View Single Post
Old 09-14-2008, 05:16 AM   #6
Bigfatfurrytexan
Avalon Senior Member
 
Join Date: Sep 2008
Posts: 151
Default Re: Anti Gravity Research And The Missing Dr. Ning Li

Much of the early work of Dr. Li was comprised of theory pushed aggressively by Dr. Podkletnov.

The good Dr., it seems, has truly been a pioneer in the search of just exactly what gravity is, and how we control it.

While reading through the following website, i ran across a very interesting piece of information.

http://www.americanantigravity.com/podkletnov.html

Quote:
Podkletnov's Force Beam
During experimentation with colleague Giovanni Modanese, Podkletnov found that by stimulating a rotating superconductor with a high-voltage electrical arc, a beam of force was created that is currently unexplained by contemporary physics.

The "mystery-force" appears to have a repulsive effect on nearby materials, and appears to be a focused beam of force, although the exact nature of the force that causes the repulsion is still under scrutiny.
It then links to a patent filed by Dr. Podkletnov (US 0108005, but the version i saw was V2, which concerns me....but i did have to pull it from a mirror site). This patent describes the methodology for creating his "force beam".

http://www.arxiv.org/pdf/physics/0108005

The abstract:

Quote:
Abstract
The detection of apparent anomalous forces in the vicinity of high-Tc superconductors
under non equilibrium conditions has stimulated an experimental research in
which the operating parameters of the experiment have been pushed to values higher
than those employed in previous attempts. The results confirm the existence of an
unexpected physical interaction. An apparatus has been constructed and tested in
which the superconductor is subjected to peak currents in excess of 104 A, surface
potentials in excess of 1 MV , trapped magnetic field up to 1 T, and temperature
down to 40 K. In order to produce the required currents a high voltage discharge
technique has been employed. Discharges originating from a superconducting ceramic
electrode are accompanied by the emission of radiation which propagates in a focused
beam without noticeable attenuation through different materials and exerts a short
repulsive force on small movable objects along the propagation axis.
Within the
measurement error (5 to 7 %) the impulse is proportional to the mass of the objects
and independent on their composition. It therefore resembles a gravitational impulse.
The observed phenomenon appears to be absolutely new and unprecedented in the
literature. It cannot be understood in the framework of general relativity. A theory
is proposed which combines a quantum gravity approach with anomalous vacuum
fluctuations.
In essence, what we have here is a pulse gravity generator that is able to focus its energy into a "beam".

Quote:
emitter kept at the temperature of 50-70 K were accompanied by a very short pulse of
radiation coming from the superconductor and propagating along the axis line connecting
the center of the emitter and the center of the target electrode in the same direction as
the discharge. The radiation appeared to penetrate through different bodies without any
noticeable loss of energy. It acted on small interposed mobile objects like a repulsive
force field, with a force proportional to the mass of the objects.
As the properties of this
radiation are similar to the properties of the gravity force, the observed phenomenon was
called a gravity impulse.
The beam actually interacted with the spheres on a level that is congruous to their mass? That is a spectacular breakthrough, as it truly does seem to mimic a gravitational force.

Quote:
Here, however, we encounter a conceptual difficulty. Suppose to place on the trajectory
of the beam a very massive pendulum (say, 103 Kg). If the effect is gravitational, then
the acceleration of a test mass should not depend on its mass. However, it is clear that in
order to give this mass the same oscillation amplitude of the small masses employed in the
experiment, a huge energy amount is necessary, which cannot be provided by the device.
Therefore the effect would seem to violate the equivalence principle. Considering the backreaction
is probably necessary, namely the fact that the test mass exerts a reaction on the
source of the impulse. This reaction is negligible as long as we use small test masses.
This is very interesting material, indeed!
Bigfatfurrytexan is offline   Reply With Quote