lifters in a vacuum

For a discussion of the science of Townsend Brown, his experiments and his ideas.

lifters in a vacuum

Postby Elizabeth Helen Drake » Mon Jan 01, 2007 10:33 pm

Hey gang,

I just stumbled upon this very interesting post in the lifter forum and I thought some of you might enjoy reading the entire thing. It was penned by Anthony Holland. (Mr. Holland, if you happen to read this, would you join our happy crew? Just follow directions for joining the forum which Paul has put at the top of the discussion board. We would appreciate hearing from you.)

http://us.f346.mail.yahoo.com/ym/ShowLe ... &box=Inbox

The part that caught my attention especially was your statement:

"Sorry, I've only read this figure somewhere ...on the very low amperage
levels used by TT Brown...... maybe in the book by Sigma Rho... in
which the author publishes a letter from TT Brown describing how his
devices worked in vacuum at at least three different laboratory
locations and also that his power supply varied from 50KV to 250KV.
I've never seen anything that says brown had power supplies > 250KV,
such as you suggest below, but I suppose that is possible.

I've not seen anybody on the net experiment in the 100KV or higher
range yet when attempting flight in vacuum, but Brown clearly indicated
the voltage level had to be that or higher to work in vacuum. In some
recent vacuum chamber tests of which I am aware, there was a limitation
of only 15KV on the 'pass through' mechanism which would allow an
external HV supply outside the Vac. chamber.... so at that experiment
it was not possible to attempt to use a higher voltage using a power
supply external to the chamber, it simply would have arc'd over and
since the vacuum chamber was very expensive, it was determined not to
risk it at that time. It seems to be difficult to find a HV supply >
100KV with .001 amps or less (for safety reasons). I suppose maybe
somebody could build one but I don't believe you would be able to use a
metal housing high vacuum chamber. TT Brown used a large glass bell jar
for his vacuum tests. Some have suggested that tests inside metal
vacuum chambers distort the shape of the HV electrostatic field. TT
Brown clearly indicates in his notebooks and elsewhere that the SHAPE
of the field is absolutely critical to lift power.

Until somebody starts experimenting with 100KV or higher, in a non
metal vacuum chamber, we won't see any evidence of lifters working in
vacuum. Those who have categorically stated that lifters don't work in
vacuum have made a number of false assumptions upon which all of their
tests to date have been made."

Comments from our peanut gallery? NASA????

The only comment that I have is that I happen to have that book on my research shelf. Unfortuneately it is written in German, which I do not speak, but I can get the gist of many things. (The authors pen name was actually Rho Sigma.)

One of the reoccuring statments which I found interesting was " Where is Townsend Brown?"

Elizabeth
Elizabeth Helen Drake
Sr. Research Asst.
 
Posts: 1740
Joined: Fri Sep 23, 2005 6:11 am

and furthermore

Postby Elizabeth Helen Drake » Tue Jan 02, 2007 5:19 pm

Hey gang, again ..... another piece of this liftre group discussion.
This from " Steve" .... You out there Steve ..... comments???


"Leon,
The following is taken from Brown's letter to Rho Sigma (Dr. Rolf
Schaffranke) . I have it in Rho Sigma's book "Ether-Technology -
A Rational Approach to Gravity Control" but it is also available in:
http://jlnlabs. imars.com/ lifters/arl_ fac/0211001. pdf

"The experiments in vacuum were conducted at "Societe Nationale de
Construction Aeronautique" in Paris in 1955-56, in the Bahnson
Laboratories, Winston-Salem, North Carolina in 1957-58 and at
the "General Electric Space Center" at King of Prussia, Penna, in
1959. (MIKADO ARE YOU SEEING THIS, KING OF PRUSSIA, PA?)
...
In the Paris test miniature saucer type airfoils were operated in a
vaccum exceeding 10-6mm Hg.Bursts of thrust (towards the positive)
were observed every time there was a vaccum spark within the large
bell jar.- These vacuum sparks represented momentary ionization,
principally of the metal ions in the electrode material. The DC
potential used ranged from 70kV to 220kV.

