Dr Paul Laviolettes books have been the most enlightening in my reading career to understand what is really going on. Heavy at times but has exposed the lies written by most other 'Religiuos" scientists (Ie: Black Holes, Big Bang, Plate Tectonics, etc).
In fact, it's interesting, because in the information age it literally took seconds to figure out that this interpretation is bunk, and that the real Biefeld Brown effect has been put to use, and has been proven to rely on ions. Even mythbusters has weighed in with an experiment. Not rocket science, guys. I should know.
@willsquish im not sure what u mean by 'the BB effect relies on ions' in terms of that discounting LaViolette's interpretation, but its been established that ionized particles are reduced in a vacuum.
@idavid24 Under no complete vacuum condition has any BB device worked. It has only worked under a partial vacuum or no vacuum at all. Ionization actually increases with reduced pressure, due to the reduced number of collisions resulting in neutralization of ions. This is why plasma balls are under partial vacuum. All the antigravity nonsense tends to stem from a complete misunderstanding of electromagnetic effects on gasses and ions. Meanwhile the hot exhaust from the B2 proves it is a jet.
@willsquish so do you presume to know of every BB experiment ever done behind closed mil ind complex doors, and the full extent of how it has been applied? im not a physicist and i can tell youre more knowledgeable about this stuff in general, but everywhere i go to research this online suggests a reduction of ionized particles and impact with neutral particles in partial vacuum. and maybe i missed something but i dont think anyone in this vid was suggesting the B2 directly uses antigrav...
@idavid24 its been said that during its development, a 'sister' craft that did use it was being funded as its more deeply classified counterpart. i hear LaViolette speak of hypothetical saucer craft in relation to gravity wells etc. ive also personally witnessed several very low flying, completely silent, non-disk shaped craft (a few were B2 shaped, the other was somewhat pentagonal i think) fly right over me. when that happens it makes this stuff a bit easier to swallow (;
@idavid246:00, he directly says the B2 is using it. I find it hard to believe the ones who do their experiments without independent verification when every time a verification of a design is possible for designs, all of which claim to use the same (disproven) principle, it fails in a vacuum. They have no effect on electrically neutral sensitivity gravimeters. That there even is a neutral gravimeter proves there cannot be the relationship of charge and gravity as this man posits around 4:36
This comment has received too many negative votesshow
@willsquish The harderthe vacuum, the more cirrent can be turned down for greater efficiency, as Brown showed in Paris in 1955, North Carolina in 1957-68, and King of Prussia, at GE Apace Center, in 1959, and Takaaki Musha showed at the AIAA 2007 annual meeting. Forcefield propulsion makes no noise, and requires no air to function. Like rockets, they fucction much better WITHOUT air, but with this, you can go MUCH faster than any rocket, including NERVA Nuclear rockets.
@Beamshipcaptain "focefield propulsion" is science fiction. Pure and simple. Ion propulsion is science fact, but not used on the B2, unless you count the spark ignitors inside the jet engines. I understand how your fictional technology would work, but it doesn't.
This comment has received too many negative votesshow
@willsquish Forcefield propulsion has been science fact since the late 19th century. IN 1972, the US Air Force, in PROJECT OUTGROWTH, cited forcefield propulsion as having "the most future promise".
@Beamshipcaptain Cute, but no, it has not been "scientific fact" It's fiction. Your project outgrowth was a quick ad hoc program sent to do what science fiction writers do, predict possible future science developments, not actual ones. Every time a respectable institution has tried to reproduce their results in a vacuum it has failed. Every other time, you see movement of air due to ion propulsion. It's just like the free energy devices. They're scams and wishful thinking.
This comment has received too many negative votesshow
@willsquish It is scientific fact, that hs been done in vacuum in several companies and institutions arounfd the world: Paris France, Societe National de Constructions aeronautiqes in 1955, Winston Salem NC AH Bahnson Labs, 1957-58, General Electric Space Center, 1959, HONDA R & D , Yokohama, Japan 1996,2007, NASA-JPL, 2000, Purdue University, 2000. One of my clients, John Fiala, confirmed vacuum operation of my 3-foot diameter Beamship Variation I in vacuum, some years ago.
This comment has received too many negative votesshow
@willsquish Free energy and high efficiency devices work, as tested, for a hundred years. Casimir and Forward's 1984 Free energy battery comes to mind, my boss Professor John Searl's SEG also, Floyd Sweet's VTA also, The Howard Johnson Permanent Magnet motor, the Newman Motor, the Minato Wheel, the AVIG generator, the Bedini motor, the Perendev motor, the EV Gray Cpacitance Discharge engine, COLD FUSION was hailed last year on CBS' 60 Minutes as a true free energy source, SONOLUMINESCENCE, etc.
@Beamshipcaptain "Free energy and high efficiency devices work, as tested, for a hundred years."
With all due respect, ROFL. You believe in the cold fusion myth, the greater than 100% efficiency myths, and even the Newman motor which has been proven to be just a typical huckster making something that can look pretty and spark off of a battery but never actually does produce energy on its own. Proven by the national bureau of standards. No different than a snake oil salesman.
This comment has received too many negative votesshow
@willsquish Cold fusion is no myth: it works, and has been shown to on CBS 60 MINUTES< and in many institutions and countries, including the Patented Patterson Power Cell, 100% repeatability, and over 2000% excess energy. THe Bureau of Standards botched the Newman Motor tests DELIBERATELY. We have people all over the world that successfully reproduced the Newman Motor, some on Youtube. The universe operates on free energy. Free energy devices and systems mimic natural systems. ORDER OUT OF CHAOS
@Beamshipcaptain If you read the scientific literature published after that special you'd have found cold fusion to be just as much a myth as it is. Mr. Newman lives off of selling unregistered stock in his "company" which doesn't sell anything, and had to go to Mexico for a patent because they don't require proof of concept. They mimic only the imagination of men, something from nothing. Order comes from chaos at the expense of energy. Grass doesn't grow without light input.
This comment has received too many negative votesshow
@willsquish Dr. Ed Storms of Los Alamos, New Mexico, and the late Dr. Eugene Malloeve confirm cold fusion results, worldwide. Also look at Prigogine, and Nicolis (1977), Self Organization in Nonequilibrium Systems, Wiley, NY, Prigogine and Stengers, (1984) ORDER OUT OF CHAOS, Bantam Books, NY.
@willsquish Cold fusion is no myth. Ith has been quietly reproduced by every university you can name, and also Oak Ridge National Lab, Los Alamos Sandia base, The US Naval Research lab, and many others. ROSSI in Italy has a 15 KW unit right now.Order does not come from chaos at the expense of energy. Order out of chaos is an energy SOURCE, as Viktor Schauberger, Prof. John Searl, and Floyd Sweet demonstrated.
@Beamshipcaptain Actually I'm at a university and we've definitely not reproduced any cold fusion. In fact there's proof that the amount of radiation you'd expect from actual fusion using the purported device would have killed them, if it were responsible for the heat, which it's not. It's nonsense and has been universally regarded as such for a long time now. If by quietly, you mean none has reported it, and we all really got 100% confirmation but decided not to tell anyone, you're nuts.
@Enginmaster COLD FUSION has been successfully engineered by ROSSI in Italy, and they have released 15kiloWatts in 18 hours, and are gagning units together for a home and industiral power reactor. COLD FUSION has been reproduced by: Dr. Michael McKubre, STANFORD research institute, Los Alamos National Lab, Oak Ridge National lab, Naval Research lab, Naval Weapons Center, China Lake, Dr. Robert Bush, California Polytechnic (3kilowatts per cm^3.
@Enginmaster 3 kW per cubic centimeter is thirty times GREATER than the power density of fuel rods in a typical nuclear reactor!. Japan's Hokkaido National University, Osaka National University, Tokyo Institute of Technolofy,.Nippon Telephone and Telegraph. Pos and Fleischmann have been backed since 1990 by the Japanese Technova Corporation. Vested interests have done their best to quash COLD FUSION, but they cannot anymore. COLD FUSION was hailed on CBS' news' 60-MINUTES as a breakthru energy.
@Beamshipcaptain You cite no sources. The universal problem with the pseudoscience that is "cold fusion" is that they make impossibly wrong assumptions. They assume, for instance, no resistive heating. They assume no gasses from electrolysis remain and/or ignite, which the various explosions seen over the years kind of undo. The fact they have to be "loaded" makes it seem much more likely a metal hydride like battery reaction. Radiation levels prove it was not nuclear in nature, though.
@Enginmaster Dufour, J.(1993),"Cold Fusion by Sparking in Hydrogen Isotopes," FUSION TECHNOLOGY 24, p.205-228, Patterson, J."System For Electrolysis", first US Cold Fusion Patent, #5,494,5592000% excess energy, 100% repeatable, light water electrolyte, Mallove, EF,"Protocols for conducting Light Water Excess Energy Experiments," FUSION FACTS, 3(8), p.15,NoninskiVC(1992)"Excess Heat during the Electrolysis of a Light Water Solution of K2CO3 with a Nickel Cathode," FUSION TECH 21,p.163-167.
@Beamshipcaptain Mills,RL and SP Kneizys(1991),"Excess Heat Production by the Electrolysis of an Aqueous Potassium Carbonate Electrolyte and the Implications for Cold Fusion," FUSION TECH 20, p.65-81, MizunoT and M Enyo,T Akimoto,K Azuni(1993),"Anomalous Heat Evolution from SrCeO3-Type Proton Conductors during Absorption/Desorption of Deuterium in Alternate Electric Field," 4th INTL. CONF> on COLD FUSION, Abstract in FUSION FACTS, Dec. 1993, P.30.
@Beamshipcaptain Well yeah, that's kind of completely giving away your problem there. They used light water. They didn't even try to do fusion. 2 hydrogens by themselves don't turn into helium (which is good because they haven't measured any significantly above background levels). 2 Deuteriums do, but not without sufficient energy. You do not provide any attempt to refute the fact that the heat is attributable to resistive heating and other electrochemical processes. It's fake.
@Beamshipcaptain If it actually had 2000% efficiency, clearly we'd see it by now. Instead, it appears to be a money sponge. A process by which well intentioned scientists who are easily fooled by their own ad hoc explanations for why it must be extraordinary rather than just typical heating (forgetting occam's razor, basically) extract money from investors that know nothing of the science. Did they even consult with the chemists who make nickel metal hydride batteries? They store energy.
