Anti Gravity Research And The Missing Dr. Ning Li

[Bigfatfurrytexan]

I was fortunate enough to have a fellow poster from another forum share a link with me regarding a very interesting discovery by Dr. Ning-Li, then of the University of Alabama. The article can be found here:

http://www.popularmechanics.com/scie...h/1281736.html

"While an operational device is at least five years in the future,
developers of what can be loosely termed a force-field machine say it
has cleared major theoretical hurdles. To demonstrate their claim, they
invited POPULAR MECHANICS to visit their Huntsville, Ala., laboratory
to see the most important component of their proof-of-concept
demonstrator. It is a 12-in.-dia. high-temperature superconducting disc
(HTSD). When the force-field machine is complete, a bowling ball placed
anywhere above this disc, which resembles a clutch plate, will stay
exactly where you left it."

I was particularly hopeful after reading the article, as the good Dr. was quoted as saying:

Li says she has turned down several offers for financial backing. It is less about money than control. "Investors want control over the technology," she says. "This is too important. It should belong to all the American people."

Very promising, indeed!

So, i went on a search. The article was from 1999, so given that she predicted applications of the technology in 5 years, i was wondering where is was at as of 2004.

Problem is, after this article, the trail pretty much runs cold. Now, i am not saying i have done exhaustive searches. But i have employed the assistance of various friends and individuals (some of whom are Drs in the field, as well...they say that DARPA snapped her up....which i think i believe).

So, here is what i have been able to find:

One member of Pegasus found this link, which was shared with me:

http://www.scansite.org/scan.php?pid=157

It is very similar in concept to what i already had...but there is some additional information (of a more technical nature) than the PM article:

“If Einstein was right, the amount of gravito-magnetic energy produced by an object is proportional to its mass and its movement”, explains Dr. Li. To create the artificial gravitational fields, Torr and Li propose placing a superconducting container in a magnetic field to align ions that are spinning or rotating in tiny circles inside the superconducting material. Their theory predicts the existence of ionic spin or rotation in a superconductor in a magnetic field.

It goes on to explain what an Einstein/Bose condensate is, and how this applies to the HTSD technology.

This was very exciting information to see for me, for sure. And i was getting more and more curious about where Dr Li was, and what she was doing.

There was talk of her starting her own company, "AC Gravity LLC", but i could find nothing about it anywhere, other than mentioning it as a plan.

Then i decided to start searching .gov and .mil sites, taking the advice of another ex-Pegasus member who believes she is working for DARPA now.

Seems as though this may somehow be true:

http://www.zpenergy.com/modules.php?...=print&sid=838

### Missing Scientist Update: ###

Dr. Ning Li is still missing, and I will post the DoD funding receipt showing where she's probably at below:
----------------------------------------------------------------------------
Department of Defense Annual Report on Cooperative Agreements and Other Transactions Entered into During FY2001 Under 10 USC 2371
----------------------------------------------------------------------------
Agreement Number: DAAH01-01-9-R001

Type of Agreement: Other Transaction for Prototype

Title: Gravito - Electro Magnetic Superconductivity Experiment

Awarding Office: US Army Aviation and Missile Command (AMCOM), AMSAM-AC-RD-BA

Awardee: AC Gravity, LLD

Effective Date: 25 Apr 2001

Completion Date: 25 Sep 2002

U.S. Government Dollars: $448,970

Non-Government Dollars: $ 0

Dollars Returned to Government Account: $ 0

I find this amusing, as she stated in the article you referenced that she didn't want outside investors so much, since she wanted control. She claimed that her work was the property of the American People. How quickly she lost this promising outlook.

Regardless, she left the University shortly after NASA began to show interest:

http://www.space.com/businesstechnol...av_000928.html

The main university professor involved with the project, Ning Li, has since left the school. She said she has founded a company in Huntsville that also will market a gravity-shield device.

Li said she dropped the NASA collaboration and decided to work independently after the agency "wasted" the project's money and resources.

Koczor said the project fell apart not because of incompetence, but because Li was primarily interested in proving her theories of why the "gravity shield" would work. That differed from NASA's goal of simply building a working device, he said.

And went to work for some other DoD project:

In the summer of 2002 an unusual story by Nick Cook appeared in Jane's Defence Weekly. Cook, the former aviation editor at Jane's, revealed that the American aerospace contractor Boeing was investigating antigravity technology at their Phantom Works facility. Now it can be shown that the American military was also investigating antigravity technology for weapons research.

Buried in the obscure "Annual Report on Cooperative Agreements and Other Transactions Entered into During FY2001" - a report required by law - the US Army Aviation and Missile Command awarded funds to experimentally test superconductors for the manipulation of the gravitational field. Heading this effort was Dr. Ning Li and her company AC Gravity Inc. "

And this, my friends, is where the trail ran cold. It appears that when she left the University of Alabama, she formed her company. I cannot find trace of this company thus far, but the above mentioned report dispersed funds to this company.

I cannot find anything that seems to match Dr. Ning Li's work in the patent archives, or in the articles at LANL or AFRL.

I do have some other leads, which will follow in the upcoming posts.

[Bigfatfurrytexan]

The below information was added by another member from another forum ("NeedToNo"):

Here is additional info in reference to Dr. Ning Li's work as reported on earthfiles:

January 25, 2008 - Update of Emails:

Subject: Ricky Sorrells Drawing of Cone-Shaped Holes in Aerial Craft
Sent: Friday, January 25, 2008
To: earthfiles@earthfiles.com

I saw a story in Popular Mechanics about Ning Li working on antigravity.
http://www.popularmechanics.com/scie...h/1281736.html

I googled Ning Li and the first link was to another web site explaining in more detail about her work: http://www.scansite.org/scan.php?pid=157

Li explains that as the ions spin they also create a gravito-electric field perpendicular to their spin axis. In nature, this field is unobserved because the ions are randomly arranged, thus causing their tiny gravito-electric fields to cancel out one another. In a Bose-Einstein condensate, where all ions behave as one, something very different occurs.

Spinning ions - that' s what my email below is about (see red text).

