A lot of this hinges on semantics. The muscles we use to counteract gravity in sitting or standing are called the anti-gravity muscles, so "anti-gravity" need only mean opposing or counteracting the effects of gravity. The people in the video are using it in the narrower sense of actually modifying gravity itself. But these electrostatic lifters are tres cool however they work.
idiots; "an internet device that works!" I own the book that documents the making of this device. It uses the flow of ions to lift the very light balsa wood and aluminum foil "craft." This is just high school physics 101. If they wanted to do something interesting they would attack the problem of exchanging particles such gravitons (which has been viewed as incorrect due to the plank length) or string theory...something that deals with just the gravitational force and not other forces...
Mythbusters is a Joke. They dont conduct scientific testing properly, They seem to be following along with some propaganda that wishes to distort science. They are movie effects goobers, not Physicists. Physics explains magnets as clockwise/counterclockwise vortexes that push & pull. There is a million concepts about flipping these properties, yet they put out some hoaky doaky electroslide parler trick. I didnt see a shred of anything to do with electromagnetics. they should run a Corndog stand
@LendMeYourHand Magnetism is a field. Bands of energy that push and pull, with increasing energy the closer to the magnetic object in question.
If you actually watch the episode, the lifter doesn't work on a basis of magnetism. It works on the basis of ion wind. High voltage on a small surface ionizes the air around said surface, creating a like charge. The charges push against each other, lifting it up. It's thrust created from charges particles, which is why it doesn't work in a vaccuum.
@SASNIGHTCRAWLER i couldn't agree with you anymore! i was just told the other day that i was a "nut" because of what i stated on facebook about deprogramming myself against the mainstream. to make a long story short, my now x-fb-friend, claimed i had talked down to her b/c she couldn't understand how to remove her tag from my albums. i really hate to say it, but i'm starting to believe the world has lost their minds and i'm one of the only sane people remaining. whatever you're doing, keep it up
@djk4tt Don't you find it odd that if he really built 40+ craft that he claimed all functioned perfectly that he does not even have one left to show off to people? Or that he could not manage to get a video camera out to film them with? Why would his only proof that any of them where ever built be some 60 year old photos of the orignial device? Litterally all we have to go on are those photographs and his word.
@MrAwsome514 I'll assume you're referring to Searl's IGV(Inverse Gravity Vehicle), since Hutchison hasn't made any yet. I do find it odd that Searl never produces anymore evidence of his IGVs, but we were never interested in that aspect of his work in the first place. Searl may provide more information on the IGV @ searlsolutions dotcom or swallowcommand dotcom. Searl had also created a YouTube account under the username / swallowcommand. I suggest you investigate the photo mystery yourself
@djk4tt Actually Even the actual SEG searl claims to power the IGV with is suspicious. He totes around a mock up modle to show at conventions but this model is usually being run on a car battery or some times on a wall outlet. Their demonstrations never show it actually running on it's own or anything. Infact One of the materials he claimed to use in the first model in 1965 was not even invented untill the 1980's.
@djk4tt I noticed something else a bit odd. Searl claims that all of the IGV's he has built where disk shaped like the SEG. He also claims that UFO sightings over a town called warminster in the 1960's where actually people witnessing his IGV testing. However eye witness accounts describe a four pointed star shaped craft.
@djk4tt Infact there is actually a video of a police officer skecthing the four pointed star shape. Searl took a still out of this video and put it on his site... the odd thing about that though is that the still was taken out of a point in the video before the officer was finnished. In the still he has only drawen two of the four points making it look more like a disk viewed from the side. Any reasonable person would take the frame where the sketch was complete so why does he not?
@MrAwsome514 I believe he has reasoning for what he does; he will continually state that man is not ready for such things. I assume he means b/c we love to hate each other and wage wars over diminishing resources and knows we'd find a negative use for it. On the other hand, his SEG should (and would) take care of this energy crisis and the elite have a hard time trying to create ways to charge people for its energy production. This is also why Telsa's Tower was removed from Shoreham, NY.
@djk4tt Resources aren't diminishing that quickly. We could supply the entire world for 200 years just with the reserve in alaska so it is not like oil is going to be getting scarce in our life time. At any rate the main reason why I consider the bit about the police scetch to be so important is because I actually once attended one of the conventions he spoke at and when he was accepting questioned I brought it up. He denied that the officer drew any more than 2 points and had me throwen out.
@djk4tt When I asked the question I was not being rude or anything. I was just asking him why he chose to use the frame from before the sketch was complete. He immediately said that the officer didn't draw more than 2 points. He also motioned to one of the convention's security team who then came over to try and escourt me out... What do you think of that incident? Also I did some digging and found that several members of his team use fake titles. "Dr." terry moore for example has no doctorate.
@djk4tt I also found that Searl himself uses a fake title. He likes to have people call him "Prof." Searl. Infact his website refferes to him as a professor many times, but he is not a professor. He does not currently nor has he ever taught at any college or university. Infact he is not even qualified to be a professor. Truth is he won the title at one of conventions he gave a speech at. Ofcourse you won't be finding that information on his site.
@MrAwsome514 Why or What does his title have anything to do with his work? LOL. FYI, you don't need to teach at a University to have the title of "Professor". See Wikipedia's definition of "Professor"; "Literally, professor derives from Latin as a "person who professes" being usually an expert in arts or sciences; a teacher of high rank."
If you're just trying to nit-pick I suggest you do future research.
@djk4tt Well that is your answer to Searl using his false Professor title however it does not work in "Dr." Terry's case. I believe the reason why Searl calls himself a professor is because it gives the illusion of credibility. Seeing as how the only evidence he can provide is his word, 60 year old photographs that even his own family has discredited, and a mock up model which does not demonstrate actual functionality but rather is just a prop ran on a battery for show.
@djk4tt Now if you would like to point me to any instance when Searl has ever showen anything more than the 3 peices of "evidence" I just mentioned then I would be more then happy to take a look at it. I have said the same thing to every Searl supporter I have ever spoken with. To this date I have never had any of them do so. Searl claims to have shown stronger evidence at some of his presentations at past conventions... A little digging usually shows them to just be the same old mock up model.
@djk4tt Also you did not respond to the incident in which Searl both avoided my question and had me throwen out of one of his speeches. Tell me... When have you ever heard of a legitimate researcher having some one throwen out for asking a dissenting question in a polite manner? I have never seen this happen unless the person asking the question was becomming disruptive or violent and I was neither.
@MrAwsome514 sorry, I hadn't seen the question/statement that you asked to Searl. I'd never purposely avoid answering any questions. But, like I stated earlier; Searl has his reasons for what he does. If you need any technical questions answered and Searl seemed to be avoiding you, I could put you in touch with one of the employees that knows a great deal. Private message "TheRealVerbz"(Jason) on YouTube with whatever questions you may have regarding the SEG :)
@djk4tt I allready asked "therealverbs" my question. He responded by blocking me from his channel and removing my question from the comments. I also asked "Beamshipcaptain" (Russel Anderson) and he called me lazy for "not doing my own research on it" And he told me to "go find another source of information" just before he blocked me aswell. These people claim to be the ONLY source of information on this subject so doesn't such a response seem odd?
@djk4tt I am certain Searl has his reasons for what he does too. Given the way he seems to treat dissenting opinions and questioning It looks to me like his reason is to protect some sort of deception. Why else would they go to the trouble of removing comments which ask questions from their pages? Why else would they refuse to answer questions? On many of his channels your comment's cannot even be posted untill after he has approved them. He censors the commenting on his videos mercilessly. Why?
@djk4tt By the way. Recently "TheRealVerbz" has been using multiple accounts to start spamming thumbs down on several comments of mine that have held the top rated slot on sevral videos for nearly a year to force them off the first page. Others have been experiencing this censorship of his aswell. I saw one of my comments which had 30+ thumbs up on it drop to 10 in only an hour after he posted one that whent from 0 thumbs up to 20 placing it as the top rated comment on the video at the same time
@MrAwsome514 if you believe that is true, report him along with all the linked accounts you believe to be his. other than that, i really can't help you since you won't relay the question you asked Searl/his staff. all i can truly say to you is, pick up a physics book or 2 and start reading to gain some insight before you fling redundant accusations/questions around. i don't want to assume that you know nothing, but sometimes it is best to realize that you actually don't.
@djk4tt The question I asked was quite simple. You see Searl had made the claim that there would be a demonstration of both the self powering claim and the flight claims with the device that day during the presentation. This is actually a claim that he allways makes when ever he makes an appearance. After collecting every one's entrance fee, however, he reveals that "technical" difficulties have forced him to instead show a mock up model run on a car battery.
@djk4tt So I asked him what manner of technical difficulty he was reffering to, Why he could not substitute one of the other 40 machines he claims to have built, and if he intended to refund the entranc fee to compensate for his inability to deliver what he promised.
@SASNIGHTCRAWLER yes, i've heard about the VASIMR and i'm friends with a lot of these so-called "nut-cases" that created some wonderful technologies; like Hutchison + Searl.
many ppl are skeptical about their tech. and i don't blame them;
if i had an IQ below 90 i'd never believe it either ;)
@djk4tt Have you ever questioned the claims of either Hutchison or Searl? Have you ever seen a video of Searl's disk in flight? All he ever shows on his videos are slide shows of photographs which I would like to point out his own son claims to have witnessed him fake with a small model and peice of thread. Even if we ignore that there is also the matter of the sheer number of craft he claims to have built. How can a man build 40+ flying machines and only have photographs of one of them to show?
What is anti-gravity? Isn't gravity a by product of mass? Would you have to have negative mass to have anti-gravity? I don't know who says Lifters operate using anti-gravity, but I can imagine it's the same people who say aeroplanes and helicopters use anti-gravity. The kind of people who don't understand how it actually works.
