lifters in a vacuum

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

Are you sure?

Postby Mikado14 » Wed Jan 10, 2007 3:28 pm

I would "presume" that it is coronal at it's initiation.

Go to Spencer Gifts and for about $49.95 you can look at all the coronal discharge in a vacuum you want.

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 » Wed Jan 10, 2007 4:13 pm

David,

I'm not familiar with the tern "radiant discharge." I've seen the term in "free-energy" devices, but the definition eludes me.

I'm a bit confused, because there are four types of electrical breakdown (in air) - glow discharges, corona, sparks, and arcs, but you still require some material to ionize (gas, etc.), so it can't be one of those.

It's my understanding that visible coronal discharges only exist under certain pressures and conditions, but not in a vacuum (sans ionizable particles). I have a 1-foot diameter "plasma generator" here that has been partially evacuated and has some inert gas inserted. If I take it down to a high vacuum, the conditions will not be favorable for the formation of plasma, but perhaps I am missing something?
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

discharges

Postby Mikado14 » Wed Jan 10, 2007 7:30 pm

Andrew,

It is a term that a lot of the "free energy"ers and the "unity" use frequently.

I too am unfamiliar with it but then, I do put one leg in at a time.

I agree with you, if it is a vacuum, what is ionizing to create the corona, discharge arc, charge arc, in other words, "what's the plasma formed from?"

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 wdavidb » Wed Jan 10, 2007 7:53 pm

Chris,

Sorry if I'm confusing, don't mean to be.

None of the above.........a radiant discharge has to do with the underlying dynamics of the disc in question. The high voltage being applied is creating a differential in field potential between the disc and the vacuum, which as has already been pointed out is not a total vacuum, but enough for the sake of argument.

There is a non-uniform relationship involved here, huge actually. So there are a couple of things happening that might not be obvious.

One is the non-uniform relationship and the second point has to do with the internal condition of the disc. Its like a mirror effect but the charge is confined to the rim and the surface of the disc (internally and externally). Toward the center of the disc, inside, there is a huge increase in the underlying energy and a major decrease in gravity.

Now this is not going to make much sense to you if you are not familiar with my work, but the radiant discharge has to occur as the electrical charge being applied is causing an imbalance between the disc and the surrounding environment, which manifests as a non-uniform effect in the form of a field distortion, consequently the sparks radiating off the disc.

The disc itself wants to balance with the surrounding field, its a natural response, similar but not exactly the same as Beta decay.

It is due to the level of charge being applied that this would become obvious, as with common lifters you would not see or even be aware of this effect, but it does not mean it is not happening nonetheless.

So, there are safety issues even with common lifters that seem to be ignored due to a lack of available information, because you don't have to make contact with the lifter to be affected. You simply have to be too close and the effects to your body are subtle, but effects they are and they are accumlulative. So use a little discretion.
wdavidb
Junior Birdman
 
Posts: 144
Joined: Sat Dec 09, 2006 9:29 am
Location: Salt Spring Island BC Canada

Postby wdavidb » Wed Jan 10, 2007 8:34 pm

One more small but important point.........

Vacuum or no vacuum the effects are going to be present, otherwise the disc itself could not exist in a vacuum and or the charge being applied.

A vacuum might help with clarity, but it does not preclude those dynamic responses associated with physical structure. Otherwise there would be no gravitational effect in a vacuum either.
wdavidb
Junior Birdman
 
Posts: 144
Joined: Sat Dec 09, 2006 9:29 am
Location: Salt Spring Island BC Canada

Postby Chris Knight » Wed Jan 10, 2007 9:19 pm

David,

I'm particularly familiar with the work of Townsend Brown, and do understand the concept of non-uniformity, aysmmetric fields, gradient, and similar concepts. I believe we are speaking along lines that both Mikado and I can agree with from the viewpoint of practical application.

However, the mechanism of the arcing and glowing (without heating) of the apparatus electrodes in a vacuum is still in question. A "hard vacuum" is stated by the National Physical Laboratory as:

A hard vacuum is not well defined but it sometimes seems to be used erroneously to describe a pressure that is so low that extreme forces are involved - perhaps causing the containing vessel to implode for example. This is a misnomer; the forces acting on a vessel containing a 'perfect' vacuum would only be 0.001% more than those due to a medium vacuum of 1 Pa.


