Echoes of Biefeld-Brown: Mike McCulloch and Quantized Inertia

Long-time Townsend Brown inquirer Jan Lundquist – aka 'Rose' in The Before Times – has her own substantial archive to share with readers and visitors to this site. This forum is dedicated to the wealth of material she has compiled: her research, her findings, and her speculations.
Post Reply
natecull
Keeper of the Flame
Posts: 437
Joined: Sat Mar 22, 2008 10:35 am
Location: New Zealand

Echoes of Biefeld-Brown: Mike McCulloch and Quantized Inertia

Post by natecull »

Every now and then a ghostly echo of one of several of Townsend's anomalous forces rears its head in the publically-available literature. Here's a very recent one that appears to be similar to Townsend's original 1920s "Biefeld-Brown Effect": a force towards one of the poles of a symmetric capacitor.

(Not to be confused with Townsend's other, apparently almost completely unrelated, anomalous force, involving a force towards the small or large side of an asymmetric capacitor. Nor the anomalous force which that manifests when a capacitor is charging or discharging rapidly - yet which, also seems to be what Townsend first claimed in the 1920s, and then was mentioned again in the early 2000s by Jeffrey and Susan Cameron's Transdimensional Technologies of Alabama, who started the brief flurry of Internet interest in "Lifters". Nor the force associated with a massive capacitor energised with radio frequency AC, producing "gravitational waves" of a kind which Misner, Thorne, Wheeler and the LIGO Consortium certainly wouldn't recognise as such, but Nikola Tesla might have, and possibly Ning Li. Mind you, these might all be one force - but they all seem to be described very differently.)

This particular researcher is Mike McCulloch, and as usual for the Townsend Brown beat, he has his own, almost completely unique, theoretical framework and explanation for why there should be a force on a capacitor. His explanation - which seems not along any of Townsend's own theoretical lines - has to do with quantum mechanics and the horizon of the universe. It all sounds very Mach Effect-y, yet not much like James Woodward's ideas either.

Here he is three months ago: November 2022.

https://physicsfromtheedge.blogspot.com ... -cusp.html
Thursday, 24 November 2022
On the Cusp?

For the past five months my Chief Engineer (Richard Arundal) and myself have been busy in the lab attempting to prove that one can extract propellant-less thrust from a capacitor by using quantised inertia. QI thrust is implied theoretically (McCulloch, 2013, 2017), but a capacitor approach was first suggested and tested by Becker and Bhatt (2018) who had read my paper on thrust and dielectrics (2017) and did some lab tests in liaison with me. Their work has been seconded by Mansell/IVO Ltd.

Curious to test this approach I used the last remaining DARPA money to set up a lab at Plymouth University, hiring Richard. What we now have in the lab is shown above, with a few details withheld for IP reasons. The capacitor (blue plates with orange dielectric) is placed on an insulating tower on a digital balance on a heavy damping plate. The capacitor is charged up to 5 kV with a HiPot tester (on top) via wires that pass their current through Galinstan, a cool liquid metal that breaks the physical connection to the outside world and allows the capacitor to ‘float free’ on the balance.

For the past month we have been struggling with an unwanted electrostatic force, but we noticed an asymmetry as we flipped the capacitor. Recently I have looked at all the data and used maths (including matrix algebra, that I always wanted to use for something useful!) to separate out the EM force from the asymmetrical one. This extracted force is towards the anode and looks like QI. It is about 10 milligrams, only 1/3 of the force predicted (McCulloch, 2021) but there are good reasons why that might be, and we will now look at those.

In short, unless we can think of another effect that could cause a force towards the anode, then we have it and the transport & energy industry will never be the same.

References

Becker, F.M. and A.S. Bhatt, 2018. Electrostatic accelerated electrons within symmetric capacitors during field emission condition events exert bidirectional propellant-less thrust. Arxiv: https://arxiv.org/abs/1810.04368

McCulloch, M.E., 2013. Inertia from an asymmetric Casimir effect. EPL, 101, 59001. https://arxiv.org/abs/1302.2775

McCulloch, M.E., 2017. Testing quantised inertia on emdrives with dielectrics. EPL, 118, 34003. https://iopscience.iop.org/article/10.1 ... /118/34003
McCulloch., 2021. Thrust from symmetrical capacitors. Preprint: https://www.researchgate.net/publicatio ... ed_Inertia (submitted to Adv.Sp. Res.)
Going on a journey, somewhere far out east
We'll find the time to show you, wonders never cease
User avatar
Jan Lundquist
Keeper of the Flame
Posts: 351
Joined: Sat Jan 14, 2023 7:19 pm
Spam Prevention: Yes

Re: Trickfox knew.