@The111DooD I was thinking the same thing when I heard that asian dude saying "have you ever thought it would be cool to control gravity?" LOL the Mythbusters get paid to make ridiculous accusations and blow everything up every other show. They're not def. not Physics majors and they are far from the so-called "Scientists" they portray themselves to be. It's truly a shame that some people are misguided by these idiots. I point out their flaws in nearly every episode and I'm just a CS Major
physicists are still grappling with what gravity really is, it has a direct correlation to mass but has not enough evidence has been found to say that it is caused by it but may only accompany it in fixed amounts, with force determined by distance. The famed "God" particle is believed to confer mass and the elusive "graviton" has been dubbed to produce gravity, in some physical theories. In fact, what we say we know about quantum physics is still a major debate in the science
I built one of these lifters and filmed it with my home made Schlieren setup. It's pretty clear that there is air moving around and down toward the foil skirt. I think the performance might be better with a better designed configuration -not tin foil and wire - and not anti-gravity.
Check out the video on my channel "ion lifter Schlieren experiment"
It part that is not true in this myth busters scene is that, the lifting is not created by trust from airflow as they mention in this video. Somebody else showed in another video on youtube that no trust was developed after lauching the lifter (he reversed the electricity to proof it).
@Michel423 Reversing the polarity on a lifter changes nothing about it's operation. By the way the guy who originally invented lifters called it an "Ionocraft"... tell me if it was not operating based on ion wind why did he call it that?
@Michel423 I did tell him... ages ago actually. By the way if you will watch his smoke test still shows the ion wind going the same direction in both polarity configurations. Nice try.
i wonder if i can build a hovercraft out of this technology my plan is to build a very large module and wirelessly power it with a Tesla coil and a receiving coil on the lifter
i wonder if i can build a hovercraft out of this technology? my plan is to build a very large module and wirelessly power it with a Tesla coil and a receiving coil on the lifter
@powermaks Yes I have wondered this aswell. I have also wondered if this technology might be able to be used to lift large light weight solar panels high into the atmosphere. Above the clouds so that they might transmit the power wirelessly down to a recieving station on the ground. I am not sure we have a way to transmit the power that far with a transmitter light enough to place onboard. Even if we did there would still be the question of if the light weight structure could handle the winds.
@MrAwsome514 well, if the solar panels go that far, you might-as-well go the full distance and put them in orbit. i saw in the science channel some show where they to transmit the collected power from a space power station down via focused microwaves to collectors down to earth.
@powermaks The problem with that is it would be potentially dangerous to aircraft. This is why an orbital solar array is not allready inplace. However, if it was just high enough to be above the cloud cover the planes would be flying over it most of the time rather than under it
@MrAwsome514 why. it will be in space at the edge of out atmosphere with they other millions of satellites. the danger would be the high intense microwave beam that will act like a star-war death ray to any life and other stuff (the stuff your microwave at home effects) medals, water, oils, etc etc.
@MrAwsome514 planes don't fly up that high. only in the tropospheric. you would have to take it down below that to minimize the danger. its pointless to that because it will be under the clouds and the rest of the atmosphere. so it being on the ground is the same as placing it in the middle of troposphere.
cumulonimbus clouds float at the edge of the troposphere. plans fly just under of at that level. higher up in the stratosphere is where cirrus clouds form. you would need to place the solar power station somewhere above all clouds.
@powermaks This is actually being researched by several companies, including NASA, however there's a kind of a hitch.
First, solar panels only convert about 20% of the energy into electrical form. THEN, you've got ANOTHER energy loss when trying to penetrate the atmosphere, designed to prevent such particles from hitting the earth. So about 20% of THAT goes through. Then you've got the inefficiency of the plant on the surface to deal with.
So yea, doesn't generate the energy worth the expense
What happens if you put a toast, which always lands on it's coated side, on the back of a cat, which always lands on it's feet - ............ ATIGRAVITY
Ehrm... it's an ion wind gadget... the HT wire has a corona around it that charges gas (turns it into a "soft" plasma) which will then stream towards the "opposite charge" - the foil.
In essence a bladeless fan using high tension voltage and gases.
The Asians want the West to think this is all crap so they can have a suprise lifter attack! Discovery Channel is an Asian tool. Don't be distracted by the whitegirl's bellybutton.
a lot of people think that simply counteracting gravity is anti-gravity. sure if you take a to repelling magnents and one lifts, then its upward force is stronger than the force of gravity. anti gravity is stopping gravity literally and allowing yourself to float and what not.
Still a usefull technology though, if you could find a way to store/generate that kind of power in a mobile platform you could have a vehicle with no propellors or combustion.
Didn´t proove anything! They could have put the lifter on a balance to check if there was any weight change! Their investigation is nothing scientific! The energy might have not been enough to take the lifter of the ground! And the wrost thing is to laugh as if they´re investigation was more scientic than other experimentations! Science amateurs! Focussing on the idea of prooving some thing is wrong, expecting a result, insted of thinking of all variables.
@rapharigoti The experiment was sound. The lifter didn't move in a vacuum. This means it was not anti-gravity. Anyone believing it is does not have any idea what gravity is. It is IMPOSSIBLE to have anti-gravity, by that I mean what Grant has explained, the modification of the gravitational field.
Hy UnderManiac ! There are other energies involved! I´m not sayng it can be called antigravity, check on my previous comment. Ion wind is not necessary for movement! I saw the second part and decided not to delete my coment. In other tests the assimetric capacitor was placed inside a table tenis ball., smoke was filling the space were it was turned on, and there was no air displacement. There are other energies involved, not just ion wind, opossite to the conclusion of the science amateurs
@rapharigoti Please point me to this video you mention. I want to see it for myself. I maintain that the ONLY thing happening here is ion wind keeping the device in the air. It's been proven, yet proponents still believe it's anti-gravity.
Hy UnderManiac! Youtube does not allow text with url adress posting in the coments, I´m going to send you t the video through sharing option on the video. Check his channel aswell (borbasmiklos). Check also other experiments in vacum, other then user borbasmiklos. it´s a mater of controlling voltage and frequency. Ion wind is not necessary.
Has anyone tried Dr TT Brown's Electro Static Propulsion Apparatus patent? The thing is that this patent was actually tried by Dr. Thomas Townsend Brown in the 50's, and it worked in a vacuum, 5 billionths of an atmosphere.
after they sealed it in the chamber, they should have tried it BEFORE pumping the air out, to see if their electrical connections were still good. So in effect, this video proves nothing about whether or not it works in a vacuum.
@Hendrix92TheUniverse Don't you think they made sure the connections worked? Just a simple connection to a ohm meter would tell them the wires are intact. First thing I'd have done. And I did think of that when I saw them close the container.
@Hendrix92TheUniverse Scientist John Fiala, whom I have known for 11 years now, conirmed my Beamship Variation I works in hard vacuum, with only slightly less force. Which is what NASA found. Takaaki Musha showed at the 207 AIAA the Biefeld Brown effect is more efficient in vacuum, and more powerful with solid-state dielectrics. Which is what TT Brown, the discoverer, found in Paris, France in 1955 with experiments at less than 1 Billionth of an atmosphere.
This comment has received too many negative votesshow
@HaydenHatTrick The mythbusters are'nt scientists. They are ACTOR KIDS. They also failed at reproducing the Bedinin motor. They did'nt even consult John Bedini! Yet, many people on YouTube have replicated them, and have them charging batteries! Follow the money trail, and check who the mythbusters, and the DISCOVERY CHANNE's corporate sponsors are. You will find fossil and nuclear fuels companies. Follow the money trail. The DISCOVERY CHANNEL is the complete opposite of THE HISTORY CHANNEL.
This comment has received too many negative votesshow
@jack91x I read it last year. I am very flattered! By the way, I neither smoke, drink, nor take drugs of any kind. There is too much at stake to have anything but a clear head in this world of ours.
@Beamshipcaptain Not ONE bedini motor on youtube works! NOT ONE! I've checked out every one of them and I know the concept on how they're supposed to work, but they don't. I have diagrammed it and made calculations, the science doesn't lie. This motor does not work as proported.
@UnderManiac They certainly do. I have seen them, and the videos showing them working. A schoolgirl reproduced a Bedini motor. Are you admitting a schoolgirl can do something you cannot? Look at two-phase linear motors, and the Howard Johnson Permanent magnet motor, which also works as a linear motor. The SEG and the GLASS SEG (1989) are also proof of concept. The first SEG was constructed by the engineers and laborers at British Rewinds, in 1946, 65 years ago.
@Beamshipcaptain The bedini motor is nothing more than a mechanical version of a transformer. It is not an overunity motor. People who try to prove otherwise only ever measure the voltage input and output but fail to mention that voltage is not a measure of power. That way the viewers will assume that it is and thus believe that it is overunity. perhapse we should follow your money trail... oh wait that is right you run a company called applied electrogravitics which peddles psudoscience...
What's with all the down-votes? Reality is wrong, apparently. Aaaah the delusional Tesla fanboys. They love him. Seriously love him. Like, in the butt or something. Tesla made a few decent discoveries, then proceeded to just make shit up. Inventions without documentation are indistinguishable from the ramblings of a mad-man.
This comment has received too many negative votesshow
@blehblehbleh86 Tesla has over 700 fundamental patents to his credit, including RADIO.
He singlehandedly gave us our electrical 2oth century, and pioneered the basis of non-Hertzian communications systtems and wirless transmission of electrical energy.
@Beamshipcaptain you know most of his patents were due to the fact he had to patent the same things in several different countries... but what ever, yeah, he did good for himself
A wiser man than me once said: "There are no anti-fundamental forces of nature." Because I am exceedingly stubborn, I will continue to search for unnatural forces which reduce the 'law of gravity' to 'the general theory of gravity'.
Saying something is "proven" means nothing. Show us who, what and when it was proven. I wanna see real "independently tested" "scientific method" "peer-reviewed" papers... and NOT googling some website created by an idiot or some garage video that doesn't actually show anything significant.
