Testing in Vacuum again

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

Re: Testing in Vacuum again

Postby Linda Brown » Tue Sep 09, 2008 5:48 pm

Thank you Hector for that explanation of " again". It puzzled me too and I was happy to see Martin ask the question because it was in my brain too.

I will try hard, I promise, to stay on the same page with you here, looking forward to the news that you might have for us .... good or bad, as you said.

And I encourage everyone here on the Forum to clear this particular thread especially for technical data regarding what Hector is doing. Thanks Gregg for your example of the kind of questions that need to be here.

Hector,I understand your need to stay on solid footing and appreciate it... this is important work .... so though I know that the urge is strong for this group sometimes <g> lets keep the philosophical discussions for other threads...OK? Linda
Linda Brown
Resident Mystic
 
Posts: 653
Joined: Thu Feb 28, 2008 5:16 pm

Re: Testing in Vacuum again

Postby kevin.b » Tue Sep 09, 2008 6:20 pm

fibonacci is king
kevin.b
The Navigator
 
Posts: 1717
Joined: Sun Dec 24, 2006 4:30 pm
Location: oxon, england

Re: Testing in Vacuum again

Postby greggvizza » Tue Sep 09, 2008 6:54 pm

Nice find Kevin.

If that thesis wasn’t 77 pages long, I would have read the whole thing right on the spot, but I am going to have to put it aside till I can find the time.

Looks like Thomas Mahood used lead titanate zirconate as a dielectric. A material more commonly used for its piezoelectric properties than its dielectric K value. I really need to find some time soon to read the full 77 pages. I am curious why they chose a piezoelectric material. I did catch the term longitudinal waves. That would be typical of sound waves produced by the PZT, but they were performing the test in a vacuum chamber. Were they expecting to produce longitudinal waves in the aether?

GV
greggvizza
Senior Cadet
 
Posts: 483
Joined: Sat May 06, 2006 3:01 pm

Re: Testing in Vacuum again

Postby htmagic » Tue Sep 09, 2008 7:05 pm

Gregg,

Look at the YouTube video link Hector sent. Another video shows the horizontal vacuum chamber.
The device looks like this and rotates inside the chamber:

Image

MagicBill
Speeding through the Universe, thinking is the best way to travel ...
htmagic
Senior Officer
 
Posts: 661
Joined: Tue Apr 08, 2008 7:46 pm
Location: People's Republic of Maryland

Re: Testing in Vacuum again

Postby Hector » Wed Sep 10, 2008 8:21 pm

Here is a picture of the last remaining test device from the 2003 NASA vacuum tests.

1. Monel aluminum ancher point.
2. Glass tube, with copper power line.
3. Copper power line cathode electrode.
4. Aluminum sheet anode electrode.
5. Not Shown
6. Anode grounding cable.
7.Alumina Ceranic insulating body structure. Unfired.
8. Grounding stud like shown on 1.

In either case the device was modeled after TTBrowns 1962?? patent if memory serves me right and is basically a pair of one sided lifter devices carved from a piece of Alumina ceramic. I used this design because it was in the open domain and I consider almost failure proof.

The new device is an assymetrical capacitor and is fully encapsulated in a dielectric.

Image
Hector
Space Cadet
 
Posts: 41
Joined: Sat Jul 12, 2003 1:42 am

Re: Testing in Vacuum again

Postby greggvizza » Thu Sep 11, 2008 8:44 pm

greggvizza wrote:Hector,

Have you read Paul’s book in its entirety? If you follow the story, TT Brown created a whole diversionary facade to conceal his real technology. It all started after a Russian spy had compromised his meeting with the navy at Perl harbor.

There is a strong consensus that the ion wind devices were created by TTB as deliberate diversion.

GV

Hector wrote:Well then he succeeded.
Hector

I know what you mean. He succeeded temporarily. He was trixy. I spent a few years of my life around 2003 building lifters. I saw the dead end and moved on.

Hector wrote:Here is a picture of the last remaining test device from the 2003 NASA vacuum tests.

1. Monel aluminum ancher point.
2. Glass tube, with copper power line.
3. Copper power line cathode electrode.
4. Aluminum sheet anode electrode.
5. Not Shown
6. Anode grounding cable.
7.Alumina Ceranic insulating body structure. Unfired.
8. Grounding stud like shown on 1.

In either case the device was modeled after TTBrowns 1962?? patent if memory serves me right and is basically a pair of one sided lifter devices carved from a piece of Alumina ceramic. I used this design because it was in the open domain and I consider almost failure proof.

The new device is an assymetrical capacitor and is fully encapsulated in a dielectric.

Image


From the looks of it, that NASA model is basically a lifter style thruster. With a corona wire and an air dielectric I would not expect to see great results from it in a vacuum.

GV
greggvizza
Senior Cadet
 
Posts: 483
Joined: Sat May 06, 2006 3:01 pm

Re: Testing in Vacuum again

Postby Hector » Thu Sep 11, 2008 11:15 pm

It served it's purpose. It was not ment to work great it just had to work.