From Answers, the following information was provided:

The electron beam gun used in EBW both produces the electrons and accelerates them, using an emitter made of tungsten that emits electrons when heated. The electrons are then attracted to an anode inside the tool, where they collect and are then directed with magnetic forces resulting from focusing and deflection coils. These components are all housed in an electron beam gun column, in which a hard vacuum (about 0.00001 torr) is maintained.


So in a practical application, let's say that Townsend achieved a vacuum of 0.00001 torr, which falls into the category of 1×10-4 to 1×10-7 Pascals, 0.0001 to 0.0000001 torr, or a very high vacuum.

So, how much pressure is required for coronal discharge, glow discharge, ionic wind, and arcing ? Coronal discharge / glow discharge - is a diffuse transfer of ionized materials. Townsend described a definite arcing, so we can rule those out, plus the required pressure for coronal discharge / glow discharge is 0.00001 and 500 torr. At the minimal assumed level of 0.00001 torr for his vacuum, he would be right at the minimal vacuum for this effect.

I suddenly realized the list of high-voltage electrical phenomena is fairly complex, and I think I am getting off the track, because I still can't remember what pressure he was using !

Allow me to start over:

Let's say that Townsend really didn't have all that great of a vacuum (unlikely, considering the nature of the equipment being used, but for argument...) or there was significant, localized off-gasing from the materials used in the construction. We know some form of arcing ocurred between the electrodes of his apparatus.

My orginal thoughts were regarding the thrust experienced by the apparatus following the arcing, regardless of the arcing mechanism. Do you have a thought about what the correlation between the two effects were?
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 Chris Knight » Wed Jan 10, 2007 9:25 pm

David,

Right, the effects will be there regardless of the state of the vacuum. The age-old questions are, "will it work in a vacuum," and "is it caused by ion-wind."

The purpose of the vacuum experiments, of course, was to reduce some of the primary electrical effects plaguing the observation of the secondary BB Efect. Brown found that 1) it did, and 2) it was not, which brings us back to the question of the correlation between the "arcing" and "thrust (as a primary force)."

Yes, yes, I know. Victoria has Vassilito's and Moore's pant legs she won't let go, and I have the arcing.
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 » Thu Jan 11, 2007 5:05 am

Chris

I might be wrong here, but I feel you may be looking in all the wrong places for an answer.

Drop the ion wind idea in a vacuum, he was working on a sound and solid footing.

It's not a question of pressure and the surface temperature of the disc is not going to be hot, in fact it might not even be mildly warm.

This is why it gets so tricky, as he is tapping into the underlying force, which in respect to the terms you are working you might not even call it energy.

The high voltage charge is as you would say energy, but the internal dynamics of the disc counter this by a process of balance inherent to the underlying dynamics of the disc. And this is not something you could do without the disc configuration, not at this level.

If you put that much voltage into a piece of bar steel it would get hot, very hot.

Yes, this is complicated, especially when you are trying to fit it into a specific set of rules. So in order to overcome that problem I think you have to step back from it and just try and picture what was happening in the context of Brown's experience.

That's a magnificent picture of his disc....is there film of this experiment that you could look at?

I'm sorry if I'm not being very helpful here.

Explain this thrust to me a bit, what exactly are you referring to, the lift or the horizontal thrust? That's an important point.

Also I assume this thing did not spin, or at least I would hope not. as it should not. The shape is key to the whole experiment.
wdavidb
Junior Birdman
 
Posts: 144
Joined: Sat Dec 09, 2006 9:29 am
Location: Salt Spring Island BC Canada

Postby Chris Knight » Thu Jan 11, 2007 4:28 pm

David,

This thread originally began discussing the lifters in a vacuum - one of the primary discussions regarding Townsend Brown's work comes from the lifter groups. The lifters are based on the maximization of ionic wind, and hence will not work in a vacuum (aside from some minimal EG force naturally associated with all electrical fields). These "lifters" have been around far longer than Townsend Brown - I believe they were first discussed in the 1700's.

Unfortunately, the similarities between the lifter design has led people to assume that the lifter "technology" works on the principles of the Biefeld-Brown Effect - they do not (aside from the aforemenioned minimal EG force naturally associated with all electrical fields).

Therefore, many people assume that since the lifters do not work well in a vacuum (and will not work effieciently when arcing), Townsend Brown's discs will also not work in a vacuum since they mistakenly correlate any disc movement with ionic wind. This has been proven incorrect, and the point of the arcing (in a vacuum, nonetheless) associated with the thrust (approaching a primary effect) further proves their assumptions incorrect. The thrust was horizontal in the case we are discussing.