Youtube 'hutchison effect' (under FUNKTHARESERVE's Channel) for starters .. But of course if you wish to pick from the bottom of the barrel like your beloved mythbusters have, then it may probably may not be as entertaining for you or meet your society drone molded expectations.
wipe your azz with your papers .. Tesla was laughed at and ridiculed by the likes of people such as yourself .. but now is praised in obscurity.
"shhhh ...I see stupid people ..they're everywhere .. "
Praised by idiots is NOT proof of genius. Tesla had great ideas when he was younger. but was quite delusion when older. Many of his ideas never worked. No conspiracy.
@Beamshipcaptain Tesla's idea to transmit electricity wirelessly from giant towers was an epic fail. So were several experiments with oscillators. My favorite examples include one that he had to break with a hammer because it made the building resonate and almost ripped it apart, and the platform that made Samuel Clemens (Mark Twain) have explosive diarrhea. Then there was the obsession with X-raying himself that gave him tumors. In the end though, he was the smartest man EVER.
@Beamshipcaptain No. The "consumer electronics" you speak of use low range induction. What Tesla tried to do was launch lightning across towers, eliminating the need for cables. He forgot that this is very inneficient, highly dangerous, and creates the deadly gas ozone. It's probably a good thing that it never worked.
@jack91x It worked. Wardenclyffe Tower was dynamited after JP Morgan pulled funding when he found out that Tesla wanted to give away electricity for free. Morgan had bought up all the copper mines in the country, and wanted to secure his fortune by having people PAY for energy, just as Television used to be free! Tesla had surpassed his own invention of Radio by that time, had discovered the Earth is electrically conductive, and was sending signals thru the air and Earth at 17 times lightspeed.
@jack91x Tesla was using a SCALAR wave, similar to the Patented ROGERS UNDERSEA TRANSMISSION SYSTEM, which is today used to keep in touch with Nuclear subs worldwide. Scalar waves are non-Hertzian, electrogravitational (similar also to TT Brown's patented electrogravitational communications system) and can travel at any speed depending on Modulation, from near zero MPH, to near infinite velocity. The Soviets had great success with scalar interferometry in the 1960s.
@Beamshipcaptain Wow, incredibly you are able to put a lot of words together that make no real sense. I know what you're trying to say, but it just isn't making any sense. First of all, you can't just make up a word called electrogravity. It's not a real word. The two have NOTHING to do with each other. Another think, nothing can have nearly infinite velocity. That's absurd. Gravity travels at the speed of light. NOTHING can travel faster than the speed of light!
@UnderManiac I did'nt coin the term ELECTROGRAVITY, TT Brown did, in 1928! Einstien confirmed the link in his ZUR EINHEITLICHEN FELD THERIE, or the Unified Field Theory for Gravitation and Electricity, released in Prussian science journals January 10,1929, and to the NY TIMES Jan. 12,1929. Fonfirmed in 1955, and by Takaaki Musha in POSSIBILITY OF A STRON COUPLING BETWEEN ELECTRICITY AND GRAVITATION (1997). Princeton scientists sent laser pulsed thru Cesium vacpor chambers at 310 times c in 2000.
@Beamshipcaptain I've read that article. It was retracted as they did not exceed the speed of light. I do read science magazines and whatever papers I can get a hold of. I've read the article and read the retraction. Maybe you missed it, or just choose to ignore the corrected findings.
@Beamshipcaptain Einstein did not confirm a link to electricity and gravity. He was trying to work out the theory that there may be a connection. He never did come up with an actual theory linking electricity with gravity.
Consider this: Do you agree that the moon is devoid of a magnetosphere? It has a solid core, thus does not have a magnetic field surrounding it. Electricity and magnetism are interlinked. The moon has gravity, like any mass of the same density. How can this be?
@UnderManiac He certainly did, and it is called ZUR EINHEITLICHEN FELD THERIE, or the Unified Field Theory for Gravitation and Electricity, and was published in final form in High German January 10, 1929. Antigravity for flight, and passife defensive fields became popular in the 1930s thru 1956, when it "dissapeared", except in science fiction. Was released to the NY Times with Great Fanfare to the NY TIMES, as was Relativity, in 1908.
@Beamshipcaptain Beamie you are an idiot. First of all the unified field theory Einstien worked on was not trying to relate electricity with gravity it was trying to relate magnetisim with gravity. Secondly he never found a connection between the two and eventually determened that there is no connection. So no... there is no unified field theory.
@UnderManiac Experimetnal evidence shows gravtiation propagates at speeds millions of times that of light, nearly instantaneous. The Magnetic force travels much much faster than light as well. See also: Graham and Lahoz, "Observation of Static Electromagnetic Angular Momentum in Vacuo," NATURE, V. 285, May 15,1980,p.129, Woodward, James"Flux Capacitors and the Origin of Inertia", FOUNDATIONS OF PHYSICS, V. 34, 2004, P.1475.
@Beamshipcaptain Where are you getting your experimental evidence? Science has observed gravity waves traveling at the speed of light. Gravity is not instantaneous, as you seem to claim. Magnetics has nothing to do with gravity, and the magnetic "force" can not travel faster than the speed of light. What you are quoting is bad science, not peer reviewed and verified. Please stop peddling pseudoscience as real science.
@UnderManiac Mainstream science accepts that the fabric of spacetime travels MUCH faster than light.Look at Van Flandern, "Speed of Gravity: What the Experiments Say," PHYSICS LETTERS A 250:1-11 (1998), for starters.
Magnetic fields are simply ether currents. Gravitation is simply due to a converging flux of ether. Matter is an ether-sink. Electrostatic fields are simply zones of high or low concentration of ether. Ether based physics has come back in to favor, explains action at a distance.
@UnderManiac The scientists in the Princeton tests where laser pulses propagated thru Cesium vasor at 310 times lightspeed state: "The experiments prove the popular notion that nothing can travel faster than light in a vacuum is wrong". The speed of light in a vacuum has shown to vary, which of course invalidates special relativity. also look at Woodward, James F. " A New Experimental Approach to Mach's Principle and Relativistic Gravitation," FOUNDATIONS OF PHYSICS LETTERS, V. 3, No.5, 1990.
Marc Millis, who ran the now-defunct Breakthrough Propulsion Physics Program for NASA wrote:
This "Hutchison Effect" has been claimed for years, without any independent verification — ever. In fact, its originator can't even replicate it on demand. This has been investigated more than once, been part of documentaries on The Discovery Channel, but still never seems to pass critical muster.
*** That video you praise so highly can be done by a 10 grader with a rotating platform and a camera mount. He was a fraud!
"One set of videos posted to an antigravity website (and later taken down) shows closeups of a toy UFO bouncing around, and then shots of the toy gyrating wildly in the air. When it was pointed out that the movement of the toy was consistent with being supported by a string, and a moving wire or string could be seen in the video, Hutchison claimed it was a power supply"
This is not really a valid test. Putting it in that metal cylinder probably disrupts the electric field. If they really wanted to eliminate the "air thrust effect", then should just cover up the top of the triangle so that air cannot pass through it.
Even if the Larger magnetic lines of flux were disrupted by the metal enclosure.... it would have very little effect on the smaller field lines. There would have been at least SOME movement. But alas, there was NONE!
And covering the top of the lifter would not stop the air flow. The movement of air is of a VERY short displacement. A couple of centimeters at most. It is NOT how far the air travels, but the speed. Only ionized molecules very close and/or in between the foil and wire are affected by the field and are responsible for the thrust.
The same with sealing the lifter in a plastic bag. As long as air is near the wire and/or foil... there WILL BE IONIZATION. AND THEREFOR, THRUST!
@Joeviocoe You made an assumption and it's completely wrong.
I'm not talking about the ion spinners, I'm talking about ion lifters.
NASA has been experimenting with them a long time, they work in a vacuum without a gas. Key word here, lifter as in LEVITATER. I'll find the videos, I must have watched a dozen of them.
No gas yet they work. The mythbusters are biased propagandists.
Yeaaahhh.... okay. You find me a video of NASA experimenting with "Lifters" or "LEVITATERs".
I seriously doubt you can present anything though.
Cause I have researched this plenty. And all the NASA experiments were on Asymmetrical Capacitors... and NOT lifters in a vacuum. And those are two VERY different animals.
Unlimited energy sources are out there!But the Establishment doesn't want ppl to know this,Get a REAL working magnet motor at LT-MAGNET-MOTORdotCOM ,Be the revolution!
It does NOT work better in a vacuum. This Asymmetrical Capacitor shown as a video response took nearly twice as long to get up to speed when under a half-assed partial vacuum using a cheap pump to keep food fresh.
Under a full vacuum, it would not spin at all. And spinning requires MUCH LESS thrust than "lifting" does. Which is why you never see Lifters in a vacuum, only well balanced object that rotate.... VERY slowly and pick up speed. Because even very thin air can be ionized and used.
Was tested in a vacuum originally. Actually works better in a vacuum. Can achieve higher voltages. Don't know what they did wrong but it proves only how NOT to make it work in a vacuum (do what they did).
This is exactly why it is said, "you cannot Prove a Negative"... because somebody can always say, "they did not do it correctly".
It does NOT work better in a vacuum. The Asymmetrical capacitor shown as a video response took nearly twice as long to get up to speed when under a half-assed partial vacuum using a cheap pump to keep food fresh.
Under a full vacuum, it would not spin at all. And spinning requires MUCH LESS thrust than "lifting" does.
They can't say that the lifter is busted...even if it truly isn't anti-gravity, because the test was done wrong. First this lifter uses an electric field....However the Vacuum chamber is made of metal...Um it don't take a rocket scientist to say that the metal chamber itself will cancel out the field.
Secondly... that lifter isn't going to lift on a one mile an hour wind as they propose in the video...the lifter is still much too heavy. It could be a combination of static and propulsion though.