Post by Jan Lundquist »

Trickfox/Raymond Lavosier
Re: Obama releases secret T.T. Brown Technology
*
*
Post by Trickfox » Tue Jan 20, 2009 3:46 pm
Yes ...well get a load of this!



A cooled hollow superconductive shield is energized by an electromagnetic field resulting in the quantized vortices of lattice ions projecting a gravitomagnetic field that forms a spacetime curvature anomaly outside the space vehicle.

United States Patent 6,960,975 , by Volfson, November 1, 2005

AFRL Proves Feasibility of Plasma Actuator,
https://www.wpafb.af.mil/News/Article-D ... actuators/
natecull
Keeper of the Flame
Posts: 437
Joined: Sat Mar 22, 2008 10:35 am
Location: New Zealand

Re: Echoes of Biefeld-Brown: Mike McCulloch and Quantized Inertia

Post by natecull »

United States Patent 6,960,975 , by Volfson, November 1, 2005

AFRL Proves Feasibility of Plasma Actuator,
Hi Rose. I think I remember Raymond posting that link back in the day.

I was however confused, and remain so, about any actual link between the two very different subjects:

One, a patent for something very out there that is claiming to be manipulating spacetime.

Two, a really-existing "plasma actuator" which describes itself as simply "plasma-heated air", which is not on the face of it anything to do with manipulating space time.

It's possible of course that Raymond was seeing a link that actually exists, but I take nothing on face value. He was a valued contributor and I miss him, but him just putting these two apparently unrelated articles side by side doesn't do it for me. I need it spelled out clearly how "plasma actuator" follows from "gravitomagnetic field", because the physics of the two different mechanisms aren't even in the same solar system at first glance.

Here's the Boris Volfson patent: https://patents.google.com/patent/US6960975B1/en

The paper begins by name-checking all the usual suspects in the modern antigravity mythology, including Podkletnov of course. One thing that immediately strikes me is hmm, Ning "high-frequency gravitational waves" Li was doing cool stuff as far back the 1990s! I did not know that.
In the early 1990s, Ning Li and D. G Torr described a method and means for converting an electromagnetic field into a gravitomagnetic field. Li and Torr suggested that, under the proper conditions, the minuscule force fields of superconducting atoms can “couple”, compounding in strength to the point where they can produce a repulsion force (“Effects of a Gravitomagnetic Field on Pure Superconductors”, N. Li and D. G. Torr, Physical Review, Volume 43, Page 457, 3 pages, 15 Jan. 1991).
He's also breaking out quaternions, scratching the late Tom Bearden's itch. I love quaternions myself (I blame Bearden for inflicting me with that) but I don't understand how to do anything actually cool with them. But Volfson tries to invoke them for spacetime:
The quaterized Julia set Qn+1=Qn 2+C0 is assumed to be an accurate mathematical representation of the Universal spacetime. The generic quaternion Q0 belongs to the Julia set associated with the quaternion C, and n tends to infinity. If we assume that the quaternion value C0 is associated with the Universal spacetime 29, C1 is the value of quaternion C for the spacetime anomaly associated with lowered pressure of inflationary vacuum state 27, and C2 is the value of quaternion C for the spacetime anomaly associated with elevated pressure of inflationary vacuum state 28, then we can construct two diagrams.
Certainly a novel use of mathematics, I guess. Is it physics? I want it to be. I'm not yet sure that it is.

(To explain my snark a little bit: if I understand my general relativity correctly (which I don't but let's pretend I do), spacetime is usually described as a tensor with ten components: essentially 4d x 4d, so 16 components, but 6 of them cancel out, largely because space is assumed to be "torsion-free", ie not twisted in a certain way. A quaternion, though, is only one chunk of 4d. So it doesn't have enough numbers to model Einstein's spacetime. Two quaternions, ie a "biquaternion", is usually required if you want to do the quaternion thing, which most physicists don't, but I think Peter "Not Even Wrong" Woit is drifting in that direction. Quaternions are a whole weird ball of Victorian-era unhelpfulness and are usually thought of as describing rotation rather than the generalised warping that Einstein wanted. Bearden might have been onto something with his constant harping on about them, or he might have just been down a weird rabbithole leading nowhere.)

Regards, Nate
Going on a journey, somewhere far out east
We'll find the time to show you, wonders never cease
Post Reply