Until and unless they actually analyze TOTAL input of electricity using the meter the electrical company uses on their experiment, and demonstrate more joules out than in (which those papers do not show, as they assume to add back in the (considerable) energy of electrolyzing the water or D2O (depending on which paper you read) to the out energy, without in most cases even measuring the volume of hydrogen, etc. This is why some experiments explode. Not fusion. No gamma or neutron radiation.
I'm beginning to think this is your religion. I only get this kind of evasive non-answering of scientific observations when there's complete pseudoscience like young earth creationism, other fundamentalist religions, or an over-unity con artist device. You have chips in the game I assume. And not necessarily money. Just religious devotion.
@willsquish Graneau,P. (1985) "Electrodynami Explosions in Liquids," APPLIED PHYSICS LETTERS 46(5)p.468-470, Gray, EV"PULSED CAPACITOR DISCHARGE ELECTRIC ENGINE", US Pat No. 3,890,548, M. Fleischmann, S. Pons, "Electrochemically Induced Nuclear Fusion of Deuterium," JOURNAL OF ELECTROANALYTICAL CHEMISTRY, 261,301 (1989)FS Sweet, "Nothing is Something: The THeory and Operation of a Phase Conjugated Vacuum Triode, June, 1988
@Beamshipcaptain With all due respect, if you only can cite unpublished works, non-repeatable tests, and choose yourself to denounce all official institutions as purposefully hiding all useful (yet never sold to anyone for practical use by their solitary proponents who make money off witless investors at fairs) technology, then I can't convince you otherwise. It's your religion of conspiracism. But it's not science unless you accept the repeated attempts and refutations of repeatability.
This comment has received too many negative votesshow
@willsquish All the works I cite ar published and some patented. Shiniche Seike, " THe Principles of Ultra-Relativity,"G- Research laboratory, Tokyo, Japan, EV Gray, "Pulsed Capacitance Discharge Engine," US Pat # 3,890,548,T Boyer" Random Electrodynamics: The THeory of classical electrodynamics with classical electromagnetic Zero Point radiation", PHYSICAL REVIEW D, Vol 11 No.4 pp 790,808, WH Bostick(1966, "Pair Production of Plasma Vortices," PHYSICAL FLUIDS, Vol9 pp 2078-80.
I don't see what "pair production of plasma vortices" has to do with any of the free energy devices or "electrogravitic" devices you have been proposing. Cold fusion I'll grant you was controversial for awhile, but is now just plain demonstrably wrong. Patents for things that aren't "perpetual motion" devices do not require proof of claims. I've had to test a couple aerodynamic devices for companies that were going to use patented devices. Only one actually did what it said.
This comment has received too many negative votesshow
@willsquish You don't see it because you are so negative. Determined to maintain the status quo and calcified dogma. COLD FUSION has been replicated and proven all over the world, for the last 20 years! What is your malfunction?Patterson Power Cell has 2000% excess energy, 100% repeatability US Patent No. 5,494,559. Puthof, H., (1987) Ground State of Hydrogen as a zero-point fluctuation determined state," PHYSICAL REVIEW D 35(10), p. 3266-69.
@Beamshipcaptain I am quite familiar with electroHYDROdynamics. It's a real phenomenon. A really cool boat in japan uses it. Electrogravitics is, otoh, fake. Cold fusion has been demonstrated by many to have been impossible. If the energy seen by the experimenters had been due to fusion, neutron levels would have killed them. Instead it was just typical warming up water with electricity. As I stated before, it's your religion. You choose to believe conspiracy over science. That's ok.
This comment has received too many negative votesshow
@willsquish Your statements show you have done no research. Cold fusion with neutron production, and transmutation of elements, and phenomenological amounts of excess heat energy has been proven for over 20 years, and confirmed on National Television, and in many scienc journals, including PHYSICAL REVIEW, and FUSION FACTS. You seem hellbent on maintaining the status quo, illogically. Many have replicated the Bedini motor (including a Schoolgirl), and the newman motor.
@Beamshipcaptain Actually I've done plenty of research. The newman motor is fake. I notice none are on the market, and considering if it lived up to claims, it'd be instantly useful for any number of applications, that proves it's a scam. Please show me the investors that are getting dividends off it each year. The DOE reviews seem quite conclusive, and the proponents of cold fusion do not answer the inconsistencies with basic physics.
This comment has received too many negative votesshow
@willsquish A corvette was run in a test of the Nwwman Motor in 1987, it was on TV and in DISCOVER magazine, but you are too young to remember those. RAY O VAC sponsored the work, because the Newman motor Recharges "unrechargeable" alkaline batteries. People have replicated it on YOutube, successfully!
@Beamshipcaptain dude, running cars at 3 mph off of a few 9 volt batteries is nothing to be proud of, and certainly not evidence of a perpetual motion device. You can probably go into his records and find that he's been purchasing gasoline this whole time because his machine is bunk and hence unusable as a power source in and of itself.
This comment has received too many negative votesshow
@willsquish Nevertheless, it is proof of concept. We also have cars running off of WATER, and emit drinkable water as the only exhaust. People have replicated the Newman motor also.
@Beamshipcaptain Well...It's a proof of concept for dc power conversion into driving via electric motor from a battery.....but that technology was proven around the 1800s. It's certainly no proof of concept of overunity because the battery drained, as it has with all subsequent replications. Please tell me when you say we have cars running off of water you realize that it is hydrogen and not actually water by itself doing the work.
This comment has received too many negative votesshow
@willsquish I have studied Free Energy devices and systems, including electrogravitics, for 29 years. Longer than you have been alive. And Yes, I have published my experimental data.
@Beamshipcaptain "I have studied Free Energy devices and systems, including electrogravitics, for 29 years. " Which is why it's become your religion. Good day!
This comment has received too many negative votesshow
@willsquish ZUR EINHEITLICHEN FELD THEORY (The Unified Field Theory for Gravitation and Electricity, Jan 10, 1929, published in the NEW YORK TIMES, January 12, 1929).
This comment has received too many negative votesshow
@willsquish Patterson, J(1996) "SYSTEM FOR ELECTROLYSIS", US Pat. no.5,494,559, the first USA COLD FUSION PATENT, 2000% excess energy. 100% repeatability, worldwide. Also, Piantelli, F (1995) "Energy generation and Generator by means of anharmonic stimulated fusion," International Patent WO 95/20816. Summarised by W. Collis in FUSION FACTS 7(6), Dec. 1995, P. 14-15.
@willsquish The Vacuum tests were successful in 1955 in Paris France, in 1957-58 in Winston, Salem, NC, in 1959 at General Electric Space Center, in King of Prussia, PA, in 200, Purdeu University energy Conversion lab, 1996-2007, at HONDA R & D, Yokohama, Japan, 2000, NASA JPL vacuum chambers (patents granted to Campbell on the result of successful NASA vacuum tests), Hector Serrano (NASA-Gravitec). You have obviously done ZERO work or research on the topic of electrogravitics. So sad.
The thing is... regardless if it's a gravitic effect or ion wind, it can still be applied to advanced flight, and it has still been suppressed and covered up as a real technology for the past 80 years! If they keep stuff like this classified for 80 years, what else you think they are hiding?
@AlienScientist How has ion flow based propulsion been "suppressed"? I know about it, even the mythbusters know about it, and Hall thrusters and ion thrusters rely on it. It's just proven to be too polluting and too weak in an atmosphere to be of use. The only reason it works for space travel is because you don't have as much drag, so you can still get around with half a newton of thrust or so, for a long period of time.
This comment has received too many negative votesshow
@AlienScientist The technology and physics used by the military around the world is 80 years ahead of what we are shown, PUBLICLY. THe results are viewed flying in our skies since the 1940s and 50s. We have been to the edge of the galaxy and back, with NO time dialation! "we have craft out in the desert that would make George Lucas DROOL".- US former military brass.
so the electrogravitronic spectrum is changed?!? That seems impossible to me. If you think about the magnetic ionized carbon atmosphere often present in a vacuum, you will quickly come to the same conclusion i did. correct me if i'm wrong, but, it just doesn't seem right to me.
@AlienScientist Rarefied gas increases the amount of ionization by preventing recombination through collision. This is why hall thrusters do not work in the atmosphere.
Vacuum suppresses corona, which shorts out the apparatus reducing effciency in air. Without cornal-losses, the current can be turned down to the microAmp level, and Voltage turned up, so you get faster horizontal speed or greater lift with the same input-power, so Voltage can be turned up for unbelievable speeds, at low power in Vacuum, as shown in Paris in 1955, North Carolina in 1956-58, CLASSIFIED after a test in Honolulu in 1955, for USAF brass.
u and I seem to have very similar interests both scientific as well entertainment. As I am new in the search u undoubted seem to have learnt alot, please share with me what u know
I have. Please visit and sub my channel, if you are interested in the technology that will get Earth-humans into deep space faster, safer, cheaper, and more effectively than internal-combustion and heat-energy. The Stars Beckon...
@Cfrogboy91 ions come from the air , there is no air in a vaccume, there are some free ions in space but ions are just postive charged particals of any type. Not enough in space I suppose...
This comment has received too many negative votesshow
@Cfrogboy91 Because corona is suppressed in vacuum. This eliminates flashover, shorting out, and makes the force generated greater, without coronal losses caused by air. Read physics.
That is correct. The Black Budgeted military world, the technology is 80-100 years ahead of what we are shown publicly in the NASA, ESA, Russian Space Agency, and Chinese manned and unmanned space programmes. The reality is much more startling than many folks can handle.
This comment has received too many negative votesshow
@DAILEYericCaryUSA And they are also accelerating their destruction of our enviornment and food and water supplies with deadly oil. Nature operates on Systematised self organisation. FREE energy. Copy Nature, and you can obviate the need for Fossil fuels.
@DAILEYericCaryUSA That is EXACTLY RIGHT. But the paradigm is shifting as we speak. Expensive dirty enrgy is being replaced by clean cheap energy. Magnetic motors and generators are coming on line for commercialisation, and Hydrogen power and Cold Fusion systems (ROSSI, et al.) are ready for distribution. In the nick of time, to repair our economy and our environment. THe era of suppresion because of GREED, is over.
@Beamshipcaptain You may be right and I hope you are. I'd love to see some evidence. I don't agree at all. It is not a paradigm. It is tyranny imposed by monopoly control. If that changes it is because the controllers wish it to change.
"we created ourselves" (concerning secret spaceships). Obviously not a "WE" there are many beings that aren't part of "WE". Easy for them to put up a sign "military base" and "off limits" and it's not connected to our military, or if even used to be they are all mind controlled now and part of "THEM". "Our governments" ARE obviously in war, Perhaps "Our scientists" obviously hide the spaceships unanimously around the world, brains ally against all government and against all establishments.