I think I can explain what those cone-shaped holes and mirage heat waves are, but first let tell you a little about myself. I'm 30 now. When I was about 18, I saw a strange light in the sky that looked like a red ball of light. As I was looking, it shot out of sight in the blink of an eye. The first question I asked myself was not "What was that?" I asked, "How?"

Sense then in my spare time, I've researched the how question. Without getting too technical, I came to conclusion that an electromagnetic field can cause an antigravity effect IF the fields are shaped properly. There are actually two fields that need to be shaped properly. The electrical field and the magnetic field.

The electrical field has to be shaped like a tornado or a vortex. The magnetic field has to be shaped like a donut. If you can make a device that can create the electrical vortex, then the electrical field will cause the magnetic field to take the donut shape. The same is true the other way around. If you had a device that can make a donut-shaped magnetic field, it will build the electrical field in a vortex shape. These shaped fields cancels gravity.

Another thing to mention that might explain what Ricky Sorrells saw. It's known for a fact that gravity bends lights. It's part of the theory of relativity that gravity can slow down time and cause mass to change. These are relativity facts.

Now, we can explain Ricky's drawing. Each cone-shaped indention is a device that creates an electrical vortex (sometime called a plasma or ion vortex), and like a tornado with multiple vortexes, they all the add up to cause one big vortex around the craft. That big vortex causes a large donut-shaped field around the craft. Within this donut shaped magnetic field, magnetic flux lines are created in a little different shape than normal matter. Flux line are the force lines in magnetic fields. You can see these flux lines if you sprinkle metal shaving over a piece of paper with a magnet under it. Flux lines are always curved, except in the center of a donut-shaped field.

Now, a craft using fields as described are subject to some side effects. Because atoms vibrate differently depending on gravity, a craft with a cancelling-gravity- effect will cause atoms to vibrate faster and make time seem faster (within the center). Or if you're on the edge of donut-shaped field like this, you'll be in a place were gravity is a little stronger then normal and time would seem slower. So think that if you walked up to a running craft, as you get closer to the magnetic field your watch would slow down. Once you entered the field and started to walk toward the center, your watch will start speeding up again until you get to the center. At that point, your watch will be running much faster then someone else's watch on the outside of the field. With time dilation comes length contraction. This explains why people see various craft as different sizes. The eyewitnesses are really seeing the craft's field changing and its time dilation factor changing.

As far as different lights around the craft - the color, size, and shape of the lights will depend on where you are in relationship to the craft, time of day, strength of field, and condition in the environment. Ionized air normally produces a blue hue like lightening. This is because most of the light emitted by ionized air is UV light, but some radiation is also in the visible spectrum. Water vapor in the air will split the UV light and other light into different colors. Kind of like how water vapor splits white light into a rainbow. The field will be more visible at night and might be drowned out completely during the day and the sun's light. Also, if you could see the fields around the craft, it would be like looking through a wavy pool of water. Light bends in water. If you look at something like a vent at the bottom of swimming pools, you see that it not clear, but seems to dance around. Same thing with light coming off a craft such as this, but a little bit more intense.

Above is from the middle of linked page:
http://www.earthfiles.com/news.php?I...ry=Environment

[Bigfatfurrytexan]

http://www.eskimo.com/~billb/weird/wallc/wallct.txt

20. Effects of a Gravitomagnetic Field on Pure Superconductors, Ning Li
and Douglas Torr, Physical Review D, Vol 43 No2 p457, January 1991
Li and Torr present Maxwells equations for gravitation using MKS
units. The equations are given in a form where the gravitomagnetic
permeability of a superconductor material is presumed to be different
than the permeability of free space. Vector equations for the
gravitational potentials are also presented. The canonical momentum
is derived (same finding as Ross paper). It is established that an
electrical current also results in a mass current, and an inter-
relationship is derived between the magnetic field and gravitomagnetic
field in a superconductor. It is established that the magnetic flux
in a superconductor is a function of the gravitomagnetic permeability,
and vice versa, resulting in a more rigorous form of the Meissner
equation and the London theory. It is shown that the gravitomagnetic
field must have a relatively large size in a superconductor, and is
on the order of 10E11 times larger than the magnetic field.

21. Gravitational Effects on the Magnetic Attenuation of Superconductors,
Ning Li and Douglas Torr, Physical Review B, Vol 64 No 9 p5489.
September 1992.
Li and Torr elaborate on their theory of the interrelationship of
the gravitomagnetic field and the magnetic field in superconductors.
It is established that the gravitomagnetic field must be sourced by
spin alignment of the lattice ions. The velocity of a gravitational
wave in a superconductor is estimated to be two orders of magnitude
slower than the vacuum velocity, resulting in an estimate of relative
gravitational permeability of a superconductor material which is as
much as four magnitudes greater than free space.

22. Gravitoelectric-Electric Coupling Via Superconductivity, Douglas Torr
and Ning Li, Foundations of Physics Letters, Vol 6 No 4 p371. (1993)
Torr and Li continue their analysis of gravitational effects in
superconductors. Abstract: "Recently we demonstrated theoretically
that the carriers of quantized angular momentum are not the Cooper
pairs but the latice ions, which must execute coherent localized
motion consistent with the phenomenon of superconductivity. We
demonstrate here that in the presence of an external magnetic field,
the free superelectron and bound ion currents largely cancel providing
a self-consistent microscopic and macroscopic interpretation of near-
zero magnetic permeability inside superconductors. The neutral mass
currents, however, do not cancel, because of the monopolar
gravitational charge. It is shown the coherent alignment of lattice
ion spins will generate a detectable gravitomagnetic field, and in the
presence of a time-dependent applied magnetic vector potential field,
a detectable gravitoelectric field."

Note the dates on these papers. She actualized her work in 1999, and these papers are 6-8 years older. This would indicate that she had funding, and therefore had someones ear.