If you view any of the lifter videos that take place outside you will undoubtedly realize that ambient winds even on a still day are greater than 1 mph, and therefore these lifters are still Lifting... I do realize the lifters are bigger, but that just means it takes more wind to make it lift.
If what I say is true, then the Mythbusters test was improperly done.
"For some reason there is still debates on youtube about these lifters being REAL antigravity devices." For some reason, there are still debates on whether the earth is flat or not. Nutjobs are everywhere.
MYTHBUSTERS are fun to watch but sometimes .... I remember they tried to replicate John Bedini motor... However it was ridiculous to see that - few whatever wound coils and few mosfets - they say it was busted.... its like building a car with square wheels and then just state: ... its not moving so its must be fake... I dont care they busting other crap.. but I care when they make jokes out of a real inventions without reproducing anything that looks even close to original...
Have you ever heard the phrase, "You cannot prove a negative"?
Mythbusters are fun to watch... but they can only make reasonable attempts based on some designs they find on the internet.
Bedini Motors only work if you ignore conservation of energy. If you are impressed with spinning and shiny objects.
Whenever someone connects the output to the input and remove any batteries, the magic goes away. And fails the expectation of "running forever" or "uncontrollable acceleration"
isn't this technology similar to how that new dyson fan works? it's a blade-less fan. and I am guessing it's similar for the fact this object has measurable thrust (air-flow).
This technology is similar to the Ionic Breeze by sharper image. Ionizes the air, then accelerates it to create a breeze. Not really powerful, but helps clean dust and ozone supposedly.
The Dyson is completely different. It DOES have fan blades and a motor... it is hidden in the base (impeller). And the ring is just an air channel that uses a bit of Bernoulli's principle to move a larger volume of air.
@Joeviocoe If you know anything at all about the "Biefeld-Brown effect" you're already WAAAAAAY past the 50th percentile in the filed of science. If you really expected Mythbusters to teach you something useful in this episode you were bound for disappointment right from the start.
If u can find any science books and/or articles from the say 50's back check em out, there was a plasma emitter in the 20's or earlier, 1975 high voltage electric engine, im wanting to say that didnt have to be recharged, it was banned. worked off repulsion, they were making electric engine drive delivery trucks before 1900. Im not basic shit off utube, specially from a tv show.
u realize the whole "ufo" craze, sightings whatever u want to call it started around the 40's wasnt it the 20's brown was tinkering in it, hell his first one was a saucer not toothpicks and a strip of aluminum foil. Look at the moon landings in 64,65,67 they are in the same dang spot, that robot they sent to mars, idk about civilizations and all that, looks like a crash sight to me. If i could recall the extact text i give it to, i go thru 100 a day. the b2 bomber works off of browns work.
stay in that mainstream state of mind joe, u seriously think this gov funded operations are going to tell u the entire truth about advanced technology? they also said browns devices where useless, but hell they stated they tested in the report at 19kv lol, course they didnt. keep ur head in that lil box and hope the gov throws u a bone, or keep digging and figure it out
Lol , noones talking about the ppl i was talking about the government slipping in under false pretense of his "citizenship" which i reckon he got not long after being here. He was called to jury dutySomething tells me we havent heard the last of ole NIkoli. Somethings telling me him and ole marconi just might have left us a present. where bouts did u get info about the mercury at? find that very interesting, I just ordered 20 lbs of it.
if u think that the same ppl that has been witholding knowledge from the public to line their own pockets,supressed tesla and stole his works, are going to just decide hey lets tell the whole story for the good of mankind. ur either blind or just plain thick skulled. I suggest u dig a lil deeper,, the day these mainstreamers tell the public the whole truth be the day micky mouse is president. but hell what can u tell rockets cientist they havent been taught already by gov appointed curriculum GL
Stole? He put his most important works into public domain himself.
Nobody but Tesla is responsible for exposing himself to mercury vapor.
His "secret superweapon" was not exactly a secret... he spent a great deal of time raving about it. It just didn't work.
His wireless power transmission notions demonstrated that while he was inventive his basic grasp of physics was a bit spotty. Wireless transmission is certainly possible, just horribly dangerous and horribly inefficient.
WE DONT WATCH YOU ANYMORE MYTHBUSTERS!! HAHA
YOU SOLD OUT TO THE MAN, YOU BITCHS!
freshkryp69 3 weeks ago
A lot of this hinges on semantics. The muscles we use to counteract gravity in sitting or standing are called the anti-gravity muscles, so "anti-gravity" need only mean opposing or counteracting the effects of gravity. The people in the video are using it in the narrower sense of actually modifying gravity itself. But these electrostatic lifters are tres cool however they work.
goodmaro 2 months ago in playlist More videos from Joeviocoe
Go to 3:59 repeatand watch Kari
mrmestupkid 2 months ago
This has been flagged as spam show
nice
saahilsheriff 4 months ago
Delicious conspiracy theorist butthurt abound!
InvadeNormandy 6 months ago
idiots; "an internet device that works!" I own the book that documents the making of this device. It uses the flow of ions to lift the very light balsa wood and aluminum foil "craft." This is just high school physics 101. If they wanted to do something interesting they would attack the problem of exchanging particles such gravitons (which has been viewed as incorrect due to the plank length) or string theory...something that deals with just the gravitational force and not other forces...
maverickplabs 6 months ago
Mythbusters is a Joke. They dont conduct scientific testing properly, They seem to be following along with some propaganda that wishes to distort science. They are movie effects goobers, not Physicists. Physics explains magnets as clockwise/counterclockwise vortexes that push & pull. There is a million concepts about flipping these properties, yet they put out some hoaky doaky electroslide parler trick. I didnt see a shred of anything to do with electromagnetics. they should run a Corndog stand
LendMeYourHand 6 months ago 4
@LendMeYourHand Magnetism is a field. Bands of energy that push and pull, with increasing energy the closer to the magnetic object in question.
If you actually watch the episode, the lifter doesn't work on a basis of magnetism. It works on the basis of ion wind. High voltage on a small surface ionizes the air around said surface, creating a like charge. The charges push against each other, lifting it up. It's thrust created from charges particles, which is why it doesn't work in a vaccuum.
TheGibbySG 3 weeks ago
@TheGibbySG There's not enough character space for a proper explanation.
TheGibbySG 3 weeks ago
@minonicotino You are right, it is called paint thinner xD
kmncztms 6 months ago
@SASNIGHTCRAWLER i couldn't agree with you anymore! i was just told the other day that i was a "nut" because of what i stated on facebook about deprogramming myself against the mainstream. to make a long story short, my now x-fb-friend, claimed i had talked down to her b/c she couldn't understand how to remove her tag from my albums. i really hate to say it, but i'm starting to believe the world has lost their minds and i'm one of the only sane people remaining. whatever you're doing, keep it up
djk4tt 6 months ago
@djk4tt Don't you find it odd that if he really built 40+ craft that he claimed all functioned perfectly that he does not even have one left to show off to people? Or that he could not manage to get a video camera out to film them with? Why would his only proof that any of them where ever built be some 60 year old photos of the orignial device? Litterally all we have to go on are those photographs and his word.
MrAwsome514 6 months ago
@MrAwsome514 I'll assume you're referring to Searl's IGV(Inverse Gravity Vehicle), since Hutchison hasn't made any yet. I do find it odd that Searl never produces anymore evidence of his IGVs, but we were never interested in that aspect of his work in the first place. Searl may provide more information on the IGV @ searlsolutions dotcom or swallowcommand dotcom. Searl had also created a YouTube account under the username / swallowcommand. I suggest you investigate the photo mystery yourself
djk4tt 6 months ago
@djk4tt Actually Even the actual SEG searl claims to power the IGV with is suspicious. He totes around a mock up modle to show at conventions but this model is usually being run on a car battery or some times on a wall outlet. Their demonstrations never show it actually running on it's own or anything. Infact One of the materials he claimed to use in the first model in 1965 was not even invented untill the 1980's.
MrAwsome514 6 months ago
@djk4tt I noticed something else a bit odd. Searl claims that all of the IGV's he has built where disk shaped like the SEG. He also claims that UFO sightings over a town called warminster in the 1960's where actually people witnessing his IGV testing. However eye witness accounts describe a four pointed star shaped craft.
MrAwsome514 6 months ago
@djk4tt Infact there is actually a video of a police officer skecthing the four pointed star shape. Searl took a still out of this video and put it on his site... the odd thing about that though is that the still was taken out of a point in the video before the officer was finnished. In the still he has only drawen two of the four points making it look more like a disk viewed from the side. Any reasonable person would take the frame where the sketch was complete so why does he not?
MrAwsome514 6 months ago
@MrAwsome514 I believe he has reasoning for what he does; he will continually state that man is not ready for such things. I assume he means b/c we love to hate each other and wage wars over diminishing resources and knows we'd find a negative use for it. On the other hand, his SEG should (and would) take care of this energy crisis and the elite have a hard time trying to create ways to charge people for its energy production. This is also why Telsa's Tower was removed from Shoreham, NY.
djk4tt 6 months ago
@djk4tt Resources aren't diminishing that quickly. We could supply the entire world for 200 years just with the reserve in alaska so it is not like oil is going to be getting scarce in our life time. At any rate the main reason why I consider the bit about the police scetch to be so important is because I actually once attended one of the conventions he spoke at and when he was accepting questioned I brought it up. He denied that the officer drew any more than 2 points and had me throwen out.
MrAwsome514 6 months ago
@djk4tt When I asked the question I was not being rude or anything. I was just asking him why he chose to use the frame from before the sketch was complete. He immediately said that the officer didn't draw more than 2 points. He also motioned to one of the convention's security team who then came over to try and escourt me out... What do you think of that incident? Also I did some digging and found that several members of his team use fake titles. "Dr." terry moore for example has no doctorate.