Condensers of various types, air dielectric and barium titanate were
assembled on a rotary support to eliminate the electrostatic effect
of chamber walls and observations were made of the rate of
rotation.Intense acceleration was always observed during the vacuum
spark (which, incidentally, illuminated the entire interior of the
vacuum chamber). Barium Titanate dielectrique always exceeded air
dielectric in total thrust. The results which were most significant
from the -standpoint of the Biefeld-Brown effect was that thrust
continued, even when there was no vacuum spark, causing the rotor to
accelerate in the negative to positive direction to the point where
voltage had to be reduced or the experiment discontinued because of
the danger that the rotor would fly apart.

In short, it appears there is strong evidence that Biefeld-Brown
effect does exist in the negative to positive direction in a vacuum
of at least 10-6 Torr. The residual thrust is several orders of
magnitude larger than the remaining ambient ionization can account
for."

The spark was a warning flag for me since that can produce a
reaction force, however, he does say there was thrust even when
there was no spark.
-Steve
http://rimstar. org

PS. In Brown's US patent 2,949,550 he describes devices that are
basically the same as lifters but in his US patent 3,022,430 he
describes devices that are quite different. Brown built all kinds of
devices which likely resulted in various sources of thrust. In the
Bahnson labs video some of his devices clearly use foil, though
those are dome type devices.
Links to the above mentioned patents follow:
http://v3.espacenet .com/textdoc? DB=EPODOC& IDX=US2949550& F=0
http://v3.espacenet .com/textdoc? DB=EPODOC& IDX=US3022430& F=0

SO DOES THIS HELP ANYBODY? ELIZABETH
Elizabeth Helen Drake
Sr. Research Asst.
 
Posts: 1740
Joined: Fri Sep 23, 2005 6:11 am

things finally seen

Postby Elizabeth Helen Drake » Wed Jan 03, 2007 1:59 pm

You know, the Lifter Group Forum is normally kept busy by discussions of the best way to build these lifters.

I have always wondered why some of those folks haven't paid more attention to the man who initially recognized and developed the phenomenon. Oh there has been mention of his name. Usually its encased in the phrase something sort of like "originally developed by an obscure scientist in the fifties ... named .... Townsend Brown." The rank and file hasn't really bothered to look in the direction of his notebooks and really see what they were saying. Now that those notebooks are being studied more carefully I am gratified to notice that some are paying attention to the work that Townsend Brown actually accomplished.

Electrogravitic" was a word he himself coined. Today people use that word constantly without realizing its roots and of course by doing that, they miss much.

I just wanted to thank Anthony Holland for his recent post on the Lifter Group. Here it is. NASA are you paying any attention at all?

HERE IS HIS POST

Some interesting comments from TT Brown's notebooks on high vacuum
experiments:
***
"43. The Nature of the Vacuum Spark, as related to the initiation of an
electrogravitic impulse.

The vacuum spark is apparently not due to a flow of electrons, although
a flow of electrons may accompany the discharge.

Initiation of the "flash", as it is called from observations in the
dark, appear to be related to anode conditions such as shape (field
intensity) and the metal comprising the anode. In a recently evacuated
system, flashing starts at a comparatively low voltage, 30-40 KV. It
becomes less frequent at this low range and then ceases altogether. A
higher voltage is then required --- 50 to 60 KV, which causes a
succession of flashes which, in turn, cease. At 80-90 KV, flashing is
intense for a time, but finally ceases. At 130-140 KV, the flashing is
quite intense and cease only after a considerable time. It is believed
that a threshold may be reached between 150-200 KV where flashing will
be sustained and continuous.

The electrogravitic forces developed by the rapid succession of
impulses which accompany the flashing in the higher voltage ranges is
indeed a first order effect, measurable in thousands of dynes, even
with small scale equipment.

While the nature of the flash (or its cause) is not wholly understood,
it is reasonable a this stage to suspect positive conduction, at least
as the initiator. Emission from the anode, bombarding the cathode, may
(and probably does) release electrons which contribute to the
electrical conduction. Since the effect takes place in very high
vacuum, it is unlikely that atmospheric ions or the like are involved.
Occluded atoms or molecules are probably pulled from the anode
material, and these, of course, may be oxygen, nitrogen, hydrogen, or
any of the atmospheric gases. Metallic ions of the anode material may
be involved, or perhaps even microscopic pieces of metal.