To make it easier for you:

20. http://prola.aps.org/abstract/PRD/v43/i2/p457_1

21. http://prola.aps.org/abstract/PRB/v46/i9/p5489_1

22. http://adsabs.harvard.edu/abs/1993FoPhL...6..371T (this was linked above, i believe)

[Bigfatfurrytexan]

Some info filed by Dr. Evgeny Podkletnov:

http://www.journaloftheoretics.com/A...C-QE-final.pdf

http://adsabs.harvard.edu/abs/1992PhyC..203..441P

It is well known that after Podkletnov released info about his experiment, the US Gov became very interested. What i find puzzling is that they didn't follow his protocol, despite his warnings that they were deviating and it would change results. It makes me wonder if their public attempt at his technology was a sham, meant to discredit him. Since this has happened, Dr. Podkletnov has grown VERY quiet. Not what you would expect from the first person to publicly announced that he has reduced gravitational effect.

[Bigfatfurrytexan]

One thing that stands out is Henry Wallace. It would seem that he didn't provide complete information in his patents...but the concept caught the eye of the DoD, and they spent some time researching it as well.

http://www.eskimo.com/~billb/weird/wallc/wallct.txt

New Scientist, 14 February 1980, Patents Review
This article is one of the only references to Wallace's work anywhere
in the literature. The article provides a brief summary of his
invention and ends with this intriguing paragraph. "Although the
Wallace patents were initially ignored as cranky, observers believe
that his invention is now under serious but secret investigation by
the military authorities in the US. The military may now regret that
the patents have already been granted and so are available for anyone
to read."

That was written in 1980 by a somewhat respected, albeit somewhat "pulpy" science magazine. New Scientist is not known for making broad, crankpot assertions.

Then, in 1990, Dennis Cravens of Science Applications International Corp filed a report with Edwards AFB (yes, thats right, EDWARDS AFB) entitled, "Electric Propulsion Study" (i cannot find the actual report right now...i am still searching and would be appreciative if anyone in the audience would let me know if they find it...look for AL-TR-89-040. there are many references to it, but no actual report yet. Also, it is reported that it is registered under DTIC as ad-a227121 but i cannot find it there, either). Dennis Cravens summary is something along the lines of:

"The
patents are written in a very believable style which include part
numbers, sources for some components, and diagrams of data. Attempts
were made to contact Wallace using patent addresses and other sources
but he was not located nor is there a trace of what became of his work.
The concept can be somewhat justified on general relativistic grounds
since rotating frames of time varying fields are expected to emit
gravitational waves."

Perhaps Wallace's work, and mimicry of results achieved by others such as Brown, Carr, and Searle, is what had caught the eye of the DoD. Whether you believe the aforementioned individuals to be cranks or not, the underlying theme behind their claims has a sort of sameness that demands further investigation.

Now, having shown that the science behind the matter is feasible (and had the attention of our DoD, as well as NASA), i would like to point your attention to the fact that we have the technology to pull it off. The anecdotes state that she was able to levitate a bowling ball above her superconducting disk (i would LOVE to have video of that). That would intimate that the technology is available.

Besides, i have a friend that is very, very well attuned to the field of materials science, specifically nano's. I can assure you that we have the technology from a superconductor standpoint. I could likely post some level of proof on this, but i literally have hundreds of emails covering different nanotechnological patents, and finding what i am looking for can be difficult.

Remember, even a 2% loss in relative weight would yield HUGE financial impacts, especially when considered alongside the DoD "Heavy Lift" program.

[Bigfatfurrytexan]

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

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:

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".

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.

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]

I am willing to bet that the Chinese government is willing to provide a substantial amount of autonomy (at least initially) to a scientist like Dr. Li, who can provide technology that gives a competitve edge. They are moving full speed ahead with stem cell research and could end up being a sponsor of human cloning.

Below is a joint Chinese/US effort:

High Frequency Gravity Waves

It is Chinese with English translations. Could one of our mathematicians have a perusal at the math and theory and provide some feedback?


Something to consider:

Dr. Li left U of Ala because she was feeling they were too focused on the end product, with making a workable and marketable product. This is the capitalism and free market economics unduly influencing science.

She wanted to work on the theory, to prove specific principles. This would allow for further development of greater understanding (and greater technological achievement) while still achieving some marketable concepts to help fund the long term effort.

It would seem that her reasons for leaving are solid and commendable. There is a line that must be considered, and i (being in business) understand things like return on investment. However, there has to be an understanding that intellectual rights can create a MUCH greater return, and could likely be worth waiting for.

[Bigfatfurrytexan]

Working with Dr. Li in 1999 were Koczor and Noever. These two were basically in charge of putting to use some new gravity measuring instrumentation (which is presumably why Koczor picked up on what Li was working on in the first place, as he has spoken openly about his interest being what drew him to her research).

There was an experiment performed by these two call the Eclipse project. This may have been discussed here at ATS (not going to bother to search as it is pretty arcane). However, here is the story of what the Eclipse project was:

http://www.cybercitycafe.com/explore/gravity.html

In 1959, at the enthusiastic urging of rocket pioneer Werner von Braun, a peculiar set of physics experiments first appeared in English as a four-part series in the journal Aero/Space Engineering. The author, Maurice Allais, was a skilled physicist with an interest in the behavior of Foucault's Pendulum. From 1954 to 1960 he made careful observations of the motion of glass and metallic pendulums with the hope he would discover some connection between gravity and magnetism. Despite years of careful work, he never succeeded in finding a link between those disparate forces, but he did observe something extraordinary. During the total eclipses of June 30, 1954, and October 22, 1959, he detected "anomalies in the movement of the ... pendulum" during the time when the Earth, the Moon, and the Sun were aligned.

"A remarkable disturbance has been observed at the time of the total solar eclipse... it cannot be identified with periodic lunisolar effects resulting from the actual theory of gravitation."
Maurice Allais, 1959, from the abstract of his articles in Aero/Space Engineering



Allais’ solar eclipse results are hard to understand, but he was undoubtedly a meticulous scientist. His experiments were well-conceived and he repeated his measurements during two solar eclipses.

