lifters in a vacuum

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

taking me awhile

Postby grinder » Sat Jan 13, 2007 7:59 pm

Its taken me awhile but I think I am finally getting a handle on this.

Its hard to see what Dr. Brown was actually doing because there are so many sides of this thing and when people THINK they know ONE, they discount the others because they vary slightly. When in actuality ALL of his concepts are viable and provable in different directions. At once.

Two things just fascinated me in the last few exchanges.
Pauls continued pressure to fill his quest for "facts, just the facts mam, "
Elizabeths obvious guarded response about whether this should be pursued AT ALL. And her single word response as an answer to Pauls " "depends on who gets the keys!? was priceless "Ah!" she said and thats all she needed to say. A world in that "Ah" . I immediately added " Theres the rub".
And then here comes Chris (Andrew) with this very well drawn out group of information which would please Paul (I should hope, it did me) but at the end he circles back to the question of what is being built here, amonst all the choices and he says its better to build a model T instead of the Ferrari. Which I am assuming here is what concerns Elizabeth.

Folks, is it just me, or does all of this seem to be coming together?
And I wonder with Elizabeth if we are really ready. because I figured that we are talking about the FTM here. grinder
grinder
Senior Officer
 
Posts: 694
Joined: Wed Apr 05, 2006 6:20 am

vacuum

Postby Mikado14 » Tue Jan 16, 2007 3:02 am

I thought i would post this in the hopes that perhaps more information will come forth.

The following is from personal experience from the General Electric Space Center located in King of Prussia, not to far from Ashlawn. It is a description of the inside of the vacuum chamber.

You walked through what I would have called a large pressure door that was approximately 60" across by about 72" in height. When you walked in it was on the cold side with the interior all painted a flat black, very non-reflective but the paint was marked off in spots from use. It was a giant sphere that was wider than it was tall due to the fact that there was a walkway that proceeded from either side of the door that would permit walking around the entire inside of the sphere. From the walkway, you walk down ramps to the floor of the sphere, the ramps were probably at 30 degrees and put you about another 30 inches lower from the walkway. About 2/3 of the way up the sides were placed different light arrays. These could produce different wavelengths of light from the infrared to the ultraviolet. Supposedly they could do more but that is only what someone present mentioned( x-ray, gamma etc). There was a large window, approximately 3 feet by 3 feet, this was were the operator and/or observer could view the inside of the chamber.

I mentioned above that it was a sphere, in reality I believe it is ovoid.

Can anyone see the significance of this description as to what Paul is working on?

Does anyone have a description of the possible size of the one in France? or the Bahnson Labs?

I will not answer questions as to why I was there in the chamber.

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

Cost?

Postby Radomir » Tue Jan 16, 2007 10:57 pm

So Andrew what is stopping you from building an in-vacuum chamber proof of concept? The Model-T version you refer to.

Forgive my ignorance but what kind of costs are we talking about here?

What are the specific components you would use, hypothetically, and what would be the associated costs?

Power Source: I'm assuming for instance given the above discussion you'd need a voltage source that could produce at least 100KV, possibly 200-250KV.

A vacuum chamber: large bell jar with some vacuum pump attachment? Or would something more sophisticated be necessary?

Test object: The materials to build the disc to test vertical motion, assuming you prefer that embodiment over the rotating-drum patent.

Meters and video/sound recording device(s) to record the test(s)...? What else?

R.
Radomir
Senior Cadet
 
Posts: 326
Joined: Sun Dec 24, 2006 6:51 pm

Postby Chris Knight » Wed Jan 17, 2007 12:25 am

Radomir,

Your initial assumption was that an apparatus would require an in-vacuum proof-of-concept test (completely reasonable since that is what we have been talking about). Looking back at an earlier post:

"Brown worked on a number of apparatuses, and they all share a common denominator. They are like the bloodlines we have been discussing. One apparatus won't necessarily do the same thing as another - for example, a generator and a cell phone both put out energy, but they serve entirely different functions and are modified to maximize a certain electromagnetic effect."


There are numerous iterations in which air pressure, vacuum, ion wind, and so on, are of no consequence whatsoever. i.e. there's more than one way to hoe a field. Most of the work we're involved in is proprietary to Qualight, but if one wanted to build a tri-arcuate disc, I suspect one could build a full-on proof of concept for, say $20-40k. If one wanted.

