Lifter in vacuum 1

Lifter tests in high vacuum.

Category:

Howto & Style

Tags:

• lifter

[BeamshipsRevenge]

@mike4ty4 .

there are PLENTY of flaws with beamshipcaptain's ideas. John Searls are even worse. He claims that his flying disk goes from zero to ANY arbitrary velocity, instantaneously.

and if you think that beamshitcaptain is good at avoiding questions, then Searl is the master.

[BeamshipsRevenge]

this video doesn't show it lifting. it shows it mildly oscillating around a fixed axis.

is this how we're going to return to Pleiades, Russ?

[Beamshipcaptain]

@BeamshipsRevenge THey are not my ideas, they are the results of decades of research in to field effect propulsion, which I have verified with practical experiment over the last 25 years, and I have published my findings and empirical data. Professor Searl has done the same thing, greatly adding to our knowledge and expanding Man's reach into deep space.

[JoelHarvey1]

google jln labs and do your research before making assumptions

[mica410]

its not lifting.. discussion over now please k thanks?

[MrAwsome514]

@Beamshipcaptain You are saying that a machine so sensitive it can pick up the gravitational pull of the human body accurately enough to show a difference in it's data dependant on where that person is standing in relation to the machine can not pick up a gravitational field strong enough to lift a lifter against the earth's gravitational pull? The gravitational pull of a human body is not strong enough to do that so if the machine can pick that up the lifter should make the thing go nuts.

[MrAwsome514]

@mike4ty4 Well more precisely the effect is not just the ion wind there is one more thing to consider. See the ionised air is not just being pulled down to the foil but the foil is also at the same time being pulled up to the ionized air. The means more acceleraction can be achieved than what measurements of the airflow would suggest. Also Beamship captain does not like hard facts either like the NASA documents I slapped him in the face with where they said no its not antigravity.

[mike4ty4]

@Beamshipcaptain They shouldn't need to be "ionized" to be attracted as gravity does not act on charge but on mass-energy. Neutral objects should still attract. And as for inverse square law, inverse square is slow-fall enough that if there's at least 9.8 m/s^2 acceleration field being generated by a device of the size of that lifter, then there should still be some field left up there to do something. If it's 9.8 m/s^2 = 980,000,000 uGal at say, 1 cm, then at 1 m it'll still be 98,000 uGal.

[Beamshipcaptain]

h=TH efield obeys the Inverse Square law, in that the force drops off inversely with the square of the distance, as any force field in Nature, including gravity.