If something strange is happening to Foucault pendulums during solar eclipses, then it's a real mystery," says Noever. "Is it some gravitational effect, a peculiar manifestation of tides, or something else entirely? The idea that some unexplained aspect of gravity is at work seems nonsensical when you consider that it would seem to imply planets spinning out of their orbits over very long time scales (among other things). Also, why would the effect show up only during a solar eclipse? The Sun, the Moon, and the Earth are nearly aligned about once a month near the time of the new moon. A solar eclipse takes place when they are precisely aligned. If something is happening to gravity once a month, wouldn't we have noticed by now?"

*snip!*

The NASA/Marshall team plans to observe on August 11, 1999, Gravity filed with a high precision gravitometer located at the Marshall Space Flight Center in Huntsville, AL. The gravitometer is a state-of-the-art gravity sensor tested as part of a Marshall project entitled "Ultra-high precision gravity measurements". Noever and Koczor are using this extraordinary device to carry out sensitive experiments in gravity physics at the Marshall Space Flight Center. They are also exploring the history of peer-reviewed gravity research and repeating or recasting experiments that would benefit from the high precision afforded by the gravitometer. Allais’ work falls in this group.

The instrument reports very small changes in the gravitational force acting on a mechanical spring-mass. Gravitational changes are expressed as the electrical force (measured as voltage) required to maintain the spring-mass system at a predetermined position (the null point). The modified LaCoste-Romberg gravitometer (Edcon, Inc. Denver, CO) measures relative gravity until calibrated against a reference. The instrument is routinely calibrated along the 10-station Rocky Mountain Calibration range established by NOAA, Edcon and the Colorado School of Mines. The calibration is validated by comparing the measure of absolute gravity in Huntsville Alabama with reference values from the USAF gravity disk.

"If Allais’ disturbance is real, and if it has something to do with gravity, then we will be able to measure it to 10 significant digits," says Noever.

This is very interesting, honestly. The "Allais" effect would create quite the uproar in the field of physics. And upon learning of this experiment, i was very excited to find some results.

Except for one small problem: they "disappeared" with the data. Now, when i say disappeared, that may or may not be true. I have found links to a company reportedly owned by Noever, but nothing of Noever himself.

So, we have data that could very well prove a relationship between gravity and electromagnetism that has come up missing FROM THE VERY SAME people associated with Dr. Li during her groundbreaking work.

I am smelling more and more of a coverup here.

For reference, here is an article kind of summarizing the majority of the above story (from Allais own associates):

http://www.allais.info/priorartdocs/noever.htm

[Bigfatfurrytexan]

More on David Noever...

...it seems as though others have asked him the "tough questions", too. A high school kid, to be exact:

http://naturalscience.com/ns/letters/ns_let23.html

Date: Tue, 21 Sep 1999 06:09:13 -0500
To: publisher@naturalscience.com
Subject: A physics question


Maurice Allais's Discovery

Dear sirs:

I am a senior in a school in Panama, Central America, and I am doing a project on Maurice Allais. I saw your link to NASA's Space Science News story, Decrypting the Eclipse, about Maurice Allais's report that a Foucault's pendulum exhibited peculiar movements at the time of the 1954 solar eclipse. I was wondering, therefore, if you could direct me to additional information about this discovery and the results of the experiments relating to it that were conducted during the solar eclipse of August 11 this year.

I would appreciate your help.

Thank you

Alice G. Revilla


Noevers reply was to send someone else to answer his question, and then provide a bunch of links (which i will now have to sort through ) but nothing of any substance. Note, as well, that this occured in/around 1999.

[Bigfatfurrytexan]

In December of 2000 Dr. Robert Baker filed the following patent:

Gravitational Wave Generator Utilizing Submicroscopic Energizable Elements

And the abstract:

A gravitational wave generating device comprising an energizing means which act upon energizable elements such as molecules, atoms, nuclei or nuclear particles in order to create nuclear reactions or collisions, the products of which can move in a single preferred direction with an attendant impulse (jerk or harmonic oscillation) of an ensemble of target nuclei or other energizable elements over a very brief time period. The target nuclei or energizable elements acting in concert generate a gravitational wave. A preferred embodiment involves the use of a pulsed particle beam moving at the local gravitational wave speed in a target mass, which is comprised of target nuclei, to trigger a nuclear reaction and build up a coherent gravitational wave as the particles of the beam move through the target mass and impact target nuclei over very short time spans. An information-processing device connected to a computer, controls the particle beam's high-frequency, (GHz to THz) pulse rate and the number of particles in each bunch comprising the pulse in order to produce modulated gravitational waves that can carry information. A gravitational wave generation device that exhibits directivity. A gravitational wave detection device that exhibits directivity and can be tuned. The utilization of a medium in which the gravitational wave speed is reduced in order to effect refraction of the gravitational wave.

It doesn't take a rocket scientist to figure out that a "submicroscopic energizable element" refers to a nanoscale superconductive array, or something to that effect. This would match the research approach of Dr. Li, Podkletnov, and others who are working on an even bigger breakthrough currently.


In discussing this matter with a friend of mine , he recommended that I might reach out to Dr. Baker (to see if hey may know something about the possible cooperations of Dr. Li with the Chinese gravitational effort). The email i have sent is below:

Dr. Baker -



I have been researching quite a bit about the recent history of gravitational wave propagation, primarily as it relates to materials science.



I came across a patent you filed in 2000 (6784591) relating to the study of HGFW's, and it led me to a document on your website (drrobertbaker.com).



My understanding (gained via a few separate encounters) is that Dr. Li has moved off to China to work on her gravitational theories and concepts.



Along the way i have had a friend refer me to you, stating that perhaps you could shed some light on where she has gone.



I apologize for what appears to be a completely random email. Any information you might have would be helpful (if there is any, as i have not found anything as yet linking yours and her work).



As well, i would like to add that I have spent the greater part of the last week going over your work with HGFW's and am awestruck. It is some amazing work you have devoted your life to.



