? i can learn things and decipher things and solve problems. but i have to apply my energy wisely, and reduce effort as much as possible. marketing for instance.. boy do i not have time for that crap. advice and expectations when presenting new technologies. what paths can be taken etc. this is the information i want out of the thread. interested parties etc. i may well bypass my own country and release this from a foreign source.

im getting an idea of some equipment i have never used before, but only understood how they operate.. now i have to build them myself with just minor electronics background etc. im here because i will need help.. your help!

Which bit of "Build it, show it, prove it." do you not get?

Originally posted by filledcup
i have studied a great deal of mechanical engineering in my time. i am a self-taught scientist. i see no point in going to college and paying out of my arse for a degree when i can learn through reading myself.

I've worked with a self-taught engineer before, who was one of the very few people at a Fortune-500 company given the title engineer without having any kind of engineering degree. So I know being self-taught is possible, but you don't speak the engineering language he spoke which tells me that your self-education still needs a lot of work.

But there's no reason to pay out the wazoo for education if you want to learn. Here's a list of MIT courses in their opencourseware program:
ocw.mit.edu...-engineering-and-computer-science
I think they are free for self-study and you only have to pay if you want some kind of course credit, which you don't really need if your only objective is self study.

reply to post by Arbitrageur


yeah.. i am actually only now entering the realm of becoming an engineer. i have alot to learn i know in that specialized field. i understand the basics. i am not an engineer to the degree of the scientifically acclaimed. im basically a puzzle solver. i solve problems in various fields, but the solution is better in the hands of an expert to that particular field. this is just the first big one (technology based) that i believe i can actually pursue on my own. at least for a start. i will begin soon.

Originally posted by filledcup
but this.. heh.. if anyone can figure out how it's done from the things ive said in this thread id be rather amazed. but will also respect them for that ability.

Well, that was meant for everyone too. It wasnt particularly pertaining to this thread, but future threads you might make on the topic. I actually have no idea how it works on ATS, or if there is just a standard regulation, etc. Anything you post on some websites can be considered their property, so its just a good idea to keep in your head.

if they were to discover it and bring it to the fore of public knowledge before me, believe me i would have no envy, but will be quite happy that it was accepted. they did all their own work, probably taking minor clues and put it all together. u know.. if jim invents the wheel in france and jack invents it in australia and the two men have never met, but drew their conclusions from their own observations.. they are both inventors in my book.

You have some good ideas here. They should be a lot of fun to explore, and I have no doubt you will learn a lot from it. Going from the idea to an actual installed and working application can be a rather difficult process though, so be prepared for that. With an "open source" type exchange, we can all work on an idea, but I think its best for us to individually come up with a working application before we open it to that. Maybe someday, it will not matter as much, but for now, I think its the best way to approach it. (You can click on Part 2 of my signature to see how I feel about this specific topic).

The reason I suggested doing some of those other experiments is that it is essentially coming up with a testing platform, which will determine the mechanics behind any application you might later build. Its good to have an idea for a specific application, but it can be a bit like putting the cart before the horse. I found you can also shortchange yourself a bit by not giving yourself the ability to more quickly adapt it to other applications and inventions based on the same premise. And remember, this is something I am trying to encourage as many people to do as possible. Not just your experiment, but do science for themselves! So, I always try to keep that in mind that there are many reading threads like these that may be hesitant to do their own experiment. But, I think the more people actually involved in science, the better.

If you are researching anti-gravity, there are a variety of different ways this could be applied to real world systems. So, by coming up with a testing platform to explore mechanics might be a better approach, simply because you can then learn about the forces you are working with first. Doing it this way also seems to lend itself well to just creative ideas of applications and it can also save a lot of money if things dont turn out quite as you might have hoped.

Its kind of like the LHC. There is no direct application of it, but the discoveries that are found by it could lead to numerous applications. The more applications (or inventions) that are based on experimentally verified data, the better!

Seeing you do this is very encouraging to someone like me who is really trying to get more people involved in doing science for themselves, even if its just for cooking!

i have attempted to contact rodin, when i first saw his video. but i got his voice mail. i left a gracious thank you for him on voicemail. and i hate voicemail! i had hoped to work with him. then i saw nassim haramein also working with him at conferences and lectures and maybe i was a little jealous(the good funny kind). have you ever been brought to tears by a scientific lecture? rodin's lecture on VBM did that for me. i wanted to be in there, travelling with them, experimenting with them. but the story goes how the story goes. these men have made invaluable contributions to science. science just doesnt know quite how yet.

While I think Rodin and Haramein are observing real-world phenomena, I do not feel that their explanations suffice. Rodin has figured out, essentially, a different way to wind coils. However, he is not exploring the concept that unifies its operation with currently understood mechanics which has seemed to isolate him. To his credit, I am pretty sure he readily admits this and says he is presenting it for others to explore (if I remember correctly). Haramein seems to have a relatively cohesive concept, but I think he has complicated it far too much and attempted to make it proprietary a little too hard. My own thinking on "the Universe" is relatively similar, but seems to be more in line with my own (and others) observations. I have not read anything about him in a while though, so I dont know exactly where he is at in his research (or if he is even actively performing experiments).