One of the spectacular features of the flash is the colored
luminescence which appears on or immediately adjacent to the anode
and/or the shifting areas of light and color across the face of the
anode. The color is reddish --- like hot metal, although in reality the
surface is not hot: Cadmium is especially active in this respect
although other metals reveal the same red coloration. White star-like
spots of considerable brilliance appear on the cathode. "
***
Anthony
in
NY

PLEASE READ THIS CAREFULLY FOLKS, ELIZABETH
Elizabeth Helen Drake
Sr. Research Asst.
 
Posts: 1740
Joined: Fri Sep 23, 2005 6:11 am

eh what?

Postby grinder » Wed Jan 03, 2007 2:51 pm

This is really fascinating first rate stuff.

this especially

The electrogravitic forces developed by the rapid succession of
impulses which accompany the flashing in the higher voltage ranges is
indeed a first order effect, measurable in thousands of dynes, even
with small scale equipment

FIRST ORDER EFFECT? WHAT? WHAT?

And all I can think of right now is those hundreds of UFO reports where the thing was flashing from red to blue and back again and I wonder if we are seeing the lab results of the same thing?

And all that silly talk about a "lifter " not working in a vacuum? Well maybe, just maybe, its not supposed to work in a vacuum .... but this smooth disc that I have seen pictures of Townsend Brown holding. Thats no " lifter", is it Elizabeth? It took me awhile by the way, my regards. grinder
grinder
Senior Officer
 
Posts: 694
Joined: Wed Apr 05, 2006 6:20 am

Re: eh what?

Postby Mikado14 » Wed Jan 03, 2007 3:33 pm

grinder wrote:
And all that silly talk about a "lifter " not working in a vacuum? Well maybe, just maybe, its not supposed to work in a vacuum .... but this smooth disc that I have seen pictures of Townsend Brown holding. Thats no " lifter", is it Elizabeth? It took me awhile by the way, my regards. grinder


You got that right!!!

Mikado
There are more things in heaven and earth, Horatio, Than are dreamt of in your philosophy
Mikado14
Mr. Nice Guy
 
Posts: 2343
Joined: Thu Aug 10, 2006 1:49 pm
Location: Somewhere in Pennsy

No Triangles Here

Postby Paul S. » Wed Jan 03, 2007 6:38 pm

grinder wrote:And all that silly talk about a "lifter " not working in a vacuum? Well maybe, just maybe, its not supposed to work in a vacuum .... but this smooth disc that I have seen pictures of Townsend Brown holding. Thats no " lifter", is it Elizabeth?


Elizabeth asked me to put this up for grinder and Mikado:

Image
image copyright: 2007 Towsend Brown Family Archives

I confess, some of this recent business (like that "Mythbusters" piece from Discovery Channel) about "lifters don't work in a vacuum" has been confounding me, because I've read so much about Townsend Brown's own experiments in a vacuum being successful. Hell, I even have FILM of some of the experiments at the Bahnson lab in NC in '57 and '58. I'm working with that footage right now to see what I can post to Google Video (or Youtube) so that everybody can see what I'm talking about.

But grinder's observation is basically on the money. "Lifters" may not work in a vacuum, but that does not completely discount the gravitational field properties of a properly configured (and operated) Townsend Brown device.

--PS
Paul Schatzkin
aka "The Perfesser"
"At some point we have to deal with the facts, not what we want to believe is true." -- Jack Bauer
Paul S.
Sr. Rabbit Chaser
 
Posts: 1362
Joined: Thu Mar 17, 2005 1:11 pm
Location: Psych Ward

Postby Rocky » Sat Jan 06, 2007 9:17 pm

Hello all,

I’m new to the forum and haven’t read all the comments on the forums… yet, so I hope I’m not beating a dead horse (or stepping on any toes).

The Mythbusters are in my opinion, “bustedâ€
Rocky
Space Cadet
 
Posts: 45
Joined: Wed Dec 20, 2006 6:30 am
Location: Cookeville, Tennessee

welcome!

Postby Elizabeth Helen Drake » Sun Jan 07, 2007 1:24 am

Rocky,

Welcome to the Townsend Brown forum. I am sorry, I nearly missed your post! Looking forward to any and all comments.

And as all of us would tell you please NEVER worry about "stepping on toes" around here! We all wear steel tipped boots emotionally, or we should! This is a forum where anything can be discussed regarding Townsend Browns work or life, or even the philosophical underpinnings all that might generate. Have at it!