Regards,

His replies:

Date: Fri, 8 Feb 2008 22:46:48 -0800
Dear Mike: I really appreciate your interest in High-Frequency Gravitational waves. I have not heard from Dr. Ning Li for several years. In Huntsville several years back her husband prepared what my wife and I consider the best Chinese meal we have ever had. At the time I was evaluating her work on HFGWs/superconductors for the US Army. According to them she never presented them with a final report on the $500,000 contract that they paid her. I have no idea where she is or what she is doing. I am working with a Professor Fangyu Li from Chongqing University . You can find information on our activity at www.GravWave.com. Regards, Robert Baker

Then, i received this one:

Date: Sat, 9 Feb 2008 07:04:29 -0800
Thanks Mike for your interest. I have lost track of Ning Li since refereeing her never completed Army contract. You probably have found the www.GravWave.com site. If not, then take a look. Robert Baker

I replied to him, stating thank you (and that is about all).

I am confused. The email address used is not the one i sent the email to. As well, why would i recieve 2 replies?

So, i am left with the US Army, who is not well known for being forthcoming.

[Bigfatfurrytexan]

I have spent some time talking about Dr. Baker. So I thought i might expand on the work of Dr. Baker.

High-Frequency Gravitational Waves

If we can generate ripples in Einstein's fabric of space-time, then many applications become available to us. Some examples include:

1. Multi-channel communications (both point to point and point to multipoint through all material things – the ultimate wireless system). One could communicate directly through the Earth from New York to Beijing, China without the need for fiber optic cables, microwave relays, or satellite transponders – antennas, cables, and phone lines would be things of the past!

2. A remote means for causing perturbations to the motion of objects such as missiles (anything from bullets to ICBMs), spacecraft, rogue comets or minor planets, land or water vehicles or craft – a totally new propulsion system!

3. Remote coalescing of clouds of hazardous vapors, radioactive dust, etc. by changing the gravitational field in their vicinity.

4. The potential for through-earth or through-water “X-rays” in order to observe subterranean structures, geological formations (such as oil deposits), create a transparent ocean, view three-dimensional building interiors, buried devices, etc.; and

5. The potential for remotely disrupting the gravitational field in a specific region of space and even producing nuclear reactions there!"
- Dr. Robert Baker

There are further pieces of information related to this article (which basically summarizes his work during calendar year 2006):

http://www.americanantigravity.com/d...onal-Waves.pdf

http://www.americanantigravity.com/d...ences-2006.pdf

I am sure just about anyone would agree that netting even one of the above capabilities would make the research worthwhile. There are things that he has not discussed that could likely be far more worthwhile.

Consider the implications of being able to transmit data at lightspeed, without wires? The only thing that would be superior would be the proposed "Entangled Photon" approach to ultra secure communications.

His research (as part of Gravwave, LLC) is closely tied to the current Chinese efforts. Keep in mind, he is associated with Lockheed Martin (listing Buzz Aldrin as a business partner on his website, www.gravwave.com) as well as a professor, running the preeminent HGFW research department in American (and possibly world) academia at UCal - Berkely.

The below video is a 16 minute presentation (I believe you can find the .ppt in an .mht format on his website) discussing the China endeavor. He shows a lab in China, stating "the amount of money that they are willing to spend on this research is staggering".

[gvid]-2448164364122910112[/gvid]

There is an extensive bio on him here: http://www.drrobertbaker.com/cv.htm

But some highlights include:

...While on a two-year tour of active duty in the Air Force he worked on a variety of classified aerospace projects...

...was appointed to the Academic Review Committee on Gravitational Research with the U. S. Army from 2001 to 2003...

...Advisory Professor Chongqing University, China 2004...

...Dr. Baker has been Project Manager on three prototype development, fabrication, and test projects under contract to the U. S. Navy and Principal Investigator on several NASA and USAF projects while Director of Lockheed’s Astrodynamic Research Center

This is certainly a lead that I will be watching. I can't be the only one who finds it interesting that we are allowing this man to work so closely with China. If you look on his website there are pictures of him laughing during a meal on a boat in China. You can see the local peasants paddling by.

And this guy worked on classified projects? Did we forget about the Chinese at Los Alamos?

[Bigfatfurrytexan]

Buzz Aldrin most certainly has some level of agreement with the postulates pushed forth by Dr. Baker. He serves on the board of Gravwave, LLC:

Buzz Aldrin, Senior Science Advisor

Scroll down about 2/3's, you will see him. It is interesting to note that Buzz Aldrin was recently quoted as saying that "the next men on the moon will speak Chinese." That is a very bold, very blunt statement.

BTW...while i was researching some stuff on Leonid Grishchuk I found the following:

2003 Gravitational Wave Conference


What is interesting is its the first mention of Ning Li post 2002 (where i found the reference in the budget information from 2004, referencing AC Gravity, LLC, the company Li founded). She was listed here as "Honorary Co-Chairwoman" (on page 3).

While you are perusing this 36 page treat, take note of the scientists represened at this conference. It is a virtual who's who of gravity physics and materials science (sans a few that choose to be more low key).

As well, take note of who is in the "keynote" position with his information. The very same Dr. Baker of whom we are currently defending the honor of.

Finally, take a few moments to peruse the subjects (abstracts) issued forth in this publication. This rabbit hole just got deeper, and this rabbit looks like Giorgio Fontana.

[Bigfatfurrytexan]

I sent Dr. Ron Koczor an email regarding the whereabouts of Dr. Li.

To: Koczor, Ronald J. (MSFC-VP61)
Subject: Ning Li


Dr. Koczor-

I am researching some materials surrounding HFGW's (and the materials science behind it), and have come upon some rather dated articles on Dr. Ning Li and some apparently outstanding discoveries she has made.

But I have found that the trail has run cold. From my current research, it would appear that you were tied closely with her research. Is there any light that you could shed on her location? I would like to ask her a few follow up questions relating to the information currently available, if possible, and see what the status of the research is currently.

I would like to point out that i am not a journalist, or anything close. I am an independant researcher.

Regards,

His response:

Hi,

Thanks for the note. But I'm afraid I can't help you much. I haven't seen Ning Li for almost 8 years. When she left UAH, she went to the Baltimore area for some medical reason ( I don't know what they were). Someone told me she came back to Huntsville a few years later, but we never had any contact since we ended our work together in the mid-90s.

I'm afraid that's the best I can do for you.

Ron

Dr. Koczor was her boss. He is the "guru" of gravity research for NASA's Marshall Space Science Center.

