Re: [Vo]:Propellantless EM drive results

[Sean Logan]

Thanks for sharing.  This is great!


On Tue, Sep 22, 2020 at 6:11 AM JonesBeene  wrote:

>
>
> The Shawyer EM drive is not dead but now has serious competition… using
> lasers. This is almost a breakthrough but has not attracted much attention
> so far..
>
>
>
>
> https://www.nextbigfuture.com/2020/09/darpa-laser-version-of-emdrive-has-a-test-result-better-than-commercial-ion-drive.html?utm_source=feedburner&utm_medium=feed&utm_campaign=Feed%3A+blogspot%2Fadvancednano+%28nextbigfuture%29
>
>
>
> Despite the negativism from skeptics (all over the Web),  the EM drive
> concept is now approaching the status of a solid technology despite NASA
> dropping it.
>
>
>
> What’s with NASA dropping something like this??? Almost unforgiveable.
>
>
>
> Fortunately DARPA/ARPA did not give up and the latest results seem to be
>  fabulous (when and if they are  duplicated).
>
>
>
> Long video from Mike McCulloch
>
>
>
> https://youtu.be/341Yk4k51uY
>
>
>
> From the Next Big Future comments: This is related to Mike McCulloch's
> “quantized inertia” QI theory  which itself is related yet different from
> the usual Mach effect and Emdrive drama.
>
>
>
> McCulloch has a theory for inertia that predicts galaxies' rotation sans
> dark matter, distant binaries and other anomalies presumably without
> adjustment, and it has other several interesting implications. It explains
> the Emdrive and predicts several kinds of inertia-based drives using EM
> waves of different efficiencies…. To call it controversial is an
> understatement.
>
>
>
> In a way it is refreshing to get rid of the baggage of dark matter. It has
> always smelled a bit like a klutz concept… unless of course it is the
> “aether”
>
>
>
>
>
>
>

Re: [Vo]:A Question About Paul Brown

[William Beaty]

On Tue, 22 Sep 2020, Chris Zell wrote:

Does anyone have any info on this topic?   It seems to me that either Paul
Brown was a deliberate, calculated fraud or he discovered something of
immense value.


  Paul Brown's warning to other experimenters
  http://www.padrak.com/ine/INE17.html

  Some cases of suppression
  
http://web.archive.org/web/20180623085130/http://www.rense.com/general72/oinvent.htm

If I understand it, Brown's main discovery was an energy-gain in 
radioactive wires, or within wires bathed in radiation from adjacent 
sources.


So, today a simple test would be to continuously measure (high freq AC?) 
wire resistance, or perhaps measure the "Q" of a metal-enclosed LC tank 
circuit, then look for increased value when placed against a 'hot' 
radioactive sample (thin metal being a shield, to prevent capacitive 
changes to Q caused by movements of the sample.)  I think Brown claimed to 
have achieved self-oscillation from this gain (so, Q becoming infinite.) 
But with a sensitive measurement, perhaps his discovery can be detected, 
while using commonly available low-level active materials: 50,000CPM 
carnotite from eBay, radium T/R tubes, etc.  Hook an op-amp 
negative resistance circuit to a big coil/capacitor, adjust it for 
barely-stable oscillation, then see if hot samples will make oscillations 
start growing.



old Scientific American article about triggering radio signal 
amplification using an antenna coated with radium


As well as his multiple patents?


101 E. Water ST.
Elmira, NY 14901


I grew up just across the river, in 14904 zip (just down from Janowski 
Gardens, over by Dunn Field!)   Looking at Streetview, I see that the 
idiots have cut down all the trees.  Elmira was once a town of tree-lined 
avenues everywhere.  Now in comparison to 1970s, it looks like a poverty 
zone!


 ( (  (   ((O))   )  ) ) 
William J. Beaty https://electricatechnology.com
beat...@gmail.comCTO, Inventor, Research Engineer
bi...@amasci.com 
206-762-3818 vm5459 Wilkinson Rd, Langley, WA 98260-8700

RE: [Vo]:A Question About Paul Brown

[Chris Zell]

I think the Papp engine was real. However, I also think it may be a case of 
“hidden in plain sight”.

I think the radioactive stuff and inert gases may have been deliberate 
misdirection.  There was a controversy years back in which a Professor Graneau 
asserted that arcs in water might be overunity. The same might go for arcs in 
water vapor.  There was supposedly a demonstration for the government in which 
a cannon was blown apart like a Roadrunner cartoon. This would be similar to 
trees being blown apart by lightning – that wasn’t a steam expolsion.

From: Axil Axil 
Sent: Tuesday, September 22, 2020 7:05 PM
To: vortex-l 
Subject: Re: [Vo]:A Question About Paul Brown

The Papp engine used radium or thorium to increase the sensitivity of the 
electrode to electron extraction from the plasma. The alpha decay of Radium 
biased the pickup electrode with a positive charge that would attract 
electrons. This idea came from the well known technique used to dope lightning 
rods with radium back in the 1800s to increase the ability of these rods to 
attract lightning.  In the Papp engine, the application of an electric arc 
increased the production of alpha decay right before the feedback current was 
produced by the plasma.

On Tue, Sep 22, 2020 at 4:30 PM Robin 
mailto:mixent...@aussiebroadband.com.au>> 
wrote:
In reply to  Chris Zell's message of Tue, 22 Sep 2020 15:38:15 +:
Hi Chris,
[snip]
>Does anyone have any info on this topic?   It seems to me that either Paul 
>Brown was a deliberate, calculated fraud or he discovered something of immense 
>value.
Have you seen this already? 
http://www.rexresearch.com/nucell/nucell.htm
See also 
http://wiki.naturalphilosophy.org/index.php?title=Paul_M_Brown
and 
http://gratisenergi.se/hubbard.htm


CAUTION: This message was sent from outside the Nexstar organization. Please do 
not click links or open attachments unless you recognize the sender.