Bob has passed two independent polygraph tests with colours flying. And his W-2 tax form from 1989 states that in 1988 his employer that paid his salary was the Department of Naval Intelligence.
Something just occured to me. I was thinking about how antigravity might have been produced using a rodins coil with a ferro superfluid spinning inside it. Once the fluid started spinning, it would then generate charges through the coiling, which would become more powerful as the fluid spun faster and faster. Those charges could be recycled... and this means infinite energy, and very powerful electrogravitic activity but the question still lingers.. what is that ferro superfluid made from?
Fusion should be incorporated into making an antigravitational vehicle if it is to be used as the main fuel/power source. In Charles Berlitz's book The Bermuda Triangle, he talkes about a man - --- Jessup? who was murdered because he came too close to this type of technology and planned to construct an antigravitational electromagnetic device or vehicle, but his efforts were silenced.. There are probably many other ways of making such a vehicle though..
nobody has ever done this, but i have come up with a device that generates well over enough energy to supply my house and my next door neighbors' with just gravity itself.
IT"S NOT LIKE THAT LEGO CRAP ON YOUTUBE!!!....(they don't generate the sufficient supply of energy for the average household)
I'm 17 years old, and i have been ordering parts for the last 6 months to improve as i make more models.... i have 4 of these devices and i would like to share my free energy invention to the public.
That is sorta true and not true, you can create energy or destroy it but do you know how much energy is in an atom, the first law of thermo dynamics has been taught to you deliberately as a lie. Splitting the atom goes against it, orbits go against it, the atom it self has a constant spin of electrons with no input of energy and no loss of energy and puts out electromagnetic energy. Sorry mate you have been lied too
Dude you start again with the same thing as the orbit of the moon
IF ELECTRONS OR PLANETS OR MOONS DONT BUMP INTO THINGS THEY WONT STOP SPINNING thats part of the first law as long as you dont convert the kinetic energy into something else an object in motion stays in motion
lol then you are saying you believe in perpetual motion, the moon can not maintain orbit for 4.5 billion years and have gravitational attractions. Centrifugal farce can not be maintained for 4.5 billion years wit gravty, our current explanation of orbits is completely wrong but it still stands you believe in the law of thermodynamics or the current explanation of orbits, witch is it you believe? And yes splitting the atom gives you way more energy out than in, as well as nuclear power plants.
First i wrote it a couple of times m*v^2/r=G*m1*m2/r^2 it checks out the explanation is not wrong the moon keeps moving because it has nearly zero friction in space
the law of thermodynamics says energy cannot be destroyed or created which doesnt disprove the hole orbit thing
Oh and splitting an atom gives you exactly the same amout of energy it would take to fuse it together
Wrong, its this simple, science its self tells us there can not be maintained orbit for 4.5 billion years with a force involved, one is wrong, and seems how we see one happening it is the law that is false.
I wrote the formular a couple of times now under this very video
One last time: The moon has a velocity because it's in a vacuum it doesnt change (things in motion tend to stay in motion) which gives it a certain kind of force but the gravitation from the earth pulls it towards it
when both forces are in equilibrium a stable orbit is maintained
works across the hole universe in every solar system heck even the trash we have flying around our earth
You don't seem to understand what I am trying to explain. vacuum or no vacuum there is gravity involved, this means the moon can not maintain its orbit for 4.5 billion years unless another force is at work. Here, this is the first we have seen of this force in our science articles other than strepusion. Google Newfound Planet Might Be Near Death.
You don't seem to understand what has been proven. In a vacuum the moons velocity doesnt decrease therefore it has a force moving it away called centripetal force. Google it.
yes that is right but you have to ask your self why the moons valosity does not decrece when there is a force acting on it (gravity.) Did you google Newfound Planet Might Be Near Death yet? This goes for all orbits. " Or there could be " more exotic possibilities, " Hamilton told SPACE . com, such as some force holding the planet up against the inward drag of the tidal forces. "
Exactly. Fission and fusion are FREE ENERGY. Of course its massive energy released all at once. The SEG from Professor Searl GENTLY releases ZPE, by STROKING the vacuum. Not hitting it with a sledgehammer...
part 2: I think that even electrical generators are a continually feed system in this manner as well. In fact i bet they will find a slight ionisation field one day around electrical generators and figure this out. I think even plains propellers produce some of this, and helicopters, this is why you can get a spark from a helicopter well logging. Even Tesla said generators where a variable, not a constant. either way cheers my friend.
prt 1: Hi Beam, that's awesome my friend, again tough bud I think the strong magnetic field wit the high spine state is just exiting the air molecules and ejecting electrons, the electrons are being added to the system (over unity.) and the plasma field is what is left behind, it just happens to have an anti gravity feature to it.
the simplest I can possibly put it, we have been lied to, since approximately 1905, and we need to re-do everything that has been "proven" in the last 100 years because of certain assholes.
TheBeamshipCaptain, you are an internet troll, and bully and impersonator using my name, and using screen-mnmes similar to mine. You are fooling noone, and I have consulted an attorney, and it seems I have an excellent case against you. Noone is ananymous on the internet, and noone is safe from prosecution, as recent cases in the news have shown. I can sue Youtube for a million dollars now, because of this, and they will just turn around and sue YOU, whoever you are.
that does not tell me what the force is that pushes the moon away, they tell us it is tidal buldging, keep your math crap, it means nothing to me, tel me what the force is and where it comes from?
check out strepulsion. When you remove electrons or disrupt them you increase the wave function of the nucluse, this is a repulsing force, our atmospere is made up of this anti gravity.
NASA was all over strepultion when it first came out, contrary to what we are taught our moon can not orbit around the planet for 4.5 billion years without a another force holding it up there. And yes the very oxygen you breath has an anti gravity feature in it, it's not pulled to the ground from gravity is it, this force is also how a heavy molecule like water can hang in our atmosphere.
If oxygen is not pulled towards the earth was is holding the atmosphere on the planet?
You can predict the thickness of the atmosphere using gravitational force ONLY (I did it once for a physics paper it should be lying around here)
Not all of the oxygen is pushed towords the floor because of collisions described by λ=1/√2πnd^2 (assuming it is an ideal gas) which leaves only 68nm way until 2 molecules bump into each other at normal atmosphere pressure
What about the ionosphere then, and water hanging in our atmosphere, water begins to ionise at room temperature, The water molecules lose some electrons and therefor gain this anti gravity feature, lightning strikes the positively charged clouds and the water falls back down as rain once again bloated with electrons, normal rain is just electron sharing. Our atmosphere is made up of this anti gravity force.
wrong, water gets ionised at room temprature, it is the very removal of electrons that makes it rise, lightning is nothing more than negative electrons atrated to pisitive ions in the atmoshere, keep your math, 10-1 is and so is 8+2.
disprove what? how about thinking for your self and why in NASAs digram vidoe of the earth and moon how when it gets close to the earht they just take the moon and drop it back in its orbit, lol free falling for 4.5 billion years,, eeemmhhhhmmmm.
lol i thought you where joking, sorry i do not understand math at all, my worst subject. Please read my posts here 1 threw to 9. I done want to repost it all. it explains my hypothisis.
So your theory is ...what because the moon doesnt fall down to the earth there must be another force at play? oO yeah there is it's called centripetal force F=m*omega^2*r
If you equal it (how do you say Fg=Fz in english?) with the gravitational force
G*m(earth)*m(moon)/r^2=m(moon)*omega^2*R
G*m(earth)/rR=omega^2 (G*m(earth)/^2=g)
g/R=omega^2 with R=distance earth-moon
the centripetal force is slightly larger than the gravitational force but it still checks out with a margin of error or 2cm/a
Wow you are good at math, that is awesome. You can not have centripetal force for 4.5 billion years with another force at work though (gravity.) That's the only problem, it is not some delicate balancing act as they would have us believe.
the vacuum of space gives the moon nearly no resistance therefore the speed doesnt slow down
Imageing this: The moon maybe started in a higher or lower orbit and the moon moved inch by inch until both forces are in equilibrium and he settles in for thousands of years
I hate to break this to you big boy but just because you cant understand something means the existing theory backed up by math is wrong ^^
look it really is this simple, the moon can not maintain its orbit for 4.5 billion years with gravity involved, the earth and moon are going through space at the same time, lol your own science teaches you this is impossible. lol this really is not rocket science,
lol nearly no resistance? Yet it affects our tide? Face it, there is another force at work, it is blatantly obvious to anyone that does not treat science like a religion. This force can be seen in water hanging in our atmosphere, ion lifters, Hutchinson's work, Searls work, TT Browns work, the Joe cell, the B-2 bomber charging its wings, and orbits, flat galaxies, and spiraling galaxies, dark matter, dark energy.
the tide like the ocean? Actio=reactio the force F=G*m1*m2/r^2 works both ways. the earth pulls the moon towards it the moon pulls the earth and the ocean towards it
water in your atmosphere -> google boltzmann
ion lifters and Brown you say it yourself ion wind (doesnt work in vacuum)
B-2 Reducing friction and/or increase stealth
orbits Fg=Fz again
Flat Galaxies spiral movement Fz again
Spiraling galaxies is a bit complicated but forces are known
Save your math, it means nothing to me, ion lifters work better in a vacuum, you are being lied to. lol I am telling you this stuff is explained wrong. For gods sake man your own science teaches you you can not have the moon rotating around the planet for 4.5 billion years well there is gravity involved. Look our atmosphere is made up of this repulsing force.
It is you that does not understand it, i have made objects lose weight, in a few different manners i might add, precisely because I do understand it. You are confusing what you are taught with reality. Put a nail on scales like you are going to magnetize it, 12 volts DC, 50 amps and watch weight fluctuations then come talk to me, will tell you how to make an object lose weight with no power source after. And by the way there are a few people that have got electrogravitics to work in a vacuum.
part 4: it also creates these monoatomic ions i speak of that have anti gravity properties. So I had to give you a quick run down on that to explain why I did this other test, take a silver spoon, hook a negative up to it, strike it a few times with 12 volts DC, 50 amps, let sit for a an our or so, can occasionally strike if you want, and the spoon lost weight, again more tests need to be done on this one.
I have also charged a battery free once, let me know if you wanna hear how I did that?
part 3: The cell I run only gives short bursts of positive, this excites the water molecules, the electrons (covalent bonds) bail from the atoms, the negative is always left on on these cells to the negative of the battery, the negatively charged electrons are attracted to the positively charged ions in the 12 volts batter, i have had 2 battery's go to 16 volts on me due to this.