Originally posted by Serdgiam


Well, that was meant for everyone too. It wasnt particularly pertaining to this thread, but future threads you might make on the topic. I actually have no idea how it works on ATS, or if there is just a standard regulation, etc. Anything you post on some websites can be considered their property, so its just a good idea to keep in your head.

yep i am quite aware of that and structured both the OP and my responses to circumvent it.

You have some good ideas here. They should be a lot of fun to explore, and I have no doubt you will learn a lot from it. Going from the idea to an actual installed and working application can be a rather difficult process though, so be prepared for that. With an "open source" type exchange, we can all work on an idea, but I think its best for us to individually come up with a working application before we open it to that. Maybe someday, it will not matter as much, but for now, I think its the best way to approach it. (You can click on Part 2 of my signature to see how I feel about this specific topic).

i would not mind doing it that way.i just havent learned quite how we could do that tho. i have alot to learn in that area as well. how do we start it? how do we share ideas? and the physical lab process? i would have to depend on the results produced by someone else's lab without actually being there and involved. the snowflake formation experiment is just what that is for.

The reason I suggested doing some of those other experiments is that it is essentially coming up with a testing platform, which will determine the mechanics behind any application you might later build. Its good to have an idea for a specific application, but it can be a bit like putting the cart before the horse. I found you can also shortchange yourself a bit by not giving yourself the ability to more quickly adapt it to other applications and inventions based on the same premise. And remember, this is something I am trying to encourage as many people to do as possible. Not just your experiment, but do science for themselves! So, I always try to keep that in mind that there are many reading threads like these that may be hesitant to do their own experiment. But, I think the more people actually involved in science, the better.

If you are researching anti-gravity, there are a variety of different ways this could be applied to real world systems. So, by coming up with a testing platform to explore mechanics might be a better approach, simply because you can then learn about the forces you are working with first. Doing it this way also seems to lend itself well to just creative ideas of applications and it can also save a lot of money if things dont turn out quite as you might have hoped.

i agree. there is still much for me now to study to actually bring this to fruition.

Seeing you do this is very encouraging to someone like me who is really trying to get more people involved in doing science for themselves, even if its just for cooking!

While I think Rodin and Haramein are observing real-world phenomena, I do not feel that their explanations suffice. Rodin has figured out, essentially, a different way to wind coils. However, he is not exploring the concept that unifies its operation with currently understood mechanics which has seemed to isolate him.

Haramein seems to have a relatively cohesive concept, but I think he has complicated it far too much and attempted to make it proprietary a little too hard.

this is why i found it strange how rodin could not figure that out himself if he is indeed the original mind behind what he presents. but i suppose it is a matter of what his gift really is. just as mine is really in solving problems, rather than being any type of specialized scientist. understanding and solving i would say is my gift.

haramein's presentation addresses a more creative aspect. as you know we have both logical and creative brains. and his just leans to the creative. he can process shapes and figures. rodin provides the numbers.

one thing they both figured out, and rightfully so, is that they should both work together somehow. and i think Jaime Maussan is the character hinting at the ufo aspect in all of this. engines.. drives.. whatever they will be called.

i have my own model similar to rodin's i had been developing. mine reveals life within number systems. it also proves that rodin's mathematics is a sound natural mathematics system. the numbers themselves do this. my 2 significant natural inclinations are to math and music. as a result i was always good in sports as well. considered an alpha male and passed my final year exams with a distinction in maths without attending school for the last 2 years.

Originally posted by filledcup
i would not mind doing it that way.i just havent learned quite how we could do that tho. i have alot to learn in that area as well. how do we start it? how do we share ideas? and the physical lab process? i would have to depend on the results produced by someone else's lab without actually being there and involved. the snowflake formation experiment is just what that is for.

You can always build your own lab. Things like the Arduino board can be programmed for a lot of different uses and then you just parse the data yourself. As far as sharing information, it is currently the application/invention that has the value. So, I think its currently best to at least get to a working model before a full release. Take a look at the aforementioned Arduino board for a good model. Essentially, they want you to hack their product, tell you exactly how to build one yourself, but offer a pre-manufactured product for a reasonable price.

i have my own model similar to rodin's i had been developing. mine reveals life within number systems. it also proves that rodin's mathematics is a sound natural mathematics system. the numbers themselves do this.

Has Haramein come up with a testing platform for his ideas?

Regardless, I think it is always good to remember that the "numbers" dont do anything whatsoever. They are just a human interpretation of what has been going on in the universe all along, much longer than we have even existed as a species. Anything we do is just re-directing energy using forces that have been at play since the beginning of time. I think that focusing so strongly on the human representation, instead of the concept they represent, inherently limits our interpretation.