MrAwsome514 6 months ago
@djk4tt I also found that Searl himself uses a fake title. He likes to have people call him "Prof." Searl. Infact his website refferes to him as a professor many times, but he is not a professor. He does not currently nor has he ever taught at any college or university. Infact he is not even qualified to be a professor. Truth is he won the title at one of conventions he gave a speech at. Ofcourse you won't be finding that information on his site.
MrAwsome514 6 months ago
@MrAwsome514 Why or What does his title have anything to do with his work? LOL. FYI, you don't need to teach at a University to have the title of "Professor". See Wikipedia's definition of "Professor"; "Literally, professor derives from Latin as a "person who professes" being usually an expert in arts or sciences; a teacher of high rank."
If you're just trying to nit-pick I suggest you do future research.
djk4tt 6 months ago
@djk4tt Well that is your answer to Searl using his false Professor title however it does not work in "Dr." Terry's case. I believe the reason why Searl calls himself a professor is because it gives the illusion of credibility. Seeing as how the only evidence he can provide is his word, 60 year old photographs that even his own family has discredited, and a mock up model which does not demonstrate actual functionality but rather is just a prop ran on a battery for show.
MrAwsome514 6 months ago
@djk4tt Now if you would like to point me to any instance when Searl has ever showen anything more than the 3 peices of "evidence" I just mentioned then I would be more then happy to take a look at it. I have said the same thing to every Searl supporter I have ever spoken with. To this date I have never had any of them do so. Searl claims to have shown stronger evidence at some of his presentations at past conventions... A little digging usually shows them to just be the same old mock up model.
MrAwsome514 6 months ago
@djk4tt Also you did not respond to the incident in which Searl both avoided my question and had me throwen out of one of his speeches. Tell me... When have you ever heard of a legitimate researcher having some one throwen out for asking a dissenting question in a polite manner? I have never seen this happen unless the person asking the question was becomming disruptive or violent and I was neither.
MrAwsome514 6 months ago
@MrAwsome514 sorry, I hadn't seen the question/statement that you asked to Searl. I'd never purposely avoid answering any questions. But, like I stated earlier; Searl has his reasons for what he does. If you need any technical questions answered and Searl seemed to be avoiding you, I could put you in touch with one of the employees that knows a great deal. Private message "TheRealVerbz"(Jason) on YouTube with whatever questions you may have regarding the SEG :)
djk4tt 6 months ago
@djk4tt I allready asked "therealverbs" my question. He responded by blocking me from his channel and removing my question from the comments. I also asked "Beamshipcaptain" (Russel Anderson) and he called me lazy for "not doing my own research on it" And he told me to "go find another source of information" just before he blocked me aswell. These people claim to be the ONLY source of information on this subject so doesn't such a response seem odd?
MrAwsome514 6 months ago
@djk4tt I am certain Searl has his reasons for what he does too. Given the way he seems to treat dissenting opinions and questioning It looks to me like his reason is to protect some sort of deception. Why else would they go to the trouble of removing comments which ask questions from their pages? Why else would they refuse to answer questions? On many of his channels your comment's cannot even be posted untill after he has approved them. He censors the commenting on his videos mercilessly. Why?
MrAwsome514 6 months ago
@djk4tt By the way. Recently "TheRealVerbz" has been using multiple accounts to start spamming thumbs down on several comments of mine that have held the top rated slot on sevral videos for nearly a year to force them off the first page. Others have been experiencing this censorship of his aswell. I saw one of my comments which had 30+ thumbs up on it drop to 10 in only an hour after he posted one that whent from 0 thumbs up to 20 placing it as the top rated comment on the video at the same time
MrAwsome514 6 months ago
@MrAwsome514 if you believe that is true, report him along with all the linked accounts you believe to be his. other than that, i really can't help you since you won't relay the question you asked Searl/his staff. all i can truly say to you is, pick up a physics book or 2 and start reading to gain some insight before you fling redundant accusations/questions around. i don't want to assume that you know nothing, but sometimes it is best to realize that you actually don't.
djk4tt 6 months ago
@djk4tt The question I asked was quite simple. You see Searl had made the claim that there would be a demonstration of both the self powering claim and the flight claims with the device that day during the presentation. This is actually a claim that he allways makes when ever he makes an appearance. After collecting every one's entrance fee, however, he reveals that "technical" difficulties have forced him to instead show a mock up model run on a car battery.
MrAwsome514 6 months ago
@djk4tt So I asked him what manner of technical difficulty he was reffering to, Why he could not substitute one of the other 40 machines he claims to have built, and if he intended to refund the entranc fee to compensate for his inability to deliver what he promised.
MrAwsome514 6 months ago
@djk4tt Ofcourse because his son claims the photographs are fake that really only leaves us with his word doesn't it?
MrAwsome514 6 months ago
@SASNIGHTCRAWLER yes, i've heard about the VASIMR and i'm friends with a lot of these so-called "nut-cases" that created some wonderful technologies; like Hutchison + Searl.
many ppl are skeptical about their tech. and i don't blame them;
if i had an IQ below 90 i'd never believe it either ;)
djk4tt 7 months ago
@djk4tt Have you ever questioned the claims of either Hutchison or Searl? Have you ever seen a video of Searl's disk in flight? All he ever shows on his videos are slide shows of photographs which I would like to point out his own son claims to have witnessed him fake with a small model and peice of thread. Even if we ignore that there is also the matter of the sheer number of craft he claims to have built. How can a man build 40+ flying machines and only have photographs of one of them to show?
MrAwsome514 6 months ago
What is anti-gravity? Isn't gravity a by product of mass? Would you have to have negative mass to have anti-gravity? I don't know who says Lifters operate using anti-gravity, but I can imagine it's the same people who say aeroplanes and helicopters use anti-gravity. The kind of people who don't understand how it actually works.
The111DooD 8 months ago 8
@The111DooD I was thinking the same thing when I heard that asian dude saying "have you ever thought it would be cool to control gravity?" LOL the Mythbusters get paid to make ridiculous accusations and blow everything up every other show. They're not def. not Physics majors and they are far from the so-called "Scientists" they portray themselves to be. It's truly a shame that some people are misguided by these idiots. I point out their flaws in nearly every episode and I'm just a CS Major
djk4tt 7 months ago
physicists are still grappling with what gravity really is, it has a direct correlation to mass but has not enough evidence has been found to say that it is caused by it but may only accompany it in fixed amounts, with force determined by distance. The famed "God" particle is believed to confer mass and the elusive "graviton" has been dubbed to produce gravity, in some physical theories. In fact, what we say we know about quantum physics is still a major debate in the science
mbudnick242 2 months ago
@mbudnick242 If this were Facepunch I'd rate you informative :)
The111DooD 2 months ago
@minonicotino
They aren't saying anti gravity doesn't exist, they're just saying the methods they tried to produce the effect failed.
AHW214 8 months ago
I built one of these lifters and filmed it with my home made Schlieren setup. It's pretty clear that there is air moving around and down toward the foil skirt. I think the performance might be better with a better designed configuration -not tin foil and wire - and not anti-gravity.
Check out the video on my channel "ion lifter Schlieren experiment"
- Otto Belden
OttoBelden 10 months ago
well since earths athmosphere isnt a vacuum, then I gues good ol DoD could make these babies supersized and 100 times more complex.
But whats the benefit if they would be useless in space....? Maybe flip the effect once out of the atmospheres?
Anyways..this confirms. Alot.
MirthlessSmile79 10 months ago
It part that is not true in this myth busters scene is that, the lifting is not created by trust from airflow as they mention in this video. Somebody else showed in another video on youtube that no trust was developed after lauching the lifter (he reversed the electricity to proof it).
Michel423 10 months ago
@Michel423 Reversing the polarity on a lifter changes nothing about it's operation. By the way the guy who originally invented lifters called it an "Ionocraft"... tell me if it was not operating based on ion wind why did he call it that?
MrAwsome514 10 months ago
@MrAwsome514
Tell this guy, he is claiming and showing that it's not the case:
youtube.com/watch?v=uF8otSSPgdA
Michel423 10 months ago
@Michel423 I did tell him... ages ago actually. By the way if you will watch his smoke test still shows the ion wind going the same direction in both polarity configurations. Nice try.
MrAwsome514 10 months ago
can the balsa wood be substituted by a wooden stick???
lasedr1 11 months ago
@lasedr1 yes. as long as it's not too heavy or conductive.
powermaks 10 months ago
This has been flagged as spam show
i wonder if i can build a hovercraft out of this technology my plan is to build a very large module and wirelessly power it with a Tesla coil and a receiving coil on the lifter
powermaks 11 months ago
i wonder if i can build a hovercraft out of this technology? my plan is to build a very large module and wirelessly power it with a Tesla coil and a receiving coil on the lifter
powermaks 11 months ago
@powermaks Yes I have wondered this aswell. I have also wondered if this technology might be able to be used to lift large light weight solar panels high into the atmosphere. Above the clouds so that they might transmit the power wirelessly down to a recieving station on the ground. I am not sure we have a way to transmit the power that far with a transmitter light enough to place onboard. Even if we did there would still be the question of if the light weight structure could handle the winds.
MrAwsome514 10 months ago
@MrAwsome514 well, if the solar panels go that far, you might-as-well go the full distance and put them in orbit. i saw in the science channel some show where they to transmit the collected power from a space power station down via focused microwaves to collectors down to earth.
powermaks 10 months ago
@powermaks The problem with that is it would be potentially dangerous to aircraft. This is why an orbital solar array is not allready inplace. However, if it was just high enough to be above the cloud cover the planes would be flying over it most of the time rather than under it
MrAwsome514 10 months ago
@MrAwsome514 why. it will be in space at the edge of out atmosphere with they other millions of satellites. the danger would be the high intense microwave beam that will act like a star-war death ray to any life and other stuff (the stuff your microwave at home effects) medals, water, oils, etc etc.
powermaks 10 months ago
also, planes fly in the troposphere about 7 miles up into the ski.
powermaks 10 months ago
@powermaks Yea but the idea is the risk is minimized by the lower altitude.