This converts the water into a HHO as well as an ion/plasma energy,
lol HHO is short for hydrogen, hydrogen and oxygen, and yes there is HHO created in these cells, this water can burn. when negatively charged correctly. You can also make water burn with microwaves. I suspect sound one day will do this as well, all it has to do is excite the water molecules and make the covalent bonds (electrons) eject from the atoms.
"Knallgas" eh? Your "H-H-O" made it sound like you were trying to say the Hydrogyn sprouted a pair of p-Orbitals to bind the other two Well it's not IUPAC comform anyways
hydrogen fuel cells use the oxygen in the air so you don't have to store it aswell which makes it an open system so a weight change doesnt prove your theory
you clearly need to research water fuel cells. I have worked on them and studied them for about 4 years now and have never read anything about using oxygen from the air in any water water fuel cell I have studied.
so you studied these cells for 4 years and never thought of "hey if I disconnect the oxygen tank and feed normal air into it on one side it still works andI reduce the weight by 40%"? outstanding
I am sorry and I don't want to sound rude but you have no idea what you are talking about, you run a current through water with stainless steel plates and it cracks the water and gives us hydrogen and oxygen, i have no idea what you are talking about. And I lost weight because of monoatomic elements similar to monoatomic gold that has been labeled exotic matter.
Yeah and where does he hydrogen go? You store it to use the fuel cell to fuse it later with the oxygen from the air to generate a current to power an electric motor
If you would do the electrolysis in an enclosed container the hole weight of the system would note change
Ahh you are talking about the electrical kind, i am talking about the using the hydrogen and oxygen kind, you let the hydrogen and oxygen go right into the combustion chamber. And the weight loss comes from monoatomic elements that build up on the cathode as well as saturate the block. a truck has levitated, as well as FORD had a front end levitation problem once.
AH and I now finally understand which one you are talking about
Yeah you can use hydrogen + oxygen in combustion chambers of a motor but you would still need energy to convert water to hydrogen and unless you use a massiv solar cell you would have to pay for that etc etc
Of course if you dont save the water you are producing the cell gets lighter but thats not antigravity and would never ever levitate a car
part 2: that has similar property's to monoatomic gold. I might as well tell you about another expermanet i have done, i have to be honest on this one and say more tests need to be done, this one may have been a mistake with scales, lack of funds limit my work and proper testing, the above tests are a fact though.
part 1: It is odd you mentioned that, I have drained battery's and heated them on scales and saw weight loss as well, this was just one of a few successful experiment i have done because of my understanding of this. you need to heat the ions in the battery in this case though. I have also had a cathode from my water fuel cell lose 13 grams on scales well heating because it had monoatomic ions in a the form of a fine white powder
A part 2: Then there is hydrogen on demand that using a steady current that will give you 10 to 30% fuel mileage increase, the negatively charged cells give you 50 to 100% increase in fuel mileage, no gas needed, its rare but has happened. Also a top NAVY scientist has just had coldfusion pass a peer review journal with the observance of neutrons and tridium as well as transmutation, I have also seen transmutation in my negatively charged water fuel cells.
A part 1: lol oxygen form the air? What are you talking about? lol electrolysis splits water into H-H-O, the hydrogen and oxygen is used in a combustion chamber. This is with a hydrogen on demand system, there are cells that just use the electrons escaping from the water molecule's and use them as electricity as well, then there are negatively charged fuel cells that I work on, the only ones that are not over unity are the ones that utilize the electrons.
Just out of curiosity are you aware of weight loss in drained battery's? It is odd you mentioned that. I can say for a fact if you are adding heat it would aid in the weight loss.
Again explain to me what tidal budging is you moron. Heaver than air flight is possible, we are not the center of the earth, the earth is not flat, and micro waves are not a scam, all things idiots like you would have argued for before they became common knowledge, you are truly a brainwashed idiot. A parrot, NOTHING more.
TheBeamshipCaptain, so you are still acting like a 12 year old using the real Beams name ah kido, why dont ya grow up a little and use your head instead of outdated text books.
Woot just as I always said, electrons are directly related to gravity, in fact i have made objects lose weight by removing elecrons. Soon the whole world will know we have a repulsion field of energy as well as gravity, this is truly how orbits are maintaned, I had these thoughts before I descoverd the work from India known as strepultion.
That is the future of warfare!!!!!
ohkabomb917 2 months ago in playlist new patents and physics at patent office schools
i love B2 planes
tarek12mig 7 months ago
sounds like HAARP to me!
MrStrayj 9 months ago
Hey Alien scientist.
Love All your videos. I was wondering how much you know about Mount Weather virginia FEMA base?
Tommcg2310 1 year ago
Dr Paul Laviolettes books have been the most enlightening in my reading career to understand what is really going on. Heavy at times but has exposed the lies written by most other 'Religiuos" scientists (Ie: Black Holes, Big Bang, Plate Tectonics, etc).
supatipanno 1 year ago
This is real shit man. Just check out the light shows out at Groom Lake...just try to avoid the security goons, those guys are spooky.
BoxFreind 1 year ago
In fact, it's interesting, because in the information age it literally took seconds to figure out that this interpretation is bunk, and that the real Biefeld Brown effect has been put to use, and has been proven to rely on ions. Even mythbusters has weighed in with an experiment. Not rocket science, guys. I should know.
willsquish 1 year ago
@willsquish im not sure what u mean by 'the BB effect relies on ions' in terms of that discounting LaViolette's interpretation, but its been established that ionized particles are reduced in a vacuum.
idavid24 1 year ago
@idavid24 Under no complete vacuum condition has any BB device worked. It has only worked under a partial vacuum or no vacuum at all. Ionization actually increases with reduced pressure, due to the reduced number of collisions resulting in neutralization of ions. This is why plasma balls are under partial vacuum. All the antigravity nonsense tends to stem from a complete misunderstanding of electromagnetic effects on gasses and ions. Meanwhile the hot exhaust from the B2 proves it is a jet.
willsquish 1 year ago
@willsquish so do you presume to know of every BB experiment ever done behind closed mil ind complex doors, and the full extent of how it has been applied? im not a physicist and i can tell youre more knowledgeable about this stuff in general, but everywhere i go to research this online suggests a reduction of ionized particles and impact with neutral particles in partial vacuum. and maybe i missed something but i dont think anyone in this vid was suggesting the B2 directly uses antigrav...
idavid24 1 year ago
@idavid24 its been said that during its development, a 'sister' craft that did use it was being funded as its more deeply classified counterpart. i hear LaViolette speak of hypothetical saucer craft in relation to gravity wells etc. ive also personally witnessed several very low flying, completely silent, non-disk shaped craft (a few were B2 shaped, the other was somewhat pentagonal i think) fly right over me. when that happens it makes this stuff a bit easier to swallow (;
idavid24 1 year ago
@idavid24 6:00, he directly says the B2 is using it. I find it hard to believe the ones who do their experiments without independent verification when every time a verification of a design is possible for designs, all of which claim to use the same (disproven) principle, it fails in a vacuum. They have no effect on electrically neutral sensitivity gravimeters. That there even is a neutral gravimeter proves there cannot be the relationship of charge and gravity as this man posits around 4:36
willsquish 1 year ago
This comment has received too many negative votes show
@willsquish The harderthe vacuum, the more cirrent can be turned down for greater efficiency, as Brown showed in Paris in 1955, North Carolina in 1957-68, and King of Prussia, at GE Apace Center, in 1959, and Takaaki Musha showed at the AIAA 2007 annual meeting. Forcefield propulsion makes no noise, and requires no air to function. Like rockets, they fucction much better WITHOUT air, but with this, you can go MUCH faster than any rocket, including NERVA Nuclear rockets.
Beamshipcaptain 1 year ago
@Beamshipcaptain "focefield propulsion" is science fiction. Pure and simple. Ion propulsion is science fact, but not used on the B2, unless you count the spark ignitors inside the jet engines. I understand how your fictional technology would work, but it doesn't.
willsquish 1 year ago 2
This comment has received too many negative votes show
@willsquish Forcefield propulsion has been science fact since the late 19th century. IN 1972, the US Air Force, in PROJECT OUTGROWTH, cited forcefield propulsion as having "the most future promise".
Beamshipcaptain 1 year ago
@Beamshipcaptain Cute, but no, it has not been "scientific fact" It's fiction. Your project outgrowth was a quick ad hoc program sent to do what science fiction writers do, predict possible future science developments, not actual ones. Every time a respectable institution has tried to reproduce their results in a vacuum it has failed. Every other time, you see movement of air due to ion propulsion. It's just like the free energy devices. They're scams and wishful thinking.
willsquish 1 year ago 2
This comment has received too many negative votes show
@willsquish It is scientific fact, that hs been done in vacuum in several companies and institutions arounfd the world: Paris France, Societe National de Constructions aeronautiqes in 1955, Winston Salem NC AH Bahnson Labs, 1957-58, General Electric Space Center, 1959, HONDA R & D , Yokohama, Japan 1996,2007, NASA-JPL, 2000, Purdue University, 2000. One of my clients, John Fiala, confirmed vacuum operation of my 3-foot diameter Beamship Variation I in vacuum, some years ago.
Beamshipcaptain 1 year ago
This comment has received too many negative votes show
@willsquish Free energy and high efficiency devices work, as tested, for a hundred years. Casimir and Forward's 1984 Free energy battery comes to mind, my boss Professor John Searl's SEG also, Floyd Sweet's VTA also, The Howard Johnson Permanent Magnet motor, the Newman Motor, the Minato Wheel, the AVIG generator, the Bedini motor, the Perendev motor, the EV Gray Cpacitance Discharge engine, COLD FUSION was hailed last year on CBS' 60 Minutes as a true free energy source, SONOLUMINESCENCE, etc.
Beamshipcaptain 1 year ago
@Beamshipcaptain "Free energy and high efficiency devices work, as tested, for a hundred years."