If you recall, Dr. Robert Baker basically claimed that she had stiffed the government for a $500k contract that he helped sponsor her for.

Now, Dr. Koczor states that she went to Baltimore for "some medical reason". I am unsure if he meant for her own (or family) issue, or if she was beginning to work in some medical research position.

[Bigfatfurrytexan]

I have hesitated to post this information just due to the facts that is is kinda going to be thought of as "woo" by some. But moreso because it would be noteworthy as a thread of its own (which i may well do, if someone else doesn't want to do it first).

Having said that, remote viewing is a well documented endeavor (I even have some "lessons" saved from a Pegasus contributor. Once Zorgon has them on the website i will link here somewhere). There is no reason to question the validity of its' existence. What we can question is the validity of these papers.

IF anyone is better at confirming them, please let me know:

http://www.starstreamresearch.com/podkletnov.htm





Please visit the site, as there is much, much more.

[Bigfatfurrytexan]

I recieved some help from a friend in my search for Dr. Li:

Ning Li Search Results

So, maybe the above link is not very helpful and just full of jibberish. But i did search out the address provided (5005 Holmes Ave NW) and go tthis:

White Pages Arial View

It is very near the University, and just next door to some large building.


Anyone from the Huntsvile, AL area around here?

[Bigfatfurrytexan]

This has nothing to do with Ning Li, and barely anything to do with anti-grav....except that it disucsses a new way to cause levitation (by reversing the Casimir effect)

Levitating Nanomachines

Perfect lenses are nothing like conventional glass lenses. Instead, they are made of metal carved into a repetitive lattice-like structure. Glass lenses such as the ones used in cameras can't resolve details of an object that are smaller than the wavelength of the light bouncing off them. Perfect lenses do not have that limitation. And they bend--or refract--light in a direction opposite to that in which ordinary materials like water and glass bend it. Researchers predict that perfect lenses could lead to higher-density DVDs, ultrahigh-resolution microscopes that can image nanoscale objects, and faster fiber-optic communications.

The technology to make such optical lenses is only a few years old. But Philbin says it's already good enough to produce lenses that can convert the Casimir attraction between objects into repulsion. Leonhardt and Philbin's calculations show that such lenses should also be sufficient to levitate an aluminum foil 500 nanometers thick. "In theory, if you could build the right kind of lens, you could levitate heavier objects," Philbin says.

Yes, levitation means little without a terrestrial environment. However, when considering the increase of friction due to weight (and the inefficiencies that lie therein), one would figure that it could possibly be relevant.

As well, an anit-casimir force field would be VERY useful in LEO.

[Bigfatfurrytexan]

There are some interesting bits of info out there when you "google" Douglas Torr's name.

For example, this website:

http://www.theyalltoldthetruth.com/id53.htm

discusses some interesting "facts". If there are people who are more familiar with Maxwell's equations than me (not a hard feat, actually), perhaps they can chime in with input on the following:

After looking at the writeups about the NASA experiment and the Podkletnov experiment, I could see that both of the experiments were severely BLUNDERED! Yes, you heard that right. I'm sure both parties will be rather embarassed when you tell them the following, and see what their reaction is. Using the "Maxwellized" equations of gravity, and knowing the fact that the vortical motion (or spin vector) of the lattice ions in the disk must be aligned in a direction perpendicular to the plane of the disk, then the field lines of the "gravitomagnetic field" must be perpendicular to the plane of the disk also. This "gravitomagnetic field" would change with time, due to either the RF electric and magnetic fields applied, or to the spinning of the disk, or both. Indeed, in order to either create ordinary gravity or shield ordinary gravity, you must have a changing "gravitomagnetic field" in order to create that ordinary gravity field (per the "Maxwellized Equations"). Fact is, according to the "Maxwellized Equations", that the ordinary gravity field created by a changing (in strength), but always vertically oriented, gravitomagnetic field, would have to be HORIZONTAL, not vertical. In fact, the field lines of the generated ordinary gravity field are both horizontal and circular in nature. As an analogy, since the two types of gravity fields (i.e. ordinary gravity fields and "gravitomagnetic" fields) interact with each other exactly like electric and magnetic fields interact with each other, then consider the following. Any degreed electrical engineer will tell you that a collapsing vertical magnetic field will induce a circular horizontal electric field. This is the principle by which electrical generators work. Similarly, if a permanent magnet is thrust vertically through a horizontal circular coil of wire, then an electrical voltage is induced in the coil, due to the circular electric field which is produced by the moving magnet.


So, both NASA and Podkletnov were measuring for a change in gravity in THE WRONG DIRECTION!! They should have looked for any changes in gravity in the HORIZONTAL direction. Thus, the hanging weight in those experiments must have been pulled slightly either to the left or right (but not enough that they could visually see it).


The reason that Podkletnov got any results at all in the VERTICAL direction was simply due to the residual bending of the fields from the perfect horizontal, due to the finite size of the disk producing the fields. Then, there would have been a small but measurable vertical component to the generated gravity field.

I am unsure. This page has some of its "facts" wrong in other areas...but without being able to deduce the math, the logic of the above statement seems plausible.

[Bigfatfurrytexan]

1. Field of the Invention

The invention relates to the generation of inhomogeneous electromagnetic fields and in particular, to the generation of fields that exert force on massive objects. Such fields have utility in the arts of mass acceleration (including object manipulation and propulsion) and communications.


Not all inhomogeneous electric field configurations will give rise to significant gravitational fields. The present disclosure shows preferred electrode configurations that give rise to inhomogeneous electric fields capable of producing significant gravitational fields. Significant gravitational fields means at least one or more of the following: 1. Gravitational fields with strength large enough to noticeably affect a mass (preferably a force of at least 1% or more of its weight, even more preferably on the order of 10% or more of its weight, most preferably greater than its weight).