I'm somewhat familiar with the nuances of a small portion of Townsend's research in this area. I have attempted to ask questions that might help others understand the nature of the discs vs. lifters. Apparently, I have made a shabby job of it.

For anyone reading these forums, it is important to develop a scientific-based discussion based on fundamental principles to show why ionic wind is not responsible for the discs, why ionic wind cannot exist in a vacuum, etc. Unless it is comprehensible to the ordinary person, then it is of no use.

You say to forget about ion wind in a vacuum. Please explain to the forums why ionic wind cannot be responsible for movement in a vacuum. What pressure is required for ion wind to exist? Under what minimal pressure conditions will arcing, glow discharge, coronal discharge exist? What is "radiant discharge"? What underlying forces are you proposing the disc works on? Why would steel heat up if you put a charge on it (voltage)?

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 Mikado14 » Thu Jan 11, 2007 5:00 pm

Chris Knight wrote:Unfortunately, the similarities between the lifter design has led people to assume that the lifter "technology" works on the principles of the Biefeld-Brown Effect - they do not (aside from the aforemenioned minimal EG force naturally associated with all electrical fields).


'bout time somebody said it.

Chris Knight wrote:Therefore, many people assume that since the lifters do not work well in a vacuum (and will not work effieciently when arcing), Townsend Brown's discs will also not work in a vacuum since they mistakenly correlate any disc movement with ionic wind. This has been proven incorrect, and the point of the arcing (in a vacuum, nonetheless) associated with the thrust (approaching a primary effect) further proves their assumptions incorrect. The thrust was horizontal in the case we are discussing.


There is more similarity of a lifter to the speaker in the study.


Chris Knight wrote:For anyone reading these forums, it is important to develop a scientific-based discussion based on fundamental principles to show why ionic wind is not responsible for the discs, why ionic wind cannot exist in a vacuum, etc. Unless it can be comprehended by the general layman, then it is of no use.


Are you saying that individuals here lack communication skills?

Chris Knight wrote:You say to forget about ion wind in a vacuum. Please explain to the forums why ionic wind cannot be responsible for movement in a vacuum. What pressure is required for ion wind to exist? Under what minimal pressure conditions will arcing, glow discharge, coronal discharge exist? What is "radiant discharge"?


Agreed, if your going to make a statement and be called on the carpet, be prepared to explain it in terms that can be understood by all.

Mikado

PS: I see you edited while I was posting, I too would like to hear an answer to the steel heating up.
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

lifters and speakers

Postby Elizabeth Helen Drake » Thu Jan 11, 2007 5:57 pm

You are right Mikado. From what I have studied so far there is a closer relationship between the lifters and the speaker that Morgan first saw at Ashlawn in Dr. Browns study.

With the "fan" "Ion momentum transfer" is being demonstrated. Dr. Browns simplest explanation was that there was a "force field set up" which was "like two fingers sqeezing a watermellon seed." The air moved the way the squeezed watermelon seed would move ... constantly.

With the "loudspeaker" he utilized the fact that the "fan" could be turned off and on instantly .... when you can do that ... its the same thing as modulated sound .... and thats what he did. I still don't really understand all of that ..... but it is out there in the published accounts of his work. The loudspeaker was supposed to be very precise and with exceptional clairity

The disc that he is holding in that picture is another animal altogether, very distantly related maybe .... but a different thing, for a different purpose.

I think it is wonderful that these discussions are taking place and I appreciate all the mental energy flowing in this direction.

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

Postby Chris Knight » Thu Jan 11, 2007 6:08 pm

Mikado,

Are you saying that individuals here lack communication skills?


Well, only in that can be difficult for people of differing educational levels and areas of expertise to communicate. We all know communication is a two-way street, and I am no less guilty of the ocassional lack of communication skills (ask LongboardLOVELY sometime).

The difficulty is finding the common language, so I don't want to put blame on anyone person's shoulders. I tend to think in terms of forces, current, amps, materials, and so on, and it seems to me that you are of a very practical nature as well, so it can be difficult for me to understand terminology such as found in the free energy and unity worlds.