With all due respect, ROFL. You believe in the cold fusion myth, the greater than 100% efficiency myths, and even the Newman motor which has been proven to be just a typical huckster making something that can look pretty and spark off of a battery but never actually does produce energy on its own. Proven by the national bureau of standards. No different than a snake oil salesman.
willsquish 1 year ago 3
This comment has received too many negative votes show
@willsquish Cold fusion is no myth: it works, and has been shown to on CBS 60 MINUTES< and in many institutions and countries, including the Patented Patterson Power Cell, 100% repeatability, and over 2000% excess energy. THe Bureau of Standards botched the Newman Motor tests DELIBERATELY. We have people all over the world that successfully reproduced the Newman Motor, some on Youtube. The universe operates on free energy. Free energy devices and systems mimic natural systems. ORDER OUT OF CHAOS
Beamshipcaptain 1 year ago
@Beamshipcaptain If you read the scientific literature published after that special you'd have found cold fusion to be just as much a myth as it is. Mr. Newman lives off of selling unregistered stock in his "company" which doesn't sell anything, and had to go to Mexico for a patent because they don't require proof of concept. They mimic only the imagination of men, something from nothing. Order comes from chaos at the expense of energy. Grass doesn't grow without light input.
willsquish 1 year ago 7
This comment has received too many negative votes show
@willsquish Dr. Ed Storms of Los Alamos, New Mexico, and the late Dr. Eugene Malloeve confirm cold fusion results, worldwide. Also look at Prigogine, and Nicolis (1977), Self Organization in Nonequilibrium Systems, Wiley, NY, Prigogine and Stengers, (1984) ORDER OUT OF CHAOS, Bantam Books, NY.
Beamshipcaptain 1 year ago
@willsquish Cold fusion is no myth. Ith has been quietly reproduced by every university you can name, and also Oak Ridge National Lab, Los Alamos Sandia base, The US Naval Research lab, and many others. ROSSI in Italy has a 15 KW unit right now.Order does not come from chaos at the expense of energy. Order out of chaos is an energy SOURCE, as Viktor Schauberger, Prof. John Searl, and Floyd Sweet demonstrated.
Beamshipcaptain 9 months ago
@Beamshipcaptain Actually I'm at a university and we've definitely not reproduced any cold fusion. In fact there's proof that the amount of radiation you'd expect from actual fusion using the purported device would have killed them, if it were responsible for the heat, which it's not. It's nonsense and has been universally regarded as such for a long time now. If by quietly, you mean none has reported it, and we all really got 100% confirmation but decided not to tell anyone, you're nuts.
Enginmaster 8 months ago
@Enginmaster COLD FUSION has been successfully engineered by ROSSI in Italy, and they have released 15kiloWatts in 18 hours, and are gagning units together for a home and industiral power reactor. COLD FUSION has been reproduced by: Dr. Michael McKubre, STANFORD research institute, Los Alamos National Lab, Oak Ridge National lab, Naval Research lab, Naval Weapons Center, China Lake, Dr. Robert Bush, California Polytechnic (3kilowatts per cm^3.
Beamshipcaptain 8 months ago
@Enginmaster 3 kW per cubic centimeter is thirty times GREATER than the power density of fuel rods in a typical nuclear reactor!. Japan's Hokkaido National University, Osaka National University, Tokyo Institute of Technolofy,.Nippon Telephone and Telegraph. Pos and Fleischmann have been backed since 1990 by the Japanese Technova Corporation. Vested interests have done their best to quash COLD FUSION, but they cannot anymore. COLD FUSION was hailed on CBS' news' 60-MINUTES as a breakthru energy.
Beamshipcaptain 8 months ago
@Beamshipcaptain You cite no sources. The universal problem with the pseudoscience that is "cold fusion" is that they make impossibly wrong assumptions. They assume, for instance, no resistive heating. They assume no gasses from electrolysis remain and/or ignite, which the various explosions seen over the years kind of undo. The fact they have to be "loaded" makes it seem much more likely a metal hydride like battery reaction. Radiation levels prove it was not nuclear in nature, though.
Enginmaster 8 months ago
@Enginmaster Dufour, J.(1993),"Cold Fusion by Sparking in Hydrogen Isotopes," FUSION TECHNOLOGY 24, p.205-228, Patterson, J."System For Electrolysis", first US Cold Fusion Patent, #5,494,5592000% excess energy, 100% repeatable, light water electrolyte, Mallove, EF,"Protocols for conducting Light Water Excess Energy Experiments," FUSION FACTS, 3(8), p.15,NoninskiVC(1992)"Excess Heat during the Electrolysis of a Light Water Solution of K2CO3 with a Nickel Cathode," FUSION TECH 21,p.163-167.
Beamshipcaptain 8 months ago
@Beamshipcaptain Mills,RL and SP Kneizys(1991),"Excess Heat Production by the Electrolysis of an Aqueous Potassium Carbonate Electrolyte and the Implications for Cold Fusion," FUSION TECH 20, p.65-81, MizunoT and M Enyo,T Akimoto,K Azuni(1993),"Anomalous Heat Evolution from SrCeO3-Type Proton Conductors during Absorption/Desorption of Deuterium in Alternate Electric Field," 4th INTL. CONF> on COLD FUSION, Abstract in FUSION FACTS, Dec. 1993, P.30.
Beamshipcaptain 8 months ago
@Beamshipcaptain Well yeah, that's kind of completely giving away your problem there. They used light water. They didn't even try to do fusion. 2 hydrogens by themselves don't turn into helium (which is good because they haven't measured any significantly above background levels). 2 Deuteriums do, but not without sufficient energy. You do not provide any attempt to refute the fact that the heat is attributable to resistive heating and other electrochemical processes. It's fake.
Enginmaster 8 months ago
@Beamshipcaptain If it actually had 2000% efficiency, clearly we'd see it by now. Instead, it appears to be a money sponge. A process by which well intentioned scientists who are easily fooled by their own ad hoc explanations for why it must be extraordinary rather than just typical heating (forgetting occam's razor, basically) extract money from investors that know nothing of the science. Did they even consult with the chemists who make nickel metal hydride batteries? They store energy.
Enginmaster 8 months ago
Until and unless they actually analyze TOTAL input of electricity using the meter the electrical company uses on their experiment, and demonstrate more joules out than in (which those papers do not show, as they assume to add back in the (considerable) energy of electrolyzing the water or D2O (depending on which paper you read) to the out energy, without in most cases even measuring the volume of hydrogen, etc. This is why some experiments explode. Not fusion. No gamma or neutron radiation.
Enginmaster 8 months ago
I'm beginning to think this is your religion. I only get this kind of evasive non-answering of scientific observations when there's complete pseudoscience like young earth creationism, other fundamentalist religions, or an over-unity con artist device. You have chips in the game I assume. And not necessarily money. Just religious devotion.
Enginmaster 8 months ago
@willsquish Graneau,P. (1985) "Electrodynami Explosions in Liquids," APPLIED PHYSICS LETTERS 46(5)p.468-470, Gray, EV"PULSED CAPACITOR DISCHARGE ELECTRIC ENGINE", US Pat No. 3,890,548, M. Fleischmann, S. Pons, "Electrochemically Induced Nuclear Fusion of Deuterium," JOURNAL OF ELECTROANALYTICAL CHEMISTRY, 261,301 (1989)FS Sweet, "Nothing is Something: The THeory and Operation of a Phase Conjugated Vacuum Triode, June, 1988
Beamshipcaptain 8 months ago
@Beamshipcaptain With all due respect, if you only can cite unpublished works, non-repeatable tests, and choose yourself to denounce all official institutions as purposefully hiding all useful (yet never sold to anyone for practical use by their solitary proponents who make money off witless investors at fairs) technology, then I can't convince you otherwise. It's your religion of conspiracism. But it's not science unless you accept the repeated attempts and refutations of repeatability.
willsquish 1 year ago 2
This comment has received too many negative votes show
@willsquish All the works I cite ar published and some patented. Shiniche Seike, " THe Principles of Ultra-Relativity,"G- Research laboratory, Tokyo, Japan, EV Gray, "Pulsed Capacitance Discharge Engine," US Pat # 3,890,548,T Boyer" Random Electrodynamics: The THeory of classical electrodynamics with classical electromagnetic Zero Point radiation", PHYSICAL REVIEW D, Vol 11 No.4 pp 790,808, WH Bostick(1966, "Pair Production of Plasma Vortices," PHYSICAL FLUIDS, Vol9 pp 2078-80.
Beamshipcaptain 1 year ago
I don't see what "pair production of plasma vortices" has to do with any of the free energy devices or "electrogravitic" devices you have been proposing. Cold fusion I'll grant you was controversial for awhile, but is now just plain demonstrably wrong. Patents for things that aren't "perpetual motion" devices do not require proof of claims. I've had to test a couple aerodynamic devices for companies that were going to use patented devices. Only one actually did what it said.
willsquish 1 year ago 2
This comment has received too many negative votes show
@willsquish You don't see it because you are so negative. Determined to maintain the status quo and calcified dogma. COLD FUSION has been replicated and proven all over the world, for the last 20 years! What is your malfunction?Patterson Power Cell has 2000% excess energy, 100% repeatability US Patent No. 5,494,559. Puthof, H., (1987) Ground State of Hydrogen as a zero-point fluctuation determined state," PHYSICAL REVIEW D 35(10), p. 3266-69.
Beamshipcaptain 1 year ago
This comment has received too many negative votes show
@willsquish "ELECTROHYDRODYNAMICS" 1960, Whitehall-Rand, "How to 'Fall' into Space", BUSINESS WEEK, Feb. 8, 1968, "Towards Flight Without Stress, Strain, or Weight," INTERAVIA, March 23rd, 1956, INTEL, Washington, DC, 1956, "Electrogravitics Systems", AVIATION STUDIES< Wright Patterson, OH, AFB Library, "Northrop Studying Sonic Boom Remedy," AVIATION WEEK AND SPACE TECHNOLOGY, (Jan.22, 1968), p.21, "Sonic Boom Experiments," PRODUCT ENGINEERING, March 11, 1968, 35-36.
Beamshipcaptain 1 year ago
@Beamshipcaptain I am quite familiar with electroHYDROdynamics. It's a real phenomenon. A really cool boat in japan uses it. Electrogravitics is, otoh, fake. Cold fusion has been demonstrated by many to have been impossible. If the energy seen by the experimenters had been due to fusion, neutron levels would have killed them. Instead it was just typical warming up water with electricity. As I stated before, it's your religion. You choose to believe conspiracy over science. That's ok.
willsquish 1 year ago 3
This comment has received too many negative votes show
@willsquish Your statements show you have done no research. Cold fusion with neutron production, and transmutation of elements, and phenomenological amounts of excess heat energy has been proven for over 20 years, and confirmed on National Television, and in many scienc journals, including PHYSICAL REVIEW, and FUSION FACTS. You seem hellbent on maintaining the status quo, illogically. Many have replicated the Bedini motor (including a Schoolgirl), and the newman motor.