The only thing all of us ask is that we treat each other with respect. We are all displaying (and are sure to display in the future) various degrees of ignorance around here, and you will discover this whole thing is alot like an onion! Just when you think you have a handle on what you are looking at another peel slides off and you end up starting fresh.

I am glad you mentioned a light for dark passageways. You're gonna need it! Welcome again! Elizabeth
Elizabeth Helen Drake
Sr. Research Asst.
 
Posts: 1740
Joined: Fri Sep 23, 2005 6:11 am

Postby Chris Knight » Sun Jan 07, 2007 2:52 am

Rocky,

That's smart - you are right about the lifters. Mr. Naudin and Ventura aren't all that interested in talking about that aspect of the lifters, though.

The sparks Townsend observed in the tri-arcuate discs are important. In the absence of ion wind in a hard vacuum, what do you think might be the cause of such an effect?

The spark across the gap was followed immediately by an impulse (thrust). Do you think perhaps the thrust was caused by an "equalization" of the electrode charges?
Andrew
Qualight Environmental
(http://www.qualight.com, http://www.qualightenv.com, http://www.qualightscp.com)

"If you think the situation is under control, then you don't truly understand the situation."
Chris Knight
Keeper of the Flame
 
Posts: 465
Joined: Sat Aug 02, 2003 5:35 am
Location: Los Angeles, CA

Sparks?

Postby Paul S. » Sun Jan 07, 2007 5:20 am

Chris Knight wrote:The sparks Townsend observed in the tri-arcuate discs are important. In the absence of ion wind in a hard vacuum, what do you think might be the cause of such an effect?


Forgive my ignorance here, but this business about sparks in the vacuum has been coming up this week. The guys over at the Yahoo Lifters group have been all over it, and I've been reading some of Dr. Brown's notes on the subject.

So, uh, what exactly is it that's so unusual about this spark? Are sparks not supposed to happen in a vacuum? That doesn't sound right to me.

--PS
Paul Schatzkin
aka "The Perfesser"
"At some point we have to deal with the facts, not what we want to believe is true." -- Jack Bauer
Paul S.
Sr. Rabbit Chaser
 
Posts: 1362
Joined: Thu Mar 17, 2005 1:11 pm
Location: Psych Ward

Re: Sparks?

Postby Mikado14 » Sun Jan 07, 2007 3:40 pm

Paul S. wrote:

So, uh, what exactly is it that's so unusual about this spark? Are sparks not supposed to happen in a vacuum? That doesn't sound right to me.

--PS


In layman's terms, no. If there is a pure vacuum, and when I say pure, we're talking maybe 1x10-6 (1 times 10 to the negative 6) torre, there is no appreciable amount of atmosphere to ionize. The ionization of the atmosphere, and hence resultant plasma, is what you see in an arc.

Mikado
There are more things in heaven and earth, Horatio, Than are dreamt of in your philosophy
Mikado14
Mr. Nice Guy
 
Posts: 2343
Joined: Thu Aug 10, 2006 1:49 pm
Location: Somewhere in Pennsy

Postby Chris Knight » Sun Jan 07, 2007 4:58 pm

Right, Mikado. I used the term "hard vacuum," which is an anachronism now. Vacuum is described from a low vacuum (high pressure) through high vacuum to extreme ultra-high vacuum (very low pressure).

From Answers:

It was the ability to make a "hard" vacuum in a glass tube, achieved in 1854, that led to the discovery of X rays, the electron, and (indirectly) radioactivity. In the first half of the 20th century, vacuum tubes powered radio and television, computers, and other electronic devices, until they were largely displaced by solid-state devices, such as transistors and
chips.


Atmospheric pressure at sea level is approximately 760 torr (about 30 billion billion (30E18) gas molecules per cubic centimeter) compared with interstellar spaces having as low as 10E−16 Torr, where only a few molecules are found per cubic centimeter, and perhaps as low as one hydrogen atom per cubic meter. The best we have been able to do is vacuums with less than 100,000 gas molecules per cubic centimeter.

Ionic wind form Answers:

Ion wind, ionic wind, or coronal wind is a stream of ionized fluid generated by a strong electric field.