I want to communicate with you, David, because I want to understand what you are conceptualizing. I can go a little further out there if you can come a little further in this direction.
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 » Fri Jan 12, 2007 10:19 am

Ionic wind............the lifter crowd claim that ionic wind is responsible for the lifter effect, but lifters do not work in a vacuum, so I am assuming that it is not an ionic wind effect that is at work in the vacuum. In fact I am positive it is not an ionic wind effect.

Now in some respects you are talking right over my head, but I am trying.

In a vacuum, where is the ionic wind going to come from? How is it supported in a vacuum?

Let me just say this, we can't have Dr. Browns work, at least some of it, being a big secret and still have everyone know all about his flying discs.

But it is possible to understand how the disc would fly if you know what dynamic responses are required for it to perform in such a manner.

So, what I am saying or trying to say is that there are some very exciting things at work here, which involves the underlying dynamics of the disc in a vacuum.

From my experience metals get warm and then hot when you run an electrical current through them. Now maybe we are not talking about the same thing at all, which is a very real possibility, in which case I will stay away from the engineering end of things and stick to what I do know.

Unless the underlying energy of the disc is increased sufficiently, which of course reduces the relative weight of the disc....the disc will not lift or fly.

Now, I am not up to speed on the disc experiments of Dr. Brown, but if he could control horizontal thrust as well as lift.......wow!

So, if this is the case the common lifters have nothing in common with the disc shown, not even the same species.

Therefore, lets focus on the radiant discharge, which I must assume actually occurred........this is the reverse of a common lifter. The disc is radiating a charge, which is the excess or that which is not required to maintain a dynamic balance.

The radiant discharge is providing a dynamic balance in relation to the disc.

Now, Dr. Brown says that it worked better in a vacuum, which makes sense, as there is no air to affect resistance.

From all of this we can conclude that Dr. Brown was able to manipulate the gravity of the disc relative to the gravity of the earth in a vacuum, which is quite an achievement, but if he could also affect thrust he had found a way to focus the internal energy of the disc in such a manner as to shift the center of the dic's dynamics in the desired direction.

I am trying to picture whether the electrical discharging would increase or decrease with altitude.... it might occur going up and coming down.

And I would also suggest that the electrical discharging was more of a pulsed effect than a steady flow.

I find this whole thing totally amazing, that he was doing this when he was, yet we are still flying around in winged aircraft.

I apologize for not being more articulate and more knowledgeable in your field of expertise.
Last edited by wdavidb on Fri Jan 12, 2007 10:42 am, edited 1 time in total.
wdavidb
Junior Birdman
 
Posts: 144
Joined: Sat Dec 09, 2006 9:29 am
Location: Salt Spring Island BC Canada

Postby wdavidb » Fri Jan 12, 2007 10:30 am

I want to make this real clear.........the lifter crowd cannot compare their lifters to the work of Dr. Brown, not because he is smarter or a better scientist, even though it is probably true, but because he is working on a whole different set of principles, which have nothing to do with what the lifter gang are doing.

To some it might appear that it is the same, but it is not the same at all.
wdavidb
Junior Birdman
 
Posts: 144
Joined: Sat Dec 09, 2006 9:29 am
Location: Salt Spring Island BC Canada

Witness to the "execution" ?

Postby Paul S. » Fri Jan 12, 2007 4:44 pm

wdavidb wrote:Ionic wind............the lifter crowd claim that ionic wind is responsible for the lifter effect, but lifters do not work in a vacuum, so I am assuming that it is not an ionic wind effect that is at work in the vacuum. In fact I am positive it is not an ionic wind effect.

...

In a vacuum, where is the ionic wind going to come from? How is it supported in a vacuum?


David, based on everything I've been able to round up, it sounds to me like your assessment is essentially correct, that the "Lifter" is levitated by ionic wind, and so will not work in a vacuum. Check.

But the second part of your post here seems to imply that you have witnessed something -- a lifter or something like it? -- that HAS levitated in a vacuum, and that necessarily implies an effect other than the ionic wind.

Am I understanding you correctly here? Have you in fact witnessed such an event? Is it something you can tell us more about?

Otherwise, I believe most (if not all) of us in THIS generation are still waiting to see a Townsend Brown device operate in a vacuum.

Please note, I am NOT saying that it WON'T operate in a vacuum, only that I'm not aware of anybody in this circle, or in the Lifter group, who has witnessed such a thing.

Unless, of course, Mr. Twigsnapper was privy to something when Dr. Brown was in France...??

--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

PreviousNext

Return to The Science of Townsend Brown

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 1 guest

cron