Beamshipcaptain 1 year ago
@Beamshipcaptain Actually I've done plenty of research. The newman motor is fake. I notice none are on the market, and considering if it lived up to claims, it'd be instantly useful for any number of applications, that proves it's a scam. Please show me the investors that are getting dividends off it each year. The DOE reviews seem quite conclusive, and the proponents of cold fusion do not answer the inconsistencies with basic physics.
willsquish 1 year ago 3
This comment has received too many negative votes show
@willsquish A corvette was run in a test of the Nwwman Motor in 1987, it was on TV and in DISCOVER magazine, but you are too young to remember those. RAY O VAC sponsored the work, because the Newman motor Recharges "unrechargeable" alkaline batteries. People have replicated it on YOutube, successfully!
Beamshipcaptain 1 year ago
@Beamshipcaptain dude, running cars at 3 mph off of a few 9 volt batteries is nothing to be proud of, and certainly not evidence of a perpetual motion device. You can probably go into his records and find that he's been purchasing gasoline this whole time because his machine is bunk and hence unusable as a power source in and of itself.
willsquish 1 year ago
This comment has received too many negative votes show
@willsquish Nevertheless, it is proof of concept. We also have cars running off of WATER, and emit drinkable water as the only exhaust. People have replicated the Newman motor also.
Beamshipcaptain 1 year ago
@Beamshipcaptain Well...It's a proof of concept for dc power conversion into driving via electric motor from a battery.....but that technology was proven around the 1800s. It's certainly no proof of concept of overunity because the battery drained, as it has with all subsequent replications. Please tell me when you say we have cars running off of water you realize that it is hydrogen and not actually water by itself doing the work.
willsquish 1 year ago 2
This comment has received too many negative votes show
@willsquish I know it is hydrogen. It burns totally clean, and emits only clean drinking water.
Beamshipcaptain 1 year ago
This comment has received too many negative votes show
@willsquish I have studied Free Energy devices and systems, including electrogravitics, for 29 years. Longer than you have been alive. And Yes, I have published my experimental data.
Beamshipcaptain 1 year ago
This has been flagged as spam show
@Beamshipcaptain "I have studied Free Energy devices and systems, including electrogravitics, for 29 years. " Which is why it's become your religion. Good day!
willsquish 1 year ago
This comment has received too many negative votes show
@willsquish ZUR EINHEITLICHEN FELD THEORY (The Unified Field Theory for Gravitation and Electricity, Jan 10, 1929, published in the NEW YORK TIMES, January 12, 1929).
Beamshipcaptain 1 year ago
This comment has received too many negative votes show
@willsquish Patterson, J(1996) "SYSTEM FOR ELECTROLYSIS", US Pat. no.5,494,559, the first USA COLD FUSION PATENT, 2000% excess energy. 100% repeatability, worldwide. Also, Piantelli, F (1995) "Energy generation and Generator by means of anharmonic stimulated fusion," International Patent WO 95/20816. Summarised by W. Collis in FUSION FACTS 7(6), Dec. 1995, P. 14-15.
Beamshipcaptain 1 year ago
@willsquish The Vacuum tests were successful in 1955 in Paris France, in 1957-58 in Winston, Salem, NC, in 1959 at General Electric Space Center, in King of Prussia, PA, in 200, Purdeu University energy Conversion lab, 1996-2007, at HONDA R & D, Yokohama, Japan, 2000, NASA JPL vacuum chambers (patents granted to Campbell on the result of successful NASA vacuum tests), Hector Serrano (NASA-Gravitec). You have obviously done ZERO work or research on the topic of electrogravitics. So sad.
Beamshipcaptain 1 year ago
@Beamshipcaptain,
The thing is... regardless if it's a gravitic effect or ion wind, it can still be applied to advanced flight, and it has still been suppressed and covered up as a real technology for the past 80 years! If they keep stuff like this classified for 80 years, what else you think they are hiding?
AlienScientist 1 year ago
@AlienScientist How has ion flow based propulsion been "suppressed"? I know about it, even the mythbusters know about it, and Hall thrusters and ion thrusters rely on it. It's just proven to be too polluting and too weak in an atmosphere to be of use. The only reason it works for space travel is because you don't have as much drag, so you can still get around with half a newton of thrust or so, for a long period of time.
willsquish 1 year ago
This comment has received too many negative votes show
@AlienScientist The technology and physics used by the military around the world is 80 years ahead of what we are shown, PUBLICLY. THe results are viewed flying in our skies since the 1940s and 50s. We have been to the edge of the galaxy and back, with NO time dialation! "we have craft out in the desert that would make George Lucas DROOL".- US former military brass.
Beamshipcaptain 1 year ago
my bad, but paul laviolette looks like a white obama
APOLOMILES 1 year ago
5 *****
grey167 1 year ago
how does being in a vacuum prevent ions exactly? lol.
Cfrogboy91 2 years ago
Because there is an extremely rarefied gaseous medium inside of a vacuum the ions cannot easily ionize the surrounding gas and thus leak out.
AlienScientist 2 years ago 4
so the electrogravitronic spectrum is changed?!? That seems impossible to me. If you think about the magnetic ionized carbon atmosphere often present in a vacuum, you will quickly come to the same conclusion i did. correct me if i'm wrong, but, it just doesn't seem right to me.
Cfrogboy91 2 years ago
@AlienScientist Rarefied gas increases the amount of ionization by preventing recombination through collision. This is why hall thrusters do not work in the atmosphere.
willsquish 1 year ago
@AlienScientist what is the gas? i didn't know vacuum really contained anything other than dark energy or dark matter.
xxxslayerxxx666 6 months ago
Vacuum suppresses corona, which shorts out the apparatus reducing effciency in air. Without cornal-losses, the current can be turned down to the microAmp level, and Voltage turned up, so you get faster horizontal speed or greater lift with the same input-power, so Voltage can be turned up for unbelievable speeds, at low power in Vacuum, as shown in Paris in 1955, North Carolina in 1956-58, CLASSIFIED after a test in Honolulu in 1955, for USAF brass.
Beamshipcaptain 2 years ago
u and I seem to have very similar interests both scientific as well entertainment. As I am new in the search u undoubted seem to have learnt alot, please share with me what u know
kuvceebxab1 2 years ago
I have. Please visit and sub my channel, if you are interested in the technology that will get Earth-humans into deep space faster, safer, cheaper, and more effectively than internal-combustion and heat-energy. The Stars Beckon...
Beamshipcaptain 2 years ago
@Cfrogboy91 ions come from the air , there is no air in a vaccume, there are some free ions in space but ions are just postive charged particals of any type. Not enough in space I suppose...
silverpizza100 1 year ago
@Cfrogboy91 It doesnt. it prevents the ions from providing thrust by interacting with air molecules.
aardvark445 1 year ago
This comment has received too many negative votes show
@Cfrogboy91 Because corona is suppressed in vacuum. This eliminates flashover, shorting out, and makes the force generated greater, without coronal losses caused by air. Read physics.
Beamshipcaptain 1 year ago
This comment has received too many negative votes show
I really, really wish there was some way to block your kooky bullshit videos from popping up on my recommended list.
SisterLoquacious 2 years ago
Why so rude?
DAILEYericCaryUSA 2 years ago 3
yes i agree with you, i don't want to see this fake shit
Cfrogboy91 2 years ago
@Cfrogboy91 how is this fake, lmao
Mu5clehead 1 year ago
@Mu5clehead
skip forward
Cfrogboy91 1 year ago
@Mu5clehead
to about 130ish
Cfrogboy91 1 year ago
This is great. Thanks.
The Military-Security complex has technology one hundred years ahead of any public domain technology.
They keep stuff secret to impose gratutious control over people of earth. They keep us on oil to control the world finance.
Tyranny can be defeated, resistance is victory.
DAILEYericCaryUSA 2 years ago 16
That is correct. The Black Budgeted military world, the technology is 80-100 years ahead of what we are shown publicly in the NASA, ESA, Russian Space Agency, and Chinese manned and unmanned space programmes. The reality is much more startling than many folks can handle.
Beamshipcaptain 2 years ago
This comment has received too many negative votes show
@DAILEYericCaryUSA And they are also accelerating their destruction of our enviornment and food and water supplies with deadly oil. Nature operates on Systematised self organisation. FREE energy. Copy Nature, and you can obviate the need for Fossil fuels.
Beamshipcaptain 1 year ago
@DAILEYericCaryUSA That is EXACTLY RIGHT. But the paradigm is shifting as we speak. Expensive dirty enrgy is being replaced by clean cheap energy. Magnetic motors and generators are coming on line for commercialisation, and Hydrogen power and Cold Fusion systems (ROSSI, et al.) are ready for distribution. In the nick of time, to repair our economy and our environment. THe era of suppresion because of GREED, is over.
Beamshipcaptain 8 months ago
@Beamshipcaptain You may be right and I hope you are. I'd love to see some evidence. I don't agree at all. It is not a paradigm. It is tyranny imposed by monopoly control. If that changes it is because the controllers wish it to change.
DAILEYericCaryUSA 8 months ago
@DAILEYericCaryUSA Look around the internet. It is indded a brand new day. THe New Age has begun. The return of Atlantis.
Beamshipcaptain 8 months ago
is it me or does Dr. Paul LaViolette look like Obama? but white w/ glasses?..just wondering.
well anyways shouldn't we look more into Strong Force isn't that the strongest force in the known universe?
PhillipThunderGrunge 2 years ago
I thought about it too ;) but i also tought its not so important thing to mention :P
Matu1 2 years ago
yes i thought that was interesting, it's the mouth.
Cfrogboy91 2 years ago
"we created ourselves" (concerning secret spaceships). Obviously not a "WE" there are many beings that aren't part of "WE". Easy for them to put up a sign "military base" and "off limits" and it's not connected to our military, or if even used to be they are all mind controlled now and part of "THEM". "Our governments" ARE obviously in war, Perhaps "Our scientists" obviously hide the spaceships unanimously around the world, brains ally against all government and against all establishments.
ouivalerie 2 years ago 2
This is nothing new, The electromagnetic rotation experiment of Faraday was done in 1821
MrMDESTINY 2 years ago 3
This comment has received too many negative votes show
haha Bob Lazar had no experiences, he made them all up
arman757 2 years ago
Bob has passed two independent polygraph tests with colours flying. And his W-2 tax form from 1989 states that in 1988 his employer that paid his salary was the Department of Naval Intelligence.
Beamshipcaptain 2 years ago
Something just occured to me. I was thinking about how antigravity might have been produced using a rodins coil with a ferro superfluid spinning inside it. Once the fluid started spinning, it would then generate charges through the coiling, which would become more powerful as the fluid spun faster and faster. Those charges could be recycled... and this means infinite energy, and very powerful electrogravitic activity but the question still lingers.. what is that ferro superfluid made from?