MrAwsome514 10 months ago
@MrAwsome514 in which way. the higher in it the exosphere, the better.
powermaks 10 months ago
@powermaks The lower it is the lower the risk of it flash frying an aircraft.
MrAwsome514 10 months ago
@MrAwsome514 planes don't fly up that high. only in the tropospheric. you would have to take it down below that to minimize the danger. its pointless to that because it will be under the clouds and the rest of the atmosphere. so it being on the ground is the same as placing it in the middle of troposphere.
powermaks 10 months ago
cumulonimbus clouds float at the edge of the troposphere. plans fly just under of at that level. higher up in the stratosphere is where cirrus clouds form. you would need to place the solar power station somewhere above all clouds.
powermaks 10 months ago
@powermaks Or have it be able to manuver around the shadows of the higher clouds.
MrAwsome514 10 months ago
@powermaks This is actually being researched by several companies, including NASA, however there's a kind of a hitch.
First, solar panels only convert about 20% of the energy into electrical form. THEN, you've got ANOTHER energy loss when trying to penetrate the atmosphere, designed to prevent such particles from hitting the earth. So about 20% of THAT goes through. Then you've got the inefficiency of the plant on the surface to deal with.
So yea, doesn't generate the energy worth the expense
ShneekeyTheLost 10 months ago
The mythbusters were stupid to even do this myth as its known that these devices operate on ion wind propulsion
rbneville 1 year ago
@rbneville No I think they where right to shouve a boot up the collective asses of conspiracy thoerist's and conmen who enable them.
kurisu925 11 months ago
What happens if you put a toast, which always lands on it's coated side, on the back of a cat, which always lands on it's feet - ............ ATIGRAVITY
TheSandman10100 1 year ago
Ehrm... it's an ion wind gadget... the HT wire has a corona around it that charges gas (turns it into a "soft" plasma) which will then stream towards the "opposite charge" - the foil.
In essence a bladeless fan using high tension voltage and gases.
Kenzofeis 1 year ago
The Asians want the West to think this is all crap so they can have a suprise lifter attack! Discovery Channel is an Asian tool. Don't be distracted by the whitegirl's bellybutton.
JarJar88forever 1 year ago
I love how he emphasizes what the Asian guy (LoL) says.
ASIANPRIDE50 1 year ago
a lot of people think that simply counteracting gravity is anti-gravity. sure if you take a to repelling magnents and one lifts, then its upward force is stronger than the force of gravity. anti gravity is stopping gravity literally and allowing yourself to float and what not.
iexploderacoons 1 year ago
I know what everyone is trying to prove,, but some heavy liquor usually turns off all gravity for me... *Cheers*
13098519 1 year ago
MYTHBUSTERS = COINTELPRO
Truy to bust this myth, agents.
How do you make two 110 floor buildings implode into their own footprint at freefall speed....???
...and a few hours later make a 52 floor building do exactly the same thing, implode into its own footprint at freefall speed....???
(...and.. theas are the only three steel buildings in the entire history that has colapsed "due to intense fire"...all in the same day... )
2Fast4USuperman 1 year ago
Still a usefull technology though, if you could find a way to store/generate that kind of power in a mobile platform you could have a vehicle with no propellors or combustion.
tangent272 1 year ago
@tangent272 This would be good if the ion wind device could support a larger weight than itself.
UnderManiac 1 year ago
Didn´t proove anything! They could have put the lifter on a balance to check if there was any weight change! Their investigation is nothing scientific! The energy might have not been enough to take the lifter of the ground! And the wrost thing is to laugh as if they´re investigation was more scientic than other experimentations! Science amateurs! Focussing on the idea of prooving some thing is wrong, expecting a result, insted of thinking of all variables.
rapharigoti 1 year ago
@rapharigoti The experiment was sound. The lifter didn't move in a vacuum. This means it was not anti-gravity. Anyone believing it is does not have any idea what gravity is. It is IMPOSSIBLE to have anti-gravity, by that I mean what Grant has explained, the modification of the gravitational field.
UnderManiac 1 year ago
@rapharigoti The lifter "flew" from the ion thrust, as they measured. Without air, the lifter was unable to fly.
UnderManiac 1 year ago
@rapharigoti Obviously you didn't watch the 2nd part of this video. watch?v=a0FusVb4Gp4&feature=related
They used a gravity detector with the lifter and there was no measurable results. Stick that in your pot pipe and smoke it.
UnderManiac 1 year ago
Hy UnderManiac ! There are other energies involved! I´m not sayng it can be called antigravity, check on my previous comment. Ion wind is not necessary for movement! I saw the second part and decided not to delete my coment. In other tests the assimetric capacitor was placed inside a table tenis ball., smoke was filling the space were it was turned on, and there was no air displacement. There are other energies involved, not just ion wind, opossite to the conclusion of the science amateurs
rapharigoti 1 year ago
@rapharigoti Please point me to this video you mention. I want to see it for myself. I maintain that the ONLY thing happening here is ion wind keeping the device in the air. It's been proven, yet proponents still believe it's anti-gravity.
UnderManiac 1 year ago
Hy UnderManiac! Youtube does not allow text with url adress posting in the coments, I´m going to send you t the video through sharing option on the video. Check his channel aswell (borbasmiklos). Check also other experiments in vacum, other then user borbasmiklos. it´s a mater of controlling voltage and frequency. Ion wind is not necessary.
See ya.
rapharigoti 1 year ago
@40390576 no no we already have it, but it jsut inst publicized yet, u know it was discovered/invented in 1903 by nicolas tesla
Shift4chizzle 1 year ago
@40390576
Has anyone tried Dr TT Brown's Electro Static Propulsion Apparatus patent? The thing is that this patent was actually tried by Dr. Thomas Townsend Brown in the 50's, and it worked in a vacuum, 5 billionths of an atmosphere.
arshdeep125 1 year ago
TELL YOU A VISION IS ALWAYS GONNA LIE FUCK TELL YOU A VISION!~)}>
Peta659 1 year ago
after they sealed it in the chamber, they should have tried it BEFORE pumping the air out, to see if their electrical connections were still good. So in effect, this video proves nothing about whether or not it works in a vacuum.
Hendrix92TheUniverse 1 year ago
@Hendrix92TheUniverse Don't you think they made sure the connections worked? Just a simple connection to a ohm meter would tell them the wires are intact. First thing I'd have done. And I did think of that when I saw them close the container.
UnderManiac 1 year ago
@Hendrix92TheUniverse Scientist John Fiala, whom I have known for 11 years now, conirmed my Beamship Variation I works in hard vacuum, with only slightly less force. Which is what NASA found. Takaaki Musha showed at the 207 AIAA the Biefeld Brown effect is more efficient in vacuum, and more powerful with solid-state dielectrics. Which is what TT Brown, the discoverer, found in Paris, France in 1955 with experiments at less than 1 Billionth of an atmosphere.
Beamshipcaptain 1 year ago
sorry, what did they say about crackpots all the way to the top.... maybe i misunderstood her, but was she saying super conductors arent real !?
HaydenHatTrick 1 year ago
This comment has received too many negative votes show
@HaydenHatTrick The mythbusters are'nt scientists. They are ACTOR KIDS. They also failed at reproducing the Bedinin motor. They did'nt even consult John Bedini! Yet, many people on YouTube have replicated them, and have them charging batteries! Follow the money trail, and check who the mythbusters, and the DISCOVERY CHANNE's corporate sponsors are. You will find fossil and nuclear fuels companies. Follow the money trail. The DISCOVERY CHANNEL is the complete opposite of THE HISTORY CHANNEL.
Beamshipcaptain 1 year ago
@Beamshipcaptain Can I buy whatever you're smoking? Seriously. Read Encyclopedia Dramatica's article on you. It's pretty epic.
jack91x 1 year ago 8
This comment has received too many negative votes show
@jack91x I read it last year. I am very flattered! By the way, I neither smoke, drink, nor take drugs of any kind. There is too much at stake to have anything but a clear head in this world of ours.
Beamshipcaptain 1 year ago
@jack91x You are aware it clearly states on Encyclopaedia Dramatica's home page that its purely satirical? You astound me.
Beamshipcaptain 1 year ago
@Beamshipcaptain Not ONE bedini motor on youtube works! NOT ONE! I've checked out every one of them and I know the concept on how they're supposed to work, but they don't. I have diagrammed it and made calculations, the science doesn't lie. This motor does not work as proported.
UnderManiac 1 year ago
@UnderManiac They certainly do. I have seen them, and the videos showing them working. A schoolgirl reproduced a Bedini motor. Are you admitting a schoolgirl can do something you cannot? Look at two-phase linear motors, and the Howard Johnson Permanent magnet motor, which also works as a linear motor. The SEG and the GLASS SEG (1989) are also proof of concept. The first SEG was constructed by the engineers and laborers at British Rewinds, in 1946, 65 years ago.
Beamshipcaptain 1 year ago
@Beamshipcaptain watch?v=a0FusVb4Gp4&feature=related
UnderManiac 1 year ago
@Beamshipcaptain The bedini motor is nothing more than a mechanical version of a transformer. It is not an overunity motor. People who try to prove otherwise only ever measure the voltage input and output but fail to mention that voltage is not a measure of power. That way the viewers will assume that it is and thus believe that it is overunity. perhapse we should follow your money trail... oh wait that is right you run a company called applied electrogravitics which peddles psudoscience...
MrAwsome514 1 year ago 2
I want to see an ion lifter put in some neon argon mixture like in those plasma balls... It would look really cool with visual ionization...
DynaDuctINC 1 year ago
What's with all the down-votes? Reality is wrong, apparently. Aaaah the delusional Tesla fanboys. They love him. Seriously love him. Like, in the butt or something. Tesla made a few decent discoveries, then proceeded to just make shit up. Inventions without documentation are indistinguishable from the ramblings of a mad-man.
blehblehbleh86 1 year ago
This comment has received too many negative votes show
@blehblehbleh86 Tesla has over 700 fundamental patents to his credit, including RADIO.