The Charged Sphere

The electric field of the charged sphere is radial and therefore spherically symmetric. The spherical symmetry in turn produces a gravitational field with spherical symmetries. The electric field, E, of the charged sphere will decrease as 1/r.sup.2, where r is the distance from the center of the sphere. The derivative of the field scales as E/r where r is distance from the center of the sphere. Depending on the sign of its charge, the charged sphere would generate a gravitational force that would act to either attract or repel massive objects to or away from the center of the sphere. One use of such generators is as a device for producing, measuring and demonstrating gravitational effects and their principles. Other uses include any applications useful for applying forces to massive objects, and communications.

from the patent

[arcora]

This has always been their MO.

If they want something you have, they offer to give you what you want materially. If you decline, you disappear.

[Bigfatfurrytexan]

Originally Posted by arcora

This has always been their MO.

If they want something you have, they offer to give you what you want materially. If you decline, you disappear.

what do you mean by that?

[Bigfatfurrytexan]

How Electromagnetic Propulsion Will Work

When cooled to extremely low temperatures, electromagnets demonstrate an unusual behavior: For the first few nanoseconds after electricity is applied to them, they vibrate. David Goodwin, a program manager at the U.S. Department of Energy's Office of High Energy and Nuclear Physics, proposes that if this vibration can be contained in one direction, it could provide enough of a jolt to send spacecraft farther and faster into space than any other propulsion method in development.

This seems remarkably similar to the concept presented by the missing Dr. Li. They seem to be referring to the gravitomagnetic effect of superconductors, and the formation of the lattice ions described by Dr. Li.

[Bigfatfurrytexan]

Matt provided me this link as his explanation as to why he doesn't believe gravity is exclusively electromagnetic:

http://www.geocities.com/Area51/Shad...roject124.html

It would seem as though graviity and EM are shadows of each other.

The article is a good article, condensing the Wallace to Li timeline quite nicely. It is frustrating that the conclusion left us with questions, not answers:

Is a time varying gravitomagnetic field generated in the Tampere disk due to the horizontal time varying magnetic field used to rotate the disk, and does this result in a time varying gravitoelectric field in the disk, and possibly also in the space surrounding the disk, and could this result in exclusion of the earth's primary background gravitoelectric field as claimed by Henry Wallace? In addition, questions remain as to whether the gravitomagnetic field (from the Maxwell-like gravity equations) is of a large enough magnitude to produce the effects reported by Podkletnov and Wallace.

The big question, alluded to in this paper, is what it will take for non-specialized fields of physics to begin discussing gravity. I would suppose providing the analogue of the Maxwell equations being applied to gravity would be a good start.

Compartmentalization and specialization...it is killing creativity. In business one thing that we really focus on is communication. Between departments, employees, tiers of management...communication is what makes a business grow (well...one of the things). The lack thereof is stifling scientific progress.

There are hints at further extrapolations of Maxwells equations that have been suppressed. Being a mathematical novice, I certainly cannot contend that notion either way. But I do make note of it until proven otherwise.

[Bigfatfurrytexan]

I don't like to quote other authors through their anonymity of their screen names on other sties, but this individual provides me some excellent information that I cannot leave out of this presentation.

Provided by Stellar X from ATS:

While i wont pretend to know Maxwell's equations ( He used a mathematical system that were so complex that few in the field even tried to use it) i do have some thoughts/ideas as to the implications of some of his findings.

The author you quoted wrongly KNOWS ( as that's he he was educated to think) that the electricity really comes from the burning of the fossil fuels and that the creation of dipoles in generators and batteries are entirely 'coincidental' to the whole process of electricity ' generation'. Interestingly enough the following observations were made over a hundred years ago:

In the battery, the Poynting vector is outward, indicating
the direction of energy flow. ~Note the sensitivity of this
result to the sense of the current through the battery.! In the
vicinity of the conducting wires and next to the positive terminal
of the battery, S is parallel to the wire. Perhaps surprisingly,
S is directed from the battery on both sides of the
battery. Along the resistor R, the change of direction of E
outside the resistor causes S to change as well, gradually
turning from parallel to perpendicular to the resistor axis
~and entering it!, at its middle point ~zero surface charge!.

http://sites.huji.ac.il/science/stc/...inting-AJP.pdf

In physics, the Poynting vector can be thought of as representing the energy flux (W/m2) of an electromagnetic field. It is named after its inventor John Henry Poynting. Oliver Heaviside independently co-discovered the Poynting vector. Usually, it is defined as


where E is the electric field, H the magnetic field strength, B the magnetic flux density, µ0 the permeability of vacuum, and µr the dimensionless relative permeability of the surrounding medium. (All bold letters represent vectors.)

For example, the Poynting vector within the dielectric insulator of a coaxial cable is nearly parallel to the wire axis (assuming no fields outside the cable) - so electric energy is flowing through the dielectric between the conductors. If the core conductor was replaced by a wire having significant resistance, then the Poynting vector would become tilted toward that wire, indicating that energy flows from the e/m field into the wire, producing resistive Joule heating in the wire.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Poynting_vector

This
account obviously does not explain much about the circuit.
Indeed, in the Feynman lectures we read:4
‘‘We ask what happens in a piece of resistance
wire when it is carrying a current. Since the wire
has resistance, there is an electric field along it,
driving the current. Because there is a potential
drop along the wire, there is also an electric field
just outside the wire, parallel to the surface ~Fig.
27-5!. There is, in addition, a magnetic field
which goes around the wire because of the current.
The E and B are at right angles; therefore
there is a Poynting vector directed radially inward,
as shown in the figure. There is a flow of
energy into the wire all around. It is of course,
equal to the energy being lost in the wire in the
form of heat. So our ‘‘crazy’’ theory says that the
electrons are getting their energy to generate heat
because of the energy flowing into the wire from
the field outside. Intuition would seem to tell us
that the electrons get their energy from being
pushed along the wire, so the energy should be
flowing down ~or up! along the wire. But the
theory says that the electrons are really being
pushed by an electric field, which has come from
some charges very far away, and that the electrons
get their energy for generating heat from
these fields. The energy somehow flows from the
distant charges into a wide area of space and then
inward to the wire.’’ ~emphasis added!.