The cost would depend entirely on if you were to build it yourself, or buy.

Power supplies are cheap. If you build them yourself even cheaper. I bought a pair of lab grade +/- 50KV / 1mA supplies 20 years ago for about $2,000 each. Those were pretty small units - about 5" x 5" x 14", so I'll bet you could get a decent supply easily enough. Waveshaping would increase the complexity, but not further than someone with some EE background could build. I'd probably go to 500KV / 1mA minimum.

For the disc, you'd want to use a material that didn't suffer as much from out-gassing such as stainless steel, but you could also use aluminum to save cost, and you'd have it spun in one large piece.

I have to admit, I don't remember the rotating-drum patent, but the vertical and horizontal thrust use two different but similar structural appurtenances. Vertical thrust I'd start with a design from Project Winterhaven, which I put at http://www.qualight.com/kinetics/winter.htm (I see my image links aren't working - I'll fix that).

The most expensive part would be a vacuum chamber - if you were a decent machinist, etc. you could build a sizable vacuum chamber at reduced cost, but that would be a bit complex for most people - you'd need special welding equipment and a machinist shop. Stainless steel, glass and ceramic construction inside. All-metal seals with copper gaskets, and say, a titanium alloy or stainless steel wall construction.

Also, note that one pump won't get you down past 10E-6. From Wikpedia:

Several types of pumps may be used in sequence or in parallel. In a typical pumpdown sequence, a positive displacement pump would be used to remove most of the gas from a chamber, starting from atmosphere (760 Torr, 101 kPa) to 25 Torr (3 kPa). Then a sorption pump would be used to bring the pressure down to 10-4 Torr (10 mPa). A cryopump or turbomolecular pump would be used to bring the pressure further down to 10-8 Torr. An additional ion pump can be started below 10-6 Torr to remove gases which are not adequately handled by a cryopump or turbo pump, such as helium or hydrogen.


I would scour military surplus yards, Army-Navy surplus stores, Ebay, etc. and if that didn't come up with anything, I'd go to my local university physics department and see what they have.

In my mind, it comes down to how much passion would a person be willing to put into a project like that rather than the money. We are easily talking possibly about a multi-year project with significant financial input and intellectual learning for the potential of little to no return aside from knowledge. Plus, the machinery, tools, supplies, and vacuum chamber would have to be stored somewhere where you had enough room to work. Coupled with day to day living and distractions, I don't know many people offhand who are that dedicated.
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

Why would...

Postby Mikado14 » Wed Jan 17, 2007 2:30 am

My question is why would you want the vacuum chamber?


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 17, 2007 5:11 am

I rescanned the figures into Project Winterhaven, so everything is up and running again.
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

your response

Postby Radomir » Wed Jan 17, 2007 6:52 pm

Thanks Andrew for the thorough response. That was very helpful and enlightening.

Mikado, I was wanting the vacuum chamber because it seems that's the main point of contention. Folks don't seem to have an issue with other thrust-related TTB experimental embodiments working via some sort of ion wind effect. But as the thread content here points out, we don't appear to have any contemporary witness(es) nor direct evidence that TTB's effect worked in a vacuum. I happen to have faith that it did, and with my questions to Andrew I was trying to get a grip on what would be required to replicate such an experimental demonstration.

Apparently, quite a lot more than I had anticipated, especially around the actual chamber itself.

Much food for thought there.

R.

PS. The drum version I was referencing I believe is called the "cellular gravitator" which is an embodiment for deriving rotating shaft power from the effect. Paul has a graphic of it in Ch. 23 as the 1928 patent.

http://ttbrown.com/defying_gravity/20_cosmic_energy.html
Radomir
Senior Cadet
 
Posts: 326
Joined: Sun Dec 24, 2006 6:51 pm

Re: your response

Postby Mikado14 » Wed Jan 17, 2007 8:04 pm

Radomir wrote:Mikado, I was wanting the vacuum chamber because it seems that's the main point of contention. Folks don't seem to have an issue with other thrust-related TTB experimental embodiments working via some sort of ion wind effect. But as the thread content here points out, we don't appear to have any contemporary witness(es) nor direct evidence that TTB's effect worked in a vacuum. I happen to have faith that it did, and with my questions to Andrew I was trying to get a grip on what would be required to replicate such an experimental demonstration.