He singlehandedly gave us our electrical 2oth century, and pioneered the basis of non-Hertzian communications systtems and wirless transmission of electrical energy.
Beamshipcaptain 1 year ago
@Beamshipcaptain you know most of his patents were due to the fact he had to patent the same things in several different countries... but what ever, yeah, he did good for himself
HaydenHatTrick 1 year ago
A wiser man than me once said: "There are no anti-fundamental forces of nature." Because I am exceedingly stubborn, I will continue to search for unnatural forces which reduce the 'law of gravity' to 'the general theory of gravity'.
BenZeneProject 1 year ago
Comment removed
IRRONGIANT 1 year ago
These Bozos are 'script whores' their brain can't think outside that tiny box that encompasses their heads.
take the script away and being challenged by a anti-gravity scientist who has proven this and they may just wet their pants ...
IRRONGIANT 1 year ago
@IRRONGIANT
Saying something is "proven" means nothing. Show us who, what and when it was proven. I wanna see real "independently tested" "scientific method" "peer-reviewed" papers... and NOT googling some website created by an idiot or some garage video that doesn't actually show anything significant.
Joeviocoe 1 year ago 2
@Joeviocoe
Youtube 'hutchison effect' (under FUNKTHARESERVE's Channel) for starters .. But of course if you wish to pick from the bottom of the barrel like your beloved mythbusters have, then it may probably may not be as entertaining for you or meet your society drone molded expectations.
wipe your azz with your papers .. Tesla was laughed at and ridiculed by the likes of people such as yourself .. but now is praised in obscurity.
"shhhh ...I see stupid people ..they're everywhere .. "
IRRONGIANT 1 year ago
@IRRONGIANT
Praised by idiots is NOT proof of genius. Tesla had great ideas when he was younger. but was quite delusion when older. Many of his ideas never worked. No conspiracy.
Joeviocoe 1 year ago 2
This comment has received too many negative votes show
@Joeviocoe ALL of Tesla's ideas worked.
Beamshipcaptain 1 year ago
@Beamshipcaptain Tesla's idea to transmit electricity wirelessly from giant towers was an epic fail. So were several experiments with oscillators. My favorite examples include one that he had to break with a hammer because it made the building resonate and almost ripped it apart, and the platform that made Samuel Clemens (Mark Twain) have explosive diarrhea. Then there was the obsession with X-raying himself that gave him tumors. In the end though, he was the smartest man EVER.
jack91x 1 year ago 3
This comment has received too many negative votes show
@jack91x No, it succedded, and has been rplicated starting in the 1980s, and is used today in consumer electronics.
Beamshipcaptain 1 year ago
@Beamshipcaptain No. The "consumer electronics" you speak of use low range induction. What Tesla tried to do was launch lightning across towers, eliminating the need for cables. He forgot that this is very inneficient, highly dangerous, and creates the deadly gas ozone. It's probably a good thing that it never worked.
jack91x 1 year ago 3
@jack91x It worked. Wardenclyffe Tower was dynamited after JP Morgan pulled funding when he found out that Tesla wanted to give away electricity for free. Morgan had bought up all the copper mines in the country, and wanted to secure his fortune by having people PAY for energy, just as Television used to be free! Tesla had surpassed his own invention of Radio by that time, had discovered the Earth is electrically conductive, and was sending signals thru the air and Earth at 17 times lightspeed.
Beamshipcaptain 1 year ago
@jack91x Tesla was using a SCALAR wave, similar to the Patented ROGERS UNDERSEA TRANSMISSION SYSTEM, which is today used to keep in touch with Nuclear subs worldwide. Scalar waves are non-Hertzian, electrogravitational (similar also to TT Brown's patented electrogravitational communications system) and can travel at any speed depending on Modulation, from near zero MPH, to near infinite velocity. The Soviets had great success with scalar interferometry in the 1960s.
Beamshipcaptain 1 year ago
@Beamshipcaptain Wow, incredibly you are able to put a lot of words together that make no real sense. I know what you're trying to say, but it just isn't making any sense. First of all, you can't just make up a word called electrogravity. It's not a real word. The two have NOTHING to do with each other. Another think, nothing can have nearly infinite velocity. That's absurd. Gravity travels at the speed of light. NOTHING can travel faster than the speed of light!
UnderManiac 1 year ago
@UnderManiac I did'nt coin the term ELECTROGRAVITY, TT Brown did, in 1928! Einstien confirmed the link in his ZUR EINHEITLICHEN FELD THERIE, or the Unified Field Theory for Gravitation and Electricity, released in Prussian science journals January 10,1929, and to the NY TIMES Jan. 12,1929. Fonfirmed in 1955, and by Takaaki Musha in POSSIBILITY OF A STRON COUPLING BETWEEN ELECTRICITY AND GRAVITATION (1997). Princeton scientists sent laser pulsed thru Cesium vacpor chambers at 310 times c in 2000.
Beamshipcaptain 1 year ago
@Beamshipcaptain I've read that article. It was retracted as they did not exceed the speed of light. I do read science magazines and whatever papers I can get a hold of. I've read the article and read the retraction. Maybe you missed it, or just choose to ignore the corrected findings.
UnderManiac 1 year ago
@Beamshipcaptain Einstein did not confirm a link to electricity and gravity. He was trying to work out the theory that there may be a connection. He never did come up with an actual theory linking electricity with gravity.
Consider this: Do you agree that the moon is devoid of a magnetosphere? It has a solid core, thus does not have a magnetic field surrounding it. Electricity and magnetism are interlinked. The moon has gravity, like any mass of the same density. How can this be?
UnderManiac 1 year ago
@UnderManiac He certainly did, and it is called ZUR EINHEITLICHEN FELD THERIE, or the Unified Field Theory for Gravitation and Electricity, and was published in final form in High German January 10, 1929. Antigravity for flight, and passife defensive fields became popular in the 1930s thru 1956, when it "dissapeared", except in science fiction. Was released to the NY Times with Great Fanfare to the NY TIMES, as was Relativity, in 1908.
Beamshipcaptain 1 year ago
@Beamshipcaptain Beamie you are an idiot. First of all the unified field theory Einstien worked on was not trying to relate electricity with gravity it was trying to relate magnetisim with gravity. Secondly he never found a connection between the two and eventually determened that there is no connection. So no... there is no unified field theory.
kurisu925 11 months ago
@UnderManiac Experimetnal evidence shows gravtiation propagates at speeds millions of times that of light, nearly instantaneous. The Magnetic force travels much much faster than light as well. See also: Graham and Lahoz, "Observation of Static Electromagnetic Angular Momentum in Vacuo," NATURE, V. 285, May 15,1980,p.129, Woodward, James"Flux Capacitors and the Origin of Inertia", FOUNDATIONS OF PHYSICS, V. 34, 2004, P.1475.
Beamshipcaptain 1 year ago
@Beamshipcaptain Where are you getting your experimental evidence? Science has observed gravity waves traveling at the speed of light. Gravity is not instantaneous, as you seem to claim. Magnetics has nothing to do with gravity, and the magnetic "force" can not travel faster than the speed of light. What you are quoting is bad science, not peer reviewed and verified. Please stop peddling pseudoscience as real science.
UnderManiac 1 year ago
@UnderManiac Mainstream science accepts that the fabric of spacetime travels MUCH faster than light.Look at Van Flandern, "Speed of Gravity: What the Experiments Say," PHYSICS LETTERS A 250:1-11 (1998), for starters.
Magnetic fields are simply ether currents. Gravitation is simply due to a converging flux of ether. Matter is an ether-sink. Electrostatic fields are simply zones of high or low concentration of ether. Ether based physics has come back in to favor, explains action at a distance.
Beamshipcaptain 1 year ago
@UnderManiac The scientists in the Princeton tests where laser pulses propagated thru Cesium vasor at 310 times lightspeed state: "The experiments prove the popular notion that nothing can travel faster than light in a vacuum is wrong". The speed of light in a vacuum has shown to vary, which of course invalidates special relativity. also look at Woodward, James F. " A New Experimental Approach to Mach's Principle and Relativistic Gravitation," FOUNDATIONS OF PHYSICS LETTERS, V. 3, No.5, 1990.
Beamshipcaptain 1 year ago
@IRRONGIANT
Marc Millis, who ran the now-defunct Breakthrough Propulsion Physics Program for NASA wrote:
This "Hutchison Effect" has been claimed for years, without any independent verification — ever. In fact, its originator can't even replicate it on demand. This has been investigated more than once, been part of documentaries on The Discovery Channel, but still never seems to pass critical muster.
Joeviocoe 1 year ago 2
*** That video you praise so highly can be done by a 10 grader with a rotating platform and a camera mount. He was a fraud!
"One set of videos posted to an antigravity website (and later taken down) shows closeups of a toy UFO bouncing around, and then shots of the toy gyrating wildly in the air. When it was pointed out that the movement of the toy was consistent with being supported by a string, and a moving wire or string could be seen in the video, Hutchison claimed it was a power supply"
Joeviocoe 1 year ago 2
Comment removed
IRRONGIANT 1 year ago
This has been flagged as spam show
@Joeviocoe
thrice thou posteth without chance edgewise ...The lady doth protest too much, methinks.
~William Shakespeare
p.s. Liam also sayeth 'thou art a mindless drone and a follower of thy puppet-masters .. thy strings art too short oh dear Pinocchio'.
IRRONGIANT 1 year ago
@IRRONGIANT yep just search youtube for "Lifter test in vacuum by NASA"
SevenScientist 1 year ago
@SevenScientist
And the results are for "Asymmetrical Capacitors" NOT LIFTERS.
Just because the search algorithm equates the two terms, doesn't make it the same thing.