Spxder 2 years ago
First law of thermodynamics again
If you want to harness energy from a spinning fluid it's kinetic energy decreases and you slow it down until it completly stops
RazielKain 2 years ago
You two guys should make a clown show
you are funny like one and keep on babbleing nonsense oO
RazielKain 2 years ago
Fusion should be incorporated into making an antigravitational vehicle if it is to be used as the main fuel/power source. In Charles Berlitz's book The Bermuda Triangle, he talkes about a man - --- Jessup? who was murdered because he came too close to this type of technology and planned to construct an antigravitational electromagnetic device or vehicle, but his efforts were silenced.. There are probably many other ways of making such a vehicle though..
imhighonhappy 2 years ago
nobody has ever done this, but i have come up with a device that generates well over enough energy to supply my house and my next door neighbors' with just gravity itself.
IT"S NOT LIKE THAT LEGO CRAP ON YOUTUBE!!!....(they don't generate the sufficient supply of energy for the average household)
I'm 17 years old, and i have been ordering parts for the last 6 months to improve as i make more models.... i have 4 of these devices and i would like to share my free energy invention to the public.
gravity4all 2 years ago
Yeah proof it
show us the concept or some blue prints or explain how it works
RazielKain 2 years ago
Ha my friend not necessarily, like splitting an atom you can get more energy out sometimes than in, If you think not you have been brainwashed.
Great news, if you believe in our current explanation of centrifugal force against the moon lasting for 4.5billion years against gravity
then you know about over unity?
1freedomfighter11 2 years ago
yeah again the argument "If you believe THEM"
You get exactly as much energy back as you put it that's the first law of thermodynamics you cant produce something out of nothing
RazielKain 2 years ago
That is sorta true and not true, you can create energy or destroy it but do you know how much energy is in an atom, the first law of thermo dynamics has been taught to you deliberately as a lie. Splitting the atom goes against it, orbits go against it, the atom it self has a constant spin of electrons with no input of energy and no loss of energy and puts out electromagnetic energy. Sorry mate you have been lied too
1freedomfighter11 2 years ago
Splitting an atom doesnt go against the first law
Orbits dont go against it
Dude you start again with the same thing as the orbit of the moon
IF ELECTRONS OR PLANETS OR MOONS DONT BUMP INTO THINGS THEY WONT STOP SPINNING thats part of the first law as long as you dont convert the kinetic energy into something else an object in motion stays in motion
RazielKain 2 years ago
lol then you are saying you believe in perpetual motion, the moon can not maintain orbit for 4.5 billion years and have gravitational attractions. Centrifugal farce can not be maintained for 4.5 billion years wit gravty, our current explanation of orbits is completely wrong but it still stands you believe in the law of thermodynamics or the current explanation of orbits, witch is it you believe? And yes splitting the atom gives you way more energy out than in, as well as nuclear power plants.
1freedomfighter11 2 years ago
First i wrote it a couple of times m*v^2/r=G*m1*m2/r^2 it checks out the explanation is not wrong the moon keeps moving because it has nearly zero friction in space
the law of thermodynamics says energy cannot be destroyed or created which doesnt disprove the hole orbit thing
Oh and splitting an atom gives you exactly the same amout of energy it would take to fuse it together
RazielKain 2 years ago
Wrong, its this simple, science its self tells us there can not be maintained orbit for 4.5 billion years with a force involved, one is wrong, and seems how we see one happening it is the law that is false.
1freedomfighter11 2 years ago
dude science tells you it can
I wrote the formular a couple of times now under this very video
One last time: The moon has a velocity because it's in a vacuum it doesnt change (things in motion tend to stay in motion) which gives it a certain kind of force but the gravitation from the earth pulls it towards it
when both forces are in equilibrium a stable orbit is maintained
works across the hole universe in every solar system heck even the trash we have flying around our earth
RazielKain 2 years ago
You don't seem to understand what I am trying to explain. vacuum or no vacuum there is gravity involved, this means the moon can not maintain its orbit for 4.5 billion years unless another force is at work. Here, this is the first we have seen of this force in our science articles other than strepusion. Google Newfound Planet Might Be Near Death.
Peace.
1freedomfighter11 2 years ago
You don't seem to understand what has been proven. In a vacuum the moons velocity doesnt decrease therefore it has a force moving it away called centripetal force. Google it.
RazielKain 2 years ago
Proven in a vacuum? gravity still works in a vacuum, link please.
1freedomfighter11 2 years ago
huh? yeah gravity still works in a vaccum oO
I wasnt talking about gravity in a vaccum I was talking about the velocity the moon has which counters the gravitanional force
RazielKain 2 years ago
yes that is right but you have to ask your self why the moons valosity does not decrece when there is a force acting on it (gravity.) Did you google Newfound Planet Might Be Near Death yet? This goes for all orbits. " Or there could be " more exotic possibilities, " Hamilton told SPACE . com, such as some force holding the planet up against the inward drag of the tidal forces. "
1freedomfighter11 2 years ago
Exactly. Fission and fusion are FREE ENERGY. Of course its massive energy released all at once. The SEG from Professor Searl GENTLY releases ZPE, by STROKING the vacuum. Not hitting it with a sledgehammer...
Beamshipcaptain 2 years ago
part 2: I think that even electrical generators are a continually feed system in this manner as well. In fact i bet they will find a slight ionisation field one day around electrical generators and figure this out. I think even plains propellers produce some of this, and helicopters, this is why you can get a spark from a helicopter well logging. Even Tesla said generators where a variable, not a constant. either way cheers my friend.
1freedomfighter11 2 years ago
prt 1: Hi Beam, that's awesome my friend, again tough bud I think the strong magnetic field wit the high spine state is just exiting the air molecules and ejecting electrons, the electrons are being added to the system (over unity.) and the plasma field is what is left behind, it just happens to have an anti gravity feature to it.
1freedomfighter11 2 years ago
ps have you watched the secret of the lost ark yet? Its about science and this field, you really should watch it my friend.
Cheers again.
1freedomfighter11 2 years ago
the simplest I can possibly put it, we have been lied to, since approximately 1905, and we need to re-do everything that has been "proven" in the last 100 years because of certain assholes.
KKinsane2009 2 years ago
TheBeamshipCaptain, you are an internet troll, and bully and impersonator using my name, and using screen-mnmes similar to mine. You are fooling noone, and I have consulted an attorney, and it seems I have an excellent case against you. Noone is ananymous on the internet, and noone is safe from prosecution, as recent cases in the news have shown. I can sue Youtube for a million dollars now, because of this, and they will just turn around and sue YOU, whoever you are.
Beamshipcaptain 2 years ago
that does not tell me what the force is that pushes the moon away, they tell us it is tidal buldging, keep your math crap, it means nothing to me, tel me what the force is and where it comes from?
1freedomfighter11 2 years ago
Force that pushes the moon away from earth? easy F=mv^2/r
RazielKain 2 years ago
check out strepulsion. When you remove electrons or disrupt them you increase the wave function of the nucluse, this is a repulsing force, our atmospere is made up of this anti gravity.
1freedomfighter11 2 years ago
Stepulsion is a wild claim of 1 homepage and one homepage only
this effect hasnt been documented anywhere
Ah and ... our atmosphere is made up of anti gravity? that doesnt even make sense
RazielKain 2 years ago
NASA was all over strepultion when it first came out, contrary to what we are taught our moon can not orbit around the planet for 4.5 billion years without a another force holding it up there. And yes the very oxygen you breath has an anti gravity feature in it, it's not pulled to the ground from gravity is it, this force is also how a heavy molecule like water can hang in our atmosphere.
1freedomfighter11 2 years ago
If oxygen is not pulled towards the earth was is holding the atmosphere on the planet?
You can predict the thickness of the atmosphere using gravitational force ONLY (I did it once for a physics paper it should be lying around here)
Not all of the oxygen is pushed towords the floor because of collisions described by λ=1/√2πnd^2 (assuming it is an ideal gas) which leaves only 68nm way until 2 molecules bump into each other at normal atmosphere pressure
RazielKain 2 years ago
What about the ionosphere then, and water hanging in our atmosphere, water begins to ionise at room temperature, The water molecules lose some electrons and therefor gain this anti gravity feature, lightning strikes the positively charged clouds and the water falls back down as rain once again bloated with electrons, normal rain is just electron sharing. Our atmosphere is made up of this anti gravity force.
1freedomfighter11 2 years ago
particles dont get ionosied and flowed to the ionosphere
they get inosied in it by radiation like UV-rays therefore protecting us from it
Oh and fyi you didnt disproof my arguments so stop shouting is "our atmosphere is made up of anti gravity" after every comment
RazielKain 2 years ago
wrong, water gets ionised at room temprature, it is the very removal of electrons that makes it rise, lightning is nothing more than negative electrons atrated to pisitive ions in the atmoshere, keep your math, 10-1 is and so is 8+2.
1freedomfighter11 2 years ago
and since you are not disproofing my arguments I give you another one
you can bring the zentripedalforce to equal the gravitationalforce
Fz=Fg
mv^2/r=Gm1m2/r^2
that way you can calculate the distance earth-moon by using the speed of the rotation and the two masses and guess what....it checks out
RazielKain 2 years ago
lol oops, 10-1 is 9 so is 8+1, math can seem correct but mean nothing.
1freedomfighter11 2 years ago
disprove what? how about thinking for your self and why in NASAs digram vidoe of the earth and moon how when it gets close to the earht they just take the moon and drop it back in its orbit, lol free falling for 4.5 billion years,, eeemmhhhhmmmm.
1freedomfighter11 2 years ago
just one problem with the free fall explination, GRAVITY, please do the math on that.
1freedomfighter11 2 years ago
∂p=-rho*g*h
rho/rho0=p/p0 => rho=p/p0*rho0
dp=-p/p0*rho0*g*∂h
integral p0 to p (dp/p)=integral 0 to h (-rho0/p0*g*∂h)
lnp-lnp0=-rho0/p0*g*h
p=p0*exp(-rho0/p0*g*h)
Oh and btw...it checks out....