The first step is observation (where Haramein and Rodin sit), but there are more steps. The next is finding what drives the inevitable patterns that exist (what force are we actually dealing with, and how does it behave?). Then, we find the equations to "predict" behavior according to the patterns. Then, it moves into application. Its the scientific method in action, really, and the more people that actively participate, the more we will all learn. I think that instead of either discrediting an idea or blindly praising it, its much better for everyone involved for us to just find out for ourselves. I think our world needs more people practicing science actively.

I dont think marketing will be a big issue if you come up with anti-gravity

Originally posted by Serdgiam


Has Haramein come up with a testing platform for his ideas?

not sure. i myself havent been following his latest developments. i came across him, analyzed all that he presented and took what i needed for my particular search. my search took me elsewhere afterward.

Regardless, I think it is always good to remember that the "numbers" dont do anything whatsoever. They are just a human interpretation of what has been going on in the universe all along, much longer than we have even existed as a species. Anything we do is just re-directing energy using forces that have been at play since the beginning of time. I think that focusing so strongly on the human representation, instead of the concept they represent, inherently limits our interpretation.

ahh i see your scientific perspective and i agree. that is why i said 'number systems' and not just 'number system'. we have used various number systems in our time and each brought with it it's technological advancements and rises in perception of our reality.

The first step is observation (where Haramein and Rodin sit), but there are more steps. The next is finding what drives the inevitable patterns that exist (what force are we actually dealing with, and how does it behave?). Then, we find the equations to "predict" behavior according to the patterns. Then, it moves into application. Its the scientific method in action, really, and the more people that actively participate, the more we will all learn. I think that instead of either discrediting an idea or blindly praising it, its much better for everyone involved for us to just find out for ourselves. I think our world needs more people practicing science actively.

and that's exactly what i claim to have. of course.. understanding how it occurs in nature is how my application is developed. a very funny tidbit about Leedskalnin's Coral Castle. noticed among his tools.. were glass bottles with copper wire wound around them and a device that could be used to generate frequencies. i would say that is certain evidence about his work with magnetic coils and batteries. i hadnt taken note of it before. but as i was revisiting coral castle on youtube i see they mentioned he wrote a book called "A Book for Every Home". the documentary host speculated that it contained in it code for how his work was accomplished. i've got a hunch that he's right and the frequencies and information is right in there. i will attempt to analyze and decode it.

see above ^

he was definitely working with frequencies.

Originally posted by randyvs


reply to post by Serdgiam

 

I think the more likely explanation for moving large objects is something like this; (its actually pretty darn cool )

The use of levers and counter balance doesn't begin to tell us what was going at coral castle.
And nothing about the Godlike precision of ancient monuments. But it's very cool knowledge
to possess. I can move everything in my house by my self to a different location thru the use
of cardboard to slide on carpet and tipping, walking and balancing. But leedskalnin was moving
loading massive blocks on trucks in minutes from different accounts. Sooooo

edit on 15-7-2013 by randyvs because: (no reason given)

Originally posted by filledcup
i've got a hunch that he's right and the frequencies and information is right in there. i will attempt to analyze and decode it.

In what way are you using the term "frequencies?" At least from what you have said, I am assuming sound, but the term "frequency" is extremely over used in a lot of circles, and even sometimes, it is used flat-out incorrectly.

Originally posted by Serdgiam

Originally posted by filledcup
i've got a hunch that he's right and the frequencies and information is right in there. i will attempt to analyze and decode it.

In what way are you using the term "frequencies?" At least from what you have said, I am assuming sound, but the term "frequency" is extremely over used in a lot of circles, and even sometimes, it is used flat-out incorrectly.

i suppose i would describe it as any form of audible or inaudible signals. and would add they are usually accompanied by a magnetic field.

a signal contains a tone with a pulse. which not only does this combination create it's unique wave signature. as sound cymatics experiments show, they can also have a structural effect on surrounding matter. forcing it to adhere to preconditioned shapes and patterns.

Originally posted by randomtangentsrme
Here's the interesting thing. I actually work with sound, and acoustics. I'll tell you straight up, there is no science that points to any anti gravity principals.
So bring your tech forward. Make your fortune.
Or, as reality dictates, stop believing in fairy tails.

Originally posted by filledcup
i suppose i would describe it as any form of audible or inaudible signals. and would add they are usually accompanied by a magnetic field.

Hmm.. Well, the term is usually used to denote a quantified measurement of some type of wave or cycle. So, in general, audible or inaudible would deal more strictly with sound. The mass majority of items that can be measured with "frequency" are inaudible, and a large portion of the light spectrum is not even visible.

So, many people think of "frequency" as a measurement of a thing, rather then the thing itself. Kind of like your weight or eye color. In the way you describe it though, it doesnt come across as viewing it the same way as this. That might just be a miscommunication, but I would be interested to hear your interpretation.

Do you believe all frequencies are accompanied by a magnetic field?