Joeviocoe 1 year ago
This is not really a valid test. Putting it in that metal cylinder probably disrupts the electric field. If they really wanted to eliminate the "air thrust effect", then should just cover up the top of the triangle so that air cannot pass through it.
Nomoreidsleft 1 year ago
@Nomoreidsleft
Even if the Larger magnetic lines of flux were disrupted by the metal enclosure.... it would have very little effect on the smaller field lines. There would have been at least SOME movement. But alas, there was NONE!
Joeviocoe 1 year ago
@Nomoreidsleft
And covering the top of the lifter would not stop the air flow. The movement of air is of a VERY short displacement. A couple of centimeters at most. It is NOT how far the air travels, but the speed. Only ionized molecules very close and/or in between the foil and wire are affected by the field and are responsible for the thrust.
The same with sealing the lifter in a plastic bag. As long as air is near the wire and/or foil... there WILL BE IONIZATION. AND THEREFOR, THRUST!
Joeviocoe 1 year ago
Bravo, Mythbusters spread disinformation again.
Look into the NASA vacuum tests of the ionotators, they work just fine in vacuums without any gas present.
JonDeth 1 year ago
@JonDeth
Please read the MANY MANY posts here in this thread... regarding those NASA experiments.
They are NOT the same! These "Lifters" claim to generate enough upward Force to counteract the Force of their own weight.
Those NASA "Asymmetrical Capacitors on spin on a vertical axis. Which requires VERY little Force. And even then, they move VERY SLOWLY in a vacuum.
There is usually enough residual molecules of air that cannot be pumped out that can be ionize to provide a bit of thrust.
Joeviocoe 1 year ago
@Joeviocoe You made an assumption and it's completely wrong.
I'm not talking about the ion spinners, I'm talking about ion lifters.
NASA has been experimenting with them a long time, they work in a vacuum without a gas. Key word here, lifter as in LEVITATER. I'll find the videos, I must have watched a dozen of them.
No gas yet they work. The mythbusters are biased propagandists.
JonDeth 1 year ago
@JonDeth
Yeaaahhh.... okay. You find me a video of NASA experimenting with "Lifters" or "LEVITATERs".
I seriously doubt you can present anything though.
Cause I have researched this plenty. And all the NASA experiments were on Asymmetrical Capacitors... and NOT lifters in a vacuum. And those are two VERY different animals.
Joeviocoe 1 year ago
This has been flagged as spam show
Unlimited energy sources are out there!But the Establishment doesn't want ppl to know this,Get a REAL working magnet motor at LT-MAGNET-MOTORdotCOM ,Be the revolution!
affluenceclm 1 year ago
It does NOT work better in a vacuum. This Asymmetrical Capacitor shown as a video response took nearly twice as long to get up to speed when under a half-assed partial vacuum using a cheap pump to keep food fresh.
Under a full vacuum, it would not spin at all. And spinning requires MUCH LESS thrust than "lifting" does. Which is why you never see Lifters in a vacuum, only well balanced object that rotate.... VERY slowly and pick up speed. Because even very thin air can be ionized and used.
Joeviocoe 1 year ago
Was tested in a vacuum originally. Actually works better in a vacuum. Can achieve higher voltages. Don't know what they did wrong but it proves only how NOT to make it work in a vacuum (do what they did).
nodhear 1 year ago
@nodhear
This is exactly why it is said, "you cannot Prove a Negative"... because somebody can always say, "they did not do it correctly".
It does NOT work better in a vacuum. The Asymmetrical capacitor shown as a video response took nearly twice as long to get up to speed when under a half-assed partial vacuum using a cheap pump to keep food fresh.
Under a full vacuum, it would not spin at all. And spinning requires MUCH LESS thrust than "lifting" does.
Joeviocoe 1 year ago
They can't say that the lifter is busted...even if it truly isn't anti-gravity, because the test was done wrong. First this lifter uses an electric field....However the Vacuum chamber is made of metal...Um it don't take a rocket scientist to say that the metal chamber itself will cancel out the field.
Secondly... that lifter isn't going to lift on a one mile an hour wind as they propose in the video...the lifter is still much too heavy. It could be a combination of static and propulsion though.
Axlaiden 1 year ago
If you view any of the lifter videos that take place outside you will undoubtedly realize that ambient winds even on a still day are greater than 1 mph, and therefore these lifters are still Lifting... I do realize the lifters are bigger, but that just means it takes more wind to make it lift.
If what I say is true, then the Mythbusters test was improperly done.
Axlaiden 1 year ago
"For some reason there is still debates on youtube about these lifters being REAL antigravity devices." For some reason, there are still debates on whether the earth is flat or not. Nutjobs are everywhere.
benjwgarner 1 year ago 2
This show is such misinfo crap
ukgodsavethequeen 1 year ago
MYTHBUSTERS are fun to watch but sometimes .... I remember they tried to replicate John Bedini motor... However it was ridiculous to see that - few whatever wound coils and few mosfets - they say it was busted.... its like building a car with square wheels and then just state: ... its not moving so its must be fake... I dont care they busting other crap.. but I care when they make jokes out of a real inventions without reproducing anything that looks even close to original...
nadinka007 1 year ago
@nadinka007
Have you ever heard the phrase, "You cannot prove a negative"?
Mythbusters are fun to watch... but they can only make reasonable attempts based on some designs they find on the internet.
Bedini Motors only work if you ignore conservation of energy. If you are impressed with spinning and shiny objects.
Whenever someone connects the output to the input and remove any batteries, the magic goes away. And fails the expectation of "running forever" or "uncontrollable acceleration"
Joeviocoe 1 year ago
the lifter has nothing to do with gravity!
Shift4chizzle 1 year ago
The girl = dumb shit ignoramuse
TheJovanist 1 year ago
i bet her boobs go antigravity when she's going up and down.
realscience1 1 year ago
isn't this technology similar to how that new dyson fan works? it's a blade-less fan. and I am guessing it's similar for the fact this object has measurable thrust (air-flow).
2010cynic 1 year ago
@2010cynic
This technology is similar to the Ionic Breeze by sharper image. Ionizes the air, then accelerates it to create a breeze. Not really powerful, but helps clean dust and ozone supposedly.
The Dyson is completely different. It DOES have fan blades and a motor... it is hidden in the base (impeller). And the ring is just an air channel that uses a bit of Bernoulli's principle to move a larger volume of air.
Joeviocoe 1 year ago
Mythbusters is doing a disservice to science. Nobody who does serious "lifter" research ever claimed that the Biefeld-Brown effect is anti-gravity.
HungryGuyStories 1 year ago
@HungryGuyStories
Except BeamshipCaptain and all his cronies.
The "Biefeld-Brown effect" is real enough to be used by these guys to make it seem like they are geniuses.
Joeviocoe 1 year ago
@Joeviocoe If you know anything at all about the "Biefeld-Brown effect" you're already WAAAAAAY past the 50th percentile in the filed of science. If you really expected Mythbusters to teach you something useful in this episode you were bound for disappointment right from the start.
kendigjl 1 year ago
You woudn't get so many down votes if you cut the beginning with that idiot girls undereducated dumbass remark.
WaiteDavidMSPhysics 1 year ago
If u can find any science books and/or articles from the say 50's back check em out, there was a plasma emitter in the 20's or earlier, 1975 high voltage electric engine, im wanting to say that didnt have to be recharged, it was banned. worked off repulsion, they were making electric engine drive delivery trucks before 1900. Im not basic shit off utube, specially from a tv show.
tripwire80 1 year ago
u realize the whole "ufo" craze, sightings whatever u want to call it started around the 40's wasnt it the 20's brown was tinkering in it, hell his first one was a saucer not toothpicks and a strip of aluminum foil. Look at the moon landings in 64,65,67 they are in the same dang spot, that robot they sent to mars, idk about civilizations and all that, looks like a crash sight to me. If i could recall the extact text i give it to, i go thru 100 a day. the b2 bomber works off of browns work.
tripwire80 1 year ago
stay in that mainstream state of mind joe, u seriously think this gov funded operations are going to tell u the entire truth about advanced technology? they also said browns devices where useless, but hell they stated they tested in the report at 19kv lol, course they didnt. keep ur head in that lil box and hope the gov throws u a bone, or keep digging and figure it out
tripwire80 1 year ago
Lol , noones talking about the ppl i was talking about the government slipping in under false pretense of his "citizenship" which i reckon he got not long after being here. He was called to jury dutySomething tells me we havent heard the last of ole NIkoli. Somethings telling me him and ole marconi just might have left us a present. where bouts did u get info about the mercury at? find that very interesting, I just ordered 20 lbs of it.
tripwire80 1 year ago
@tripwire80
Where is your video proving that it works?
Joeviocoe 1 year ago
Comment removed
tripwire80 1 year ago
if u think that the same ppl that has been witholding knowledge from the public to line their own pockets,supressed tesla and stole his works, are going to just decide hey lets tell the whole story for the good of mankind. ur either blind or just plain thick skulled. I suggest u dig a lil deeper,, the day these mainstreamers tell the public the whole truth be the day micky mouse is president. but hell what can u tell rockets cientist they havent been taught already by gov appointed curriculum GL
tripwire80 1 year ago
@tripwire80
Stole? He put his most important works into public domain himself.
Nobody but Tesla is responsible for exposing himself to mercury vapor.
His "secret superweapon" was not exactly a secret... he spent a great deal of time raving about it. It just didn't work.
His wireless power transmission notions demonstrated that while he was inventive his basic grasp of physics was a bit spotty. Wireless transmission is certainly possible, just horribly dangerous and horribly inefficient.
Cp1Punishment 1 year ago
Your premise is flawed... and therefore, your conclusion is laughable.
"witholding knowledge from the public to line their own pockets,supressed tesla and stole his works"
This is the paranoid fanboi of Tesla that keeps hero worshiping him based on some crackpot conspiracy theory.
Joeviocoe 1 year ago 3