Electric charges on conductors reside entirely on their external surface (see Faraday cage), and tend to concentrate more around sharp points and edges than on flat surfaces. This means that the electric field generated by charges on a sharp conductive point is much stronger than the field generated by the same charge residing on a large smooth spherical conductive shell. When this electric field strength exceeds what is known as the corona discharge inception voltage (CIV) gradient, it ionises the air about the tip, and a small faint purple jet of plasma can be seen in the dark on the conductive tip. Ionisation of the nearby air molecules result in generation of ionised air molecules having the same polarity as that of the charged tip. Subsequently, the tip repels the like-charged ion cloud, and the ion cloud immediately expands due to the repulsion between the ions themselves. This repulsion of ions creates an electric "wind" that emanates from the tip, which is usually accompanied by a hissing noise due to the change in air pressure at the tip.


The "lifters" that are so popular with Mr. Naudin and Mr. Ventura require a atmosphere to push against - the movement is predominantly due to the movement of ionized particles against the ambient atmosphere.

Ion(ic) wind will not occur where there are no molecules to ionize as Mikado pointed out; hence any movement of the lifters in a high vacuum would be suprising (aside from any residual EMG effect associated with the electric field).

Brown mentioned that the parts of the apparatus exhibiting the arcing appeared to be red, but apparently did not heat up as with the case of the electron transmission in a vacuum tube.

What is interesting, though, aside from the generation of the spark, is the impulse associated with the sparks. Anyone catch that?

Best,
Andrew
Qualight Environmental
(http://www.qualight.com, http://www.qualightenv.com, http://www.qualightscp.com)

"If you think the situation is under control, then you don't truly understand the situation."
Chris Knight
Keeper of the Flame
 
Posts: 465
Joined: Sat Aug 02, 2003 5:35 am
Location: Los Angeles, CA

Postby Rocky » Sun Jan 07, 2007 10:29 pm

Exactly to the point. What needs to be done is emission spectral analysis of the “arcingâ€
Rocky
Space Cadet
 
Posts: 45
Joined: Wed Dec 20, 2006 6:30 am
Location: Cookeville, Tennessee

Postby Chris Knight » Mon Jan 08, 2007 3:15 am

Rocky,

That's a good idea. I was just thinking about monatomic oxygen, and the thought of the porosity of materials used in the construction of the discs came to mind. I assumed that Townsend used spun aluminum or steel, and then found the following at Ansers:

In ultra high vacuum systems, some very odd leakage paths and outgassing sources must be considered. The water absorption of aluminium and palladium becomes an unacceptable source of outgassing, and even the adsorptivity of hard metals such as stainless steel or titanium must be considered. Some oils and greases will boil off in extreme vacuums. The porosity of the metallic chamber walls may have to be considered, and the grain direction of the metallic flanges should be parallel to the flange face.


SO, it would be interesting to look at the spectra of the arcing.

It has been mentioned that he used a "hard" vacuum, but off-hand I can't remember what vacuum pressures he used. I have a document somewhere describing the current requirements versus vacuum (somewhere).
Andrew
Qualight Environmental
(http://www.qualight.com, http://www.qualightenv.com, http://www.qualightscp.com)

"If you think the situation is under control, then you don't truly understand the situation."
Chris Knight
Keeper of the Flame
 
Posts: 465
Joined: Sat Aug 02, 2003 5:35 am
Location: Los Angeles, CA

Postby wdavidb » Wed Jan 10, 2007 9:01 am

This whole lifter thing, the Ventura crowd, is missing the boat.

Sparks in a vacuum, of course there are going to be sparks, its a radiant discharge.

The missing piece is the inside/outside situation, meaning internal and external dynamics affecting inverse responses.

You induce 150,000 volts into that disc he's holding and you are going to get an inversely proportional response on the inside, which in effect reduces the discs resistance to gravity inwardly and outwardly.

The trick would be to control the effect from inside the disc by manipulating the internal dynamics to affect the external dynamics, which is the exact opposite of what Dr. Brown appears to be doing, but I'm not so sure about that. Perhaps this is what they let you see or let you think you see.

Now, if he knew the internal and external dynamics were inversely proportional then he understood how to duplicate the discs seen in the sky, or something very close to it. At any rate it was progress in the right direction, which the lifter crowd seem to keep missing.
wdavidb
Junior Birdman
 
Posts: 144
Joined: Sat Dec 09, 2006 9:29 am
Location: Salt Spring Island BC Canada

Next

Return to The Science of Townsend Brown

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: Google [Bot] and 1 guest

cron