Hector
Hector
Space Cadet
 
Posts: 41
Joined: Sat Jul 12, 2003 1:42 am

Re: Testing in Vacuum again

Postby htmagic » Mon Sep 15, 2008 6:24 pm

Hector,

Your assembly looks very similar to this sketch made by Dr. Brown in his paper "How I Control Gravity".
Image

And if you wish to read the paper, go here:
http://www.high-techmagic.com/TTB/How%20I%20Control%20Gravity.pdf

Enjoy!

MagicBill
Speeding through the Universe, thinking is the best way to travel ...
htmagic
Senior Officer
 
Posts: 661
Joined: Tue Apr 08, 2008 7:46 pm
Location: People's Republic of Maryland

Re: Testing in Vacuum again

Postby Hector » Mon Sep 15, 2008 7:07 pm

Hi Magicbill,

Should come as no surprise given the fact that throughout history the torsion pendulum has been used to measure many forces and force generating apparatus. To this day Hall thrusters, micro electric ion propulsion systems and many other still use this approach to measure force.

I based mine on R.L.Talley's example.


Hector
Hector
Space Cadet
 
Posts: 41
Joined: Sat Jul 12, 2003 1:42 am

Re: Testing in Vacuum again

Postby skyfish » Mon Sep 15, 2008 7:38 pm

Hector,
imho(disclaimer yada yada)
It does seem that more dielectric mass would be beneficial...the more mass the better...need larger density of quantum energy...and remember...Dr. Brown did not get good results until a critical voltage/energy threshold was reached...big rock versus cotton ball.
skyfish
skyfish
Senior Officer
 
Posts: 521
Joined: Sat Aug 30, 2008 5:05 am

Re: Testing in Vacuum again

Postby kevin.b » Mon Sep 15, 2008 8:47 pm

Hector,
I consider that these devices are dowsing devices, it is one of the reasons that I recognised Dr Browns work.
I am a field generator, we all are, we send and recieve back signals via this method.
We match that which made us, to operate and manipulate what makes us, we need to match it.
It takes one to recognise one.

So what would occur if our field was raised?, the field knows no bounderies, so if you are close by the device raising the field, possibly you will be also?
Try THINKING about the device moving in a particuler fashion.
Kevin, just a thought.
fibonacci is king
kevin.b
The Navigator
 
Posts: 1717
Joined: Sun Dec 24, 2006 4:30 pm
Location: oxon, england

Re: Testing in Vacuum again

Postby skyfish » Mon Sep 15, 2008 10:06 pm

We need to think gravitator...mass. But is really just a matter of density and amount of quantum energy...mass is holder.
There is a threshold quality....like a quantum jump....mass, larger scale....if you want a pronounced effect in the "larger world" you need larger scale.
And...had a thought about the cellular gravitator...
stacked gradients...multiplying the effect on the ether for a given area...Dr. Brown had good results with it.
It's all about the ether. Ether first...

>( {)">
skyfish
Senior Officer
 
Posts: 521
Joined: Sat Aug 30, 2008 5:05 am

Re: Testing in Vacuum again

Postby skyfish » Mon Sep 15, 2008 10:20 pm

Things keep popping up...don't know where they come from....really!
Here is the difference between the fan and the "real" effect....
Mass and amount of energy.
The fan was a minimal effect...not much mass in those wires..lower energy levels...but there was a gradient....hardly noticeable "effect"...very small...it was mostly electrostatic effect.
Need the mass....and larger amount of energy to really produce "effect"...need to reach that threshold.... is quantum nature of subatomic underworld...kind of like you have to push it hard enough to get it to react...and then....space/time/ether...yep...all space/time/dimensions a quantum field....and has similar behavior....ihmo.
>( {)">
skyfish
Senior Officer
 
Posts: 521
Joined: Sat Aug 30, 2008 5:05 am

Re: Testing in Vacuum again

Postby Hector » Tue Sep 16, 2008 12:45 am

Thanks for the suggestion and advice I'll think more on what you guys are saying.

Thanks,

Hector
Hector
Space Cadet
 
Posts: 41
Joined: Sat Jul 12, 2003 1:42 am

Re: Testing in Vacuum again

Postby kevin.b » Tue Sep 16, 2008 7:32 am

Skyfish ,
Think balls, big balls, and they will work better in vacuum, look at the balls of Costa Rico.
Think of them within a craft, possibly charging up on top of a pyramid?
Or at our so called hillforts, here in the UK.
They are accumulators to build up the DNA spiral flows, big balls won't weigh anything if they are PUSHING away from their opposite?
Kevin
fibonacci is king
kevin.b
The Navigator
 
Posts: 1717
Joined: Sun Dec 24, 2006 4:30 pm
Location: oxon, england

Previous

Return to The Science of Townsend Brown

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 1 guest

cron