However, the result of such an application
and the resulting energy transfer in the circuit apparently did
not satisfy Feynman. He wrote: ‘‘this theory is obviously
nuts, somehow energy flows from the battery to infinity and
then back into the load, is really strange.’’4 Feynman, however,
did not persist and left the problem for others to find a
reasonable explanation. Can we say more about energy transfer
in this simple circuit?

http://sites.huji.ac.il/science/stc/...inting-AJP.pdf

Basically it's been know in Physics that the electricity flows into the conductor from the nearly perpendicular to it and from the direction of the created dipole; in essence the energy flow from a so created dipole flows in all directions for as long as the dipole is in existence.

I am unsure. This page has some of its "facts" wrong in other areas...but without being able to deduce the math, the logic of the above statement seems plausible.

It's in my opinion just plain wrong as it never mentions the fact that any dipole may in fact be considered a negative resistor with observable results in the physical realm. As to the 'power sources' quantum physicists have made it abundantly obvious that causality is apparently no longer important in physics.



Wikipedia has it's flaws but when it comes to physics and similar 'hard' sciences the editors clearly know their business. A few more questions are truthfully posed:

Electric currents in solid matter are typically very slow flows. For example, in a copper wire of cross-section 0.5 mm², carrying a current of 5 A, the drift velocity of the electrons is of the order of a millimetre per second. To take a different example, in the near-vacuum inside a cathode ray tube, the electrons travel in near-straight lines ("ballistically") at about a tenth of the speed of light.

However, we know that electrical signals are electromagnetic waves which propagate at very high speed outside the surface of the conductor (moving at the speed of light, as can be deduced from Maxwell's Equations). For example, in AC power lines, the waves of electromagnetic energy propagate rapidly through the space between the wires, moving from a source to a distant load, even though the electrons in the wires only move back and forth over a tiny distance. Although the velocity of the flowing charges is quite low, the associated electromagnetic energy travels at the speed of light.

The nature of these three velocities can be clarified by analogy with the three similar velocities associated with gases. The low drift velocity of charge carriers is analogous to air motions; to wind. The large signal velocity is roughly analogous to the rapid propagation of sound waves, while the large random motion of charges is analogous to heat; to the high thermal velocity of randomly vibrating gas particles.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Electric_current

The generator moves an electric current, but does not create electric charge, which is already present in the conductive wire of its windings. It is somewhat analogous to a water pump, which creates a flow of water but does not create the water inside. Other types of electrical generators exist, based on other electrical phenomena such as piezoelectricity, and magnetohydrodynamics. The construction of a dynamo is similar to that of an electric motor, and all common types of dynamos could work as motors.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Electrical_generator

Most modern generators with field coils feature a capability known as self-excitation where some of the power output from the rotor is diverted to power the field coils. Additionally the rotor or stator contains a small amount of magnetizable metal, which retains a very weak residual magnetism when the generator is turned off. The generator is turned on with no load connected, and the initial weak field creates a weak flow in the field coils, which in turn begins to slightly affect the rotor to begin to produce current that then further strengthens the field. This feedback loop continues to increase field voltage and output power until the generator reaches its full operating output level.

This initial self-excitation feedback process does not work if the generator is started connected to a load, as the load will quickly dissipate the slight power production of the initial field buildup process.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Electrical_generator

Research certainly isn't easy, as main stream scientist proves over and over again by continuing in their area despite major contradictions and fundamental seeming flaws, but it's interesting and i will do what i can do explain what i think i know.

Stellar

[Bigfatfurrytexan]

Another gem provided to me by Matt:

http://www.geocities.com/CapeCanaver...rickbrown.html

So to summarize, Morgan's experiment seems to be the first independent confirmation on record of the existence of Wallace's kinemassic field!!! He used a half-integral spin nuclei material (Lead) that is apparently better for demonstrating the kinemassic field due to its higher nucleon number than what Wallace used (mostly Copper) and so he was able to use airgaps about 160 times wider and did not have to confine the field to a closed circuit. He used high angular velocity (95% of Wallace's) which caused a strong spin polarization of the powered flywheel. Morgan's experiment seems to be genuine proof of the existence of Wallace's kinemassic field, and is a much simpler way to test for its existence than Wallace's method. Since it demonstrates that Lead is a superior material for demonstrating kinemassic fields, it seems clear that this is what should be used as well in gravitational experiments related to the kinemassic field (such as [5]), as it is durable and not prohibitively expensive.

Independent confirmation of Wallace, eh?

Other than now having a better understanding of what Wallace meant by "kinnemassic" field, it would seem that the most interesting part of this is the possibility for the lay person to replicate the results.

As well, in the context of this:

Morgan basically seems to have observed a gravitomagnetic version of something called the Einstein-deHaas effect, in which a freely suspended body begins to rotate on being magnetized [6]. The Einstein-deHaas effect is the inverse of Barnett's effect, in which uniform rotation of a body causes a magnetization which is proportional to its angular velocity [6]. In the gravitational Einstein-deHaas effect, a freely suspended body would begin to rotate on being spin polarized by a gravitomagnetic field.

Would this imply that the rotation of the planets might be due to where we lie in a gravitomagnetic field?

[Bigfatfurrytexan]

http://records.viu.ca/~soules/media1...vert/page5.htm

I was cross referencing some stuff on Torr, and came across this article. It rehashes much of what is already "hashed" in this thread. But the following paragraph is interesting:

Noever’s team is struggling to fabricate 12-inch discs. Current disks tend to fracture into pieces during pressing and a subsequent baking process during the 800 amp exercise. "This is what Podkletnov says is the heart of the matter," said Noever, "learning to make the discs. He said it could take us one or two years. He did reveal the composition." Noever implies that gravity may have properties of natural frequencies higher than those commonly used in X-rays or microwave machines. Such high frequencies penetrate all known materials. “A superconductor disc could resonate and downshift the frequency to a lower level where it could be blocked by normal matter....But this is all very speculative." Noever explained that this is but one of three theories that could explain gravity shielding.

This is notable because of the work of Dr. Baker and the HFGW's that he is in China working on.

Another interesting bit: this article discusses Giovanni Modanese, a lead researcher for Dr. Baker's "Gravwave, LLC".