RazielKain 2 years ago
lol eemmmhmmmm
1freedomfighter11 2 years ago
Ypu dont understand it huh? It's a furmula called the barometric formula used to predict pressure or density by hight using gravity only and it works
It assumes air to be an ideal gas without Fugacities but the error is minimal
RazielKain 2 years ago
lol i thought you where joking, sorry i do not understand math at all, my worst subject. Please read my posts here 1 threw to 9. I done want to repost it all. it explains my hypothisis.
watch?v=WfrqzBGPnwE&feature=email
1freedomfighter11 2 years ago
So your theory is ...what because the moon doesnt fall down to the earth there must be another force at play? oO yeah there is it's called centripetal force F=m*omega^2*r
If you equal it (how do you say Fg=Fz in english?) with the gravitational force
G*m(earth)*m(moon)/r^2=m(moon)*omega^2*R
G*m(earth)/rR=omega^2 (G*m(earth)/^2=g)
g/R=omega^2 with R=distance earth-moon
the centripetal force is slightly larger than the gravitational force but it still checks out with a margin of error or 2cm/a
RazielKain 2 years ago
Wow you are good at math, that is awesome. You can not have centripetal force for 4.5 billion years with another force at work though (gravity.) That's the only problem, it is not some delicate balancing act as they would have us believe.
1freedomfighter11 2 years ago
Its not random
the vacuum of space gives the moon nearly no resistance therefore the speed doesnt slow down
Imageing this: The moon maybe started in a higher or lower orbit and the moon moved inch by inch until both forces are in equilibrium and he settles in for thousands of years
I hate to break this to you big boy but just because you cant understand something means the existing theory backed up by math is wrong ^^
RazielKain 2 years ago
By the way look up strepulsion, it explains it all very well, it is also exacly what i was saying before I ever descoverd there work.
1freedomfighter11 2 years ago
look it really is this simple, the moon can not maintain its orbit for 4.5 billion years with gravity involved, the earth and moon are going through space at the same time, lol your own science teaches you this is impossible. lol this really is not rocket science,
1freedomfighter11 2 years ago
also i have a bunch more info in the vid.
watch?v=WfrqzBGPnwE&feature=email
1freedomfighter11 2 years ago
You said this already
Its just a wild claim of 3 people and nobody besides them was able to prove it
Do you know occams razor? If 3 people claim something without prove or anybody else being able to reproduce the results .... They are lieing
RazielKain 2 years ago
lol nearly no resistance? Yet it affects our tide? Face it, there is another force at work, it is blatantly obvious to anyone that does not treat science like a religion. This force can be seen in water hanging in our atmosphere, ion lifters, Hutchinson's work, Searls work, TT Browns work, the Joe cell, the B-2 bomber charging its wings, and orbits, flat galaxies, and spiraling galaxies, dark matter, dark energy.
1freedomfighter11 2 years ago
the tide like the ocean? Actio=reactio the force F=G*m1*m2/r^2 works both ways. the earth pulls the moon towards it the moon pulls the earth and the ocean towards it
water in your atmosphere -> google boltzmann
ion lifters and Brown you say it yourself ion wind (doesnt work in vacuum)
B-2 Reducing friction and/or increase stealth
orbits Fg=Fz again
Flat Galaxies spiral movement Fz again
Spiraling galaxies is a bit complicated but forces are known
Everything you listed is already explained
RazielKain 2 years ago
Save your math, it means nothing to me, ion lifters work better in a vacuum, you are being lied to. lol I am telling you this stuff is explained wrong. For gods sake man your own science teaches you you can not have the moon rotating around the planet for 4.5 billion years well there is gravity involved. Look our atmosphere is made up of this repulsing force.
1freedomfighter11 2 years ago
you are repeating yourself over and over
many people tried the lifters in vacuum they didnt work the only one claiming they do is brown occams razor
and again just because you dont understand it means that everybody besides you is wrong
RazielKain 2 years ago
It is you that does not understand it, i have made objects lose weight, in a few different manners i might add, precisely because I do understand it. You are confusing what you are taught with reality. Put a nail on scales like you are going to magnetize it, 12 volts DC, 50 amps and watch weight fluctuations then come talk to me, will tell you how to make an object lose weight with no power source after. And by the way there are a few people that have got electrogravitics to work in a vacuum.
1freedomfighter11 2 years ago
If you think a small charge on a nail would be messurable by a normal scale...
How much heavier would a charged car battery be compared to an empty one? -.-
RazielKain 2 years ago
part 4: it also creates these monoatomic ions i speak of that have anti gravity properties. So I had to give you a quick run down on that to explain why I did this other test, take a silver spoon, hook a negative up to it, strike it a few times with 12 volts DC, 50 amps, let sit for a an our or so, can occasionally strike if you want, and the spoon lost weight, again more tests need to be done on this one.
I have also charged a battery free once, let me know if you wanna hear how I did that?
1freedomfighter11 2 years ago
part 3: The cell I run only gives short bursts of positive, this excites the water molecules, the electrons (covalent bonds) bail from the atoms, the negative is always left on on these cells to the negative of the battery, the negatively charged electrons are attracted to the positively charged ions in the 12 volts batter, i have had 2 battery's go to 16 volts on me due to this.
This converts the water into a HHO as well as an ion/plasma energy,
1freedomfighter11 2 years ago
HHO? oO are you serious? WATER IS H2O If you think you converted water to HHO you have clearly no idea what you are talking about
RazielKain 2 years ago
lol HHO is short for hydrogen, hydrogen and oxygen, and yes there is HHO created in these cells, this water can burn. when negatively charged correctly. You can also make water burn with microwaves. I suspect sound one day will do this as well, all it has to do is excite the water molecules and make the covalent bonds (electrons) eject from the atoms.
1freedomfighter11 2 years ago
Hydrogen is H2 Oxygen is O2 Water is H2O
2H+ + e- -> H2
2O- -> O2 + 2e-
H2O -> H2 + 1/2O2
thats called electrolysis
H-H-O doesnt exist
RazielKain 2 years ago
lol what part of its short for hydrogen hydrogen and oxygen did you not understand? We call it HHO.
1freedomfighter11 2 years ago
"Knallgas" eh? Your "H-H-O" made it sound like you were trying to say the Hydrogyn sprouted a pair of p-Orbitals to bind the other two Well it's not IUPAC comform anyways
hydrogen fuel cells use the oxygen in the air so you don't have to store it aswell which makes it an open system so a weight change doesnt prove your theory
RazielKain 2 years ago
you clearly need to research water fuel cells. I have worked on them and studied them for about 4 years now and have never read anything about using oxygen from the air in any water water fuel cell I have studied.
1freedomfighter11 2 years ago
so you studied these cells for 4 years and never thought of "hey if I disconnect the oxygen tank and feed normal air into it on one side it still works andI reduce the weight by 40%"? outstanding
RazielKain 2 years ago
I am sorry and I don't want to sound rude but you have no idea what you are talking about, you run a current through water with stainless steel plates and it cracks the water and gives us hydrogen and oxygen, i have no idea what you are talking about. And I lost weight because of monoatomic elements similar to monoatomic gold that has been labeled exotic matter.
1freedomfighter11 2 years ago
Yeah and where does he hydrogen go? You store it to use the fuel cell to fuse it later with the oxygen from the air to generate a current to power an electric motor
If you would do the electrolysis in an enclosed container the hole weight of the system would note change
RazielKain 2 years ago
Ahh you are talking about the electrical kind, i am talking about the using the hydrogen and oxygen kind, you let the hydrogen and oxygen go right into the combustion chamber. And the weight loss comes from monoatomic elements that build up on the cathode as well as saturate the block. a truck has levitated, as well as FORD had a front end levitation problem once.
1freedomfighter11 2 years ago
If you let oxygen and hydrogen directly into a chamber and ignire it you get a bomb
a front end levitation problem ..... are you high? oO
RazielKain 2 years ago
AH and I now finally understand which one you are talking about
Yeah you can use hydrogen + oxygen in combustion chambers of a motor but you would still need energy to convert water to hydrogen and unless you use a massiv solar cell you would have to pay for that etc etc
Of course if you dont save the water you are producing the cell gets lighter but thats not antigravity and would never ever levitate a car
RazielKain 2 years ago
part 2: that has similar property's to monoatomic gold. I might as well tell you about another expermanet i have done, i have to be honest on this one and say more tests need to be done, this one may have been a mistake with scales, lack of funds limit my work and proper testing, the above tests are a fact though.
1freedomfighter11 2 years ago
part 1: It is odd you mentioned that, I have drained battery's and heated them on scales and saw weight loss as well, this was just one of a few successful experiment i have done because of my understanding of this. you need to heat the ions in the battery in this case though. I have also had a cathode from my water fuel cell lose 13 grams on scales well heating because it had monoatomic ions in a the form of a fine white powder
1freedomfighter11 2 years ago
Dude water fuel cells work with oxygen from the air
its not an enclosed system
RazielKain 2 years ago
A part 2: Then there is hydrogen on demand that using a steady current that will give you 10 to 30% fuel mileage increase, the negatively charged cells give you 50 to 100% increase in fuel mileage, no gas needed, its rare but has happened. Also a top NAVY scientist has just had coldfusion pass a peer review journal with the observance of neutrons and tridium as well as transmutation, I have also seen transmutation in my negatively charged water fuel cells.
1freedomfighter11 2 years ago
A part 1: lol oxygen form the air? What are you talking about? lol electrolysis splits water into H-H-O, the hydrogen and oxygen is used in a combustion chamber. This is with a hydrogen on demand system, there are cells that just use the electrons escaping from the water molecule's and use them as electricity as well, then there are negatively charged fuel cells that I work on, the only ones that are not over unity are the ones that utilize the electrons.
1freedomfighter11 2 years ago
Just out of curiosity are you aware of weight loss in drained battery's? It is odd you mentioned that. I can say for a fact if you are adding heat it would aid in the weight loss.
1freedomfighter11 2 years ago
Please show me mathmaticly how I can type to you, then explain tidal bulging please.
Thank you.
1freedomfighter11 2 years ago 2
Again explain to me what tidal budging is you moron. Heaver than air flight is possible, we are not the center of the earth, the earth is not flat, and micro waves are not a scam, all things idiots like you would have argued for before they became common knowledge, you are truly a brainwashed idiot. A parrot, NOTHING more.
1freedomfighter11 2 years ago 4
TheBeamshipCaptain, so you are still acting like a 12 year old using the real Beams name ah kido, why dont ya grow up a little and use your head instead of outdated text books.
1freedomfighter11 2 years ago 5
Woot just as I always said, electrons are directly related to gravity, in fact i have made objects lose weight by removing elecrons. Soon the whole world will know we have a repulsion field of energy as well as gravity, this is truly how orbits are maintaned, I had these thoughts before I descoverd the work from India known as strepultion.
1freedomfighter11 2 years ago
electrons have mass
removal of mass reduces mass....
RazielKain 2 years ago