Ken Carrigan writes:
<<Read some of this and have read and seen Jean's Website with
his HV charged 'capacitor' flight vehicles.
.... Ion drive! Now, this high voltage scenario brings to
mind the charging of air molecules - ions. This infers, however,
a loss of electrons in a certain direction from the HV.
>>
I believe the key to understanding Carrigan's rather negative attack on the
report of an actual device, which demonstrated an apparently significant
force - is in the second word of his message: - "Read SOME of this".
The next error in this message from Carrigan is his statement "This infers,
however,
a loss of electrons in a certain direction from the HV." I would like to
respectfully point out that air can have both positive, and negative ions.
(one having excess electron(s); and the other a deficit of an electron(s) ).
There is a great deal of evidence, and other verification of the Biefeld -
Brown effect: where a thrust is produced from an asymmetrical "capacitor",
charged to high voltage. T.T. Brown himself proved that this thrust is not
solely from an ion "wind". A Brown electrogravitic device can be shown to
produce a serious thrust in air; in a vacuum; and immersed in an insulating
oil (with a very high breakdown voltage - hence NO ionization)
If indeed, you find Bearden's postulates, and mathematical proofs, plausible
- as to large areas of accepted EM theory being off the mark, then why do you
find it so impossible that there could also be a link between capacitance, or
highly charged plates of special geometry, and gravity?
This report of a replication of the multilayer capacitor, of unusual
geometry, indicates that a thrust of 6.44 kg is produced, from a device that
weighs less than 1 kg! (this is the approximate thrust to weight ratio of a
launching Space Shuttle) (X-Prize anyone?)
Carrigan's "jump to conclusion" dismissal of this finding via the (not well
thought out) explanation of an ion wind is totally without merit, if the 6.44
kg thrust is real.
The reason I challenge Carrigan's explanation in such strong terms is that
for a thrust of 14+ pounds, from an opening as small as the core of this
capacitor (3.5 cm, or 1 3/8"), would require a velocity, and volume of air
flow that is staggering - and would surely blow over lamps, and any loose
object within 5 or 10 feet of the "core". (All you math or engineering
"experts" - go figure out how many CFM's of air, at what velocity is required
to generate 14+ pounds of thrust from this diameter core!) (it surely is not
feasable from an ion wind!)
I have some experience with R/C helicopters, and mine was about 9 pounds with
full fuel; and had a .60 cu in engine, running nitromethane, and this
developed close to two horsepower. Driving the main rotors at 1500 rpm (34"
in dia) - and in a stable hover in a large room (50' x 50' x 20' ceiling)
created a wind from the downwash that was felt as far away as 20 feet, and
was at least a 10 or 15 mph breeze, within 10 feet of the beast.
So I reiterate - if this device did/does generate 14+ pounds of thrust
(comparable to my model helicopter which required 2 HP) then this is
significant. And before I dismiss it out of hand - I would want to see it
replicated (or find this report may justify building one myself, as I have a
VDG coming soon for other work).
Even if it is an ion wind (highly unlikely) then this level of thrust is far
more Power, than the fractional horsepower motor used in a Van De Graaf, to
drive the belt!
Perhaps by using a unique geometry of electric field, and very high potential
gradient, as would be the case in the description of this device; combined
with some sort of catalysing reaction caused by the movement of a small ion
wind (movement of electric and magnetic fields - all ions have 'em); that a
significant warping of spacetime (gravity) can occur? But if you dismiss it
out of hand, without a sound basis for doing so, you will never find anything
new.
Carrigan writes further:
<<Static electric fields, pure static, can not make anything move
just as static magnetic fields do not make things move.
......ion drives in our atmosphere are really not sufficient to
to do work on substantial masses.
>>
So if I understand correctly: Carrigan states earlier that dust accumulates
in and around a television or monitor (cathode ray tube) due to the ions from
a static charge, and then states that a static charge can do no work? (if the
dust has mass, and has been moved, or attracted to the surfaces, then work
has been done by this "static" charge!)
Is not gravity a "static" field as an electric or magnetic field? If you
step off a cliff does this mean that the "static" gravity field will NOT
plunge your mass down, to certain discomfort, injury or death?
(yes the act of stepping off the cliff changes the potential energy gained by
your mass from the height of the cliff, to kinetic energy - but could this
same process be occurring in the "gravity capacitor? Something - geomtery,
field shape or gradient, or a secondary effect like the small ion wind that
would occur, may act as trigger for this change from potential to kinetic?)
The charge separation that occurs between ground and clouds in a
thunderstorm, is merely a static charge, once it has been accumulated. And
is ionic in nature, by most accounts of the theory of why this charge
separation occurs. So by Carrigan's reasoning the MILLIONS of WATTS of power
in each bolt of lightening, producing a 10,000 K plasma, and a sonic
shockwave, and when striking the ground or trees, explosive disintigration of
said objects - this is all a figment of our imagination?
I think an error has been made in this blanket dismissal without careful
consideration of the facts!
Or if I may postulate: if one is willing to dismiss out of hand, the reports
of a successful demonstration of the stated goals of this discussion group,
without carefully reading that account, or considering a replication, as
details are clearly provided; then why is such an individual even reading or
participating in the discussion group?
Sincerely,
DMBoss1021
-------------------------------------------------------------
To leave this list, email <listserver@keelynet.com>
with the body text: leave Interact
list archives and on line subscription forms are at
http://keelynet.com/interact/
-------------------------------------------------------------