Electrogravitics – A Simplified Description

[Amaterasu]

Ouch, can you say foaming at the mouth?
55 it is!
Shall we share one in four winds someday?:-):-):-)
Le

As long as it's dark and thick - a spoon has to stand up in it!  [wink]  Truly, ASAP, I say!

[PLAYSWITHMACHINES]

Back here in europe it's suddenly gone to 25C (77F) and i am being forced to drink expensive lager from the 'white room' at the 'external testing facility' Oh the shame of it......

Getting back on topic,this is part of my OP for the 'gravity workshop'
Let me know what you think

.............................The Gravity Workshop................................


In an attempt to get all that is currently known about gravity and the means of defeating it into one place, i thought i'd start this thread.

First of all, i would like to keep fanciful & esoteric ideas to one side, we will concentrate on what is known at this time and what we have to work on.
The topics will be divided into various ideas coming from earlier experiments, like Searl, Podkletnov, Roschin/Godin, and of course T.T.Brown.

It is my intention to tackle each of these ideas from a 'feasability' standpoint, with the accent on getting reliable information and a working model of each of the devices shown here.

They do share a lot of factors, and here is where we must pay particular attention, especially as to the effects so far reported...

I will dip into my files & post some backround info on each device/inventor, and there will probably be a lot of links (for copyright reasons) I will try to make sure it's all in plain format so everyone can read it

How's that sound?
(I hate using 'I' so much,like it's all about me, so i will instead use 'we' which means Us, and will refer your questions to one of my other personalities.....) LOL

[Littleenki]

Multiple personalities aside, I like the outlay, Luke!:D

I think we need to do as you say, and focus on the known and somewhat well understood aspects of gravity and what it might be frist, and let everybody come up to speed, one inventor at a time.

As you go through the list of the tops 6 or 7, we can begin to see a pattern in theories which combine into a unified theory in the end.

We might not solve gravity, and its real definition, but we can meld the different ideas many researchers have had throughout history into one cohesive theory.

I do think an bit of esoteric approach would be good, once the science is nailed down, and of course I do have theories about that, as im sure Hobbit will and others.

Pedal to the Metal, bro!
Le

[Amaterasu]

I LIKE it, PWM!  Is discussing SQK allowed?  The idea that positively charged particles have positive gravity and negatively charged particles have negative gravity?  I know it's not "known," per se, but does predict the Biefeld-Brown Effect...which IS known.

[PLAYSWITHMACHINES]

Of course SQK is allowed, it comes closest to explaining Brown's work but i think each section will be divided into;

The inventor.
The machine or experiment.
The theory behind it.
3rd party replication (I.E. what others have done) and updates etc.

Be assured, i will be posting a few secrets here, some are mine & some from others, i hope they appreciate why.
Of course, all contributors will be mentioned in advance whether they know it or not

[Linda Brown]

Looking forward to see what develops.... Linda

[Amaterasu]

Of course SQK is allowed, it comes closest to explaining Brown's work but i think each section will be divided into;

The inventor.
The machine or experiment.
The theory behind it.
3rd party replication (I.E. what others have done) and updates etc.

Be assured, i will be posting a few secrets here, some are mine & some from others, i hope they appreciate why.
Of course, all contributors will be mentioned in advance whether they know it or not

AWESOME!

[SarK0Y]

In SQK, positively charged particles have a positive gravity potential "well."  (Positive particles have positive gravity.) Negatively charged particles have a negative gravity potential "hill."  (Negative particles have negative gravity.)  The positive particle's "well" is just the smallest fraction bigger than the negative "hill," accounting for the apparent weakness of gravity, where essentially even amounts of positively charged and negatively charged particles make up common matter, and in quantities as big as the earth, say, offer a slight "well" overall, thus explaining why We are aware of gravity at all.ww.change.org/petitions/us-military-release-the-technology-of-electrogravitics

looks damned stretched what about... hmmmm....  Neutron? 

[Amaterasu]

That's easy.  They are gravitationally neutral.

[SarK0Y]

That's easy.  They are gravitationally neutral.

in theory  but any theory is Nothing w/o solid proof 

[Amaterasu]

Read Subquantum Kinetics by Dr. Paul A. LaViolette.  Also, consider.  Electrons have negative charge.  Protons have positive charge.  Neutrons are neutral.  Since gravity is intimately linked to EM, without an electromagnetic component, they would have no gravitational component.

Also I recommend reading Secrets of Antigravity Propulsion by Dr. LaViolette too. If You're not into the squigglies (higher math), this is a good layman's source.

[SarK0Y]

Read Subquantum Kinetics by Dr. Paul A. LaViolette.  Also, consider.  Electrons have negative charge.  Protons have positive charge.  Neutrons are neutral.  Since gravity is intimately linked to EM, without an electromagnetic component, they would have no gravitational component.

Also I recommend reading Secrets of Antigravity Propulsion by Dr. LaViolette too. If You're not into the squigglies (higher math), this is a good layman's source.

what about colliders?  the greater speed makes the greater mass. this fact too contradicts such conjecture 

[Amaterasu]

what about colliders?  the greater speed makes the greater mass. this fact too contradicts such conjecture 

Um...  "Colliders?"  Forgive Me...but I'm not sure what You're on about.

[SarK0Y]

Um...  "Colliders?"  Forgive Me...but I'm not sure what You're on about.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Large_Hadron_Collider

[Amaterasu]

OHHH.  Right right right.  Long day, rather tired.

So You're saying that the greater speed makes the greater mass, and this fact too contradicts such conjecture of LaViolette's work or...?