We know that the experiments were done in three places to verify The Biefeld-Brown effect in a vacuum with the last one at the GE Space Center. If it were me building one, I would not reinvent the wheel since Dr. Brown has done it, and as such, verified that it does take place in a vacuum. If it were my dollar, I would go for more control of the disc.


Just a thought for a limited budget,

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 » Thu Jan 18, 2007 3:20 am

Well, I certainly wouldn't want to dissuade anyone from experimenting - it would just take a rather dedicated person.

I find that type of experimentation rather exciting and refreshing myself, because you'd probably have to start from the ground up learning about materials, theory, machining. It would take awhile, but it's something that could be done in a double garage.

There's a story out there, I think it's called "The Radioactive Boy Scout," or some such. I don't think it's all that well written, and then it basically peters out at the end, but it's a story of a(n unsupervised) young boy who improvises to the nth degree in his quest to design and build his own personal nuclear breeder reactor.

In the end (as one might expect), he manages to heavily contaminate a several areas with radiation through his inexperience, but the point is the extent of his creativeness in overcoming apparently insurmountable obstacles in his quest for knowledge.
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 18, 2007 11:18 am

I think Mikado has the right idea, control

I also think we are getting a bit lost here, because the difference between what is referred to as a lifter and Dr. Brown's disc is like night and day.

The whole idea of the disc is to affect a balance between its internal dynamics and the external dynamics functioning relative to the environment in which the disc is operating, be it a vacuum or not.

And if the portion of his work that goes beyond what little is already known still remains secret, I don't think anyone has the merit to disqualify the assertion that a disc will fly in a vacuum.

Ion wind effect may be applicable to lifters but it is not applicable to the disc, as the disc functions on a different set of principles associated with the internal/external balance of the disc's dynamic structure.
wdavidb
Junior Birdman
 
Posts: 144
Joined: Sat Dec 09, 2006 9:29 am
Location: Salt Spring Island BC Canada

guidance

Postby Elizabeth Helen Drake » Thu Jan 18, 2007 11:58 am

Now that you guys have worked around to the word "control" I just want to make one observation,

BEFORE and in the years directly AFTER that big vaccuum test in France (1955-56) Paul has a pretty good handle on the people around Dr. Brown.
Matching Dr. Browns notes with what others have said about these men and their own published bios ..... they were guidance systems experts. So you see. He came to the same conclusions then that you are reaching now. And that conclusion is mirrored by the people around him.

The fact that there is a fifty year gap .... is really not important. I believe that you are following Townsend Browns footprints accurately by just coming to your own conclusions.

Mikdado, the French vacuum chamber was noted in family archives as " specially built" and "the largest to date". However beyond that all records from the company who built it have, according to them, "been lost".

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

Project WINTERHAVEN

Postby Radomir » Thu Jan 18, 2007 7:31 pm

Andrew:

Thanks so much for posting the link to the Project WINTERHAVEN document. I've just had a chance to finish reading the main body, and am so impressed. I like to think that we're able to sense the narrative style of TTB in the text itself, though I could be projecting. I found the document to be at times poetic in its effect on me. Certainly at minimum it is an admirably thorough & clear description of the various effects he discovered; a visionary catalog of their potential uses (both inspiring and at times chilling); and the experiments proposed to explore all of the above.

I felt I had stumbled upon the infinite curiosity and scientific soul of the man himself when I read his concluding assertion that it would be a disservice to simply explore all the effects he had previously named, but that they should also chase down their requisite opposites and related effects (capacitative effect implies the need to also explore the principles and potential uses of the inductive effect). Delightful. Makes me love the and respect the man all the more.

Wonderful stuff. Thanks again.

R.
Radomir
Senior Cadet
 
Posts: 326
Joined: Sun Dec 24, 2006 6:51 pm

lifting bugs

Postby Elizabeth Helen Drake » Fri Jan 19, 2007 3:38 pm

One of the lifter group wrote a great phrase about the lifters being "Lucky to lift a bug" .... which I thought was a wonderful catchy phrase. And of course generated a group of responses. I thought you all would find some of these interesting! Comments anyone?

THIS WAS SENT BY JON DEPINET TO THE LIFTER FORUM. John, if you are reading this jump on into this forum too! The waters fine and I think you will find it interesting! Your comments below were great!

"As lifters stand now, yes, they are fairly weak.
However they demonstrate efficiency between 1.5 and
2.0 times that of current VTOL craft, mainly
helicopters.

Common helicopters are commercial applications of a
fairly inefficient technology.

Common lifters are a much more efficient but much less
developed application of a much less developed
technology.

A lifter big enough to compete with a helicopter,
would fly cheaper than the current tech allows.

Further engineering of lifter tech is necessary to
fully develop an already superior technology."

--- Steven Dufresne <stevend@rimstar. org> wrote:

> Ah yes, Orville the electronaut!
>
> http://jlnlabs. imars.com/ lifters/orville/ index.htm
> Other heavy "lifters"...
> http://jnaudin. free.fr/lifters/ enhanced. htm
> And the record holder (to my knowledge), 187g (85g
> lifter +
> 102g payload), by Saviour...
> http://blazelabs. com/e-exp14. asp
> -Steve
> http://rimstar. org
>
> Anthony Holland wrote:
> > Perhaps you have not seen the JL Naudin video of
> the first mouse
> > hoisted in a lifter?
> > Marvelous! Proof of concept.
> > Anthony
> > in
> > NY
> > On Jan 15, 2007, at 5:40 AM, emp410401 wrote:
> >
> >
> >> As these lifters are now, you would be lucky to
> lift a bug.
>
ANTHONY; I LOVED THAT PHRASE! LUCKY TO LIFT A BUG! Elizabeth
Elizabeth Helen Drake
Sr. Research Asst.
 
Posts: 1740
Joined: Fri Sep 23, 2005 6:11 am

hmmm

Postby Mikado14 » Fri Jan 19, 2007 3:45 pm

Chris Knight wrote: Well, I certainly wouldn't want to dissuade anyone from experimenting - it would just take a rather dedicated person.


You seem to have an advantage that others have not. For 20 years, you say you have had access to Dr. Brown's notebooks. In my view, there are two types of individuals, dedicated and passionate when it comes to research. The dedicated individual sees their goal with a financial reward at the end of that road and thus is driven by those rewards( and thus watches his expenditures in terms of ROI ). The passionate person only sees the quest for the knowledge and the satisfaction of having...done it, irregardless of expense and more than likely to the detriment of his/her own fiscal responsibility. Which one are you?

Chris Knight wrote:There's a story out there, I think it's called "The Radioactive Boy Scout," or some such. I don't think it's all that well written, and then it basically peters out at the end, but it's a story of a(n unsupervised) young boy who improvises to the nth degree in his quest to design and build his own personal nuclear breeder reactor.

In the end (as one might expect), he manages to heavily contaminate a several areas with radiation through his inexperience, but the point is the extent of his creativeness in overcoming apparently insurmountable obstacles in his quest for knowledge.


I take it from this that you are saying that if one is unsupervised, that a Pandora's Box may be opened. So who or whom do you propose to do the supervision of someone that would do experimentation with disc's?



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 » Fri Jan 19, 2007 5:07 pm

Mikado,

Well, I certainly haven't been in it for the fame and fortune so far. I'm much more of the second type - I have a passion for the knowledge. It has been expensive at times and time consuming. I do have a "vision" of something that I am working towards, and that is really what drives me.

HOWEVER, there is the whole "how much money is it OK for a scientist to make?" Scientists and researchers are just regular people who want to provide for their families. If given the opportunity to advance my part of all of this, I certainly will take the opportunity to increase the comfort of my wife, LongboardLOVELY. Qualight, L.L.C. was set up to pursue the commercial (manufacturing and distribution) of all practical applications that have and will arise.

As far as the radioactive boy scout, his youth and inexperience in life in general, led him to take chances, without investigating the ramifications, that ultimately put himself, family, and neighbors at risk. In an ideal world, a bit of maturation and wisdom would temper that headlong rush. In an ideal world.
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

PreviousNext

Return to The Science of Townsend Brown

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 3 guests

cron