I am not sure a virtual current needs to be invoked until a real one, which would point to a mundane ion wind effect, has been ruled out. Can you measure the current delivered by your flyback GOB?
Michel ----- Original Message ----- From: "Horace Heffner" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> To: <[email protected]> Sent: Friday, June 01, 2007 3:03 PM Subject: Re: [Vo]:Miklos Borbas Thruster?? > > On May 31, 2007, at 6:37 PM, Ghost of Brorillium wrote: > > >> >> Can someone with more knoweldege of these effects look at this and >> give some opinions? Is this the real thing or is it something mundane? > > > This may be the real thing, though there is no need for an "ether" > explanation. The permittivity of the vacuum is due to "virtual > pairs" of particles of opposite charge that pop into and out of > existence in the vacuum, their energy and the time of their existence > limited by the Heisenberg Principle. The pairs don't (need to) > continue on beyond the ping pong ball surface as the author says of > ether particles. The pairs quickly self-annihilate, either with each > other, or in the case of a current, with particles from adjacent pairs. > > The source of the effect I think is a net space charge maintained in > front of the tip by the field gradient near the fine tip and the > virtual current through the vacuum near the tip. The field gradient > concentrates (virtual current) charge near the fine point electrode > tip, and that concentrated charge has the opposite polarity as the > tip. This space charge maintained in the vacuum in front of the tip > attracts the tip. The virtual charges in the vacuum move toward the > tip but mostly annihilate before reaching it. That motion of charge > in the vacuum is virtual current. The virtual current is necessary > to establish and sustain the vacuum space charge upon which a > momentum purchase can be gained. > > Though their existence is brief, the pair momentum is tapped on > average by the field gradient. The repelled particle of the pair is > (on average) further away from the tip for most of its lifetime. Due > to the 1/r^2 force field near the tip, the force on the tip from the > closer particle of the pair is larger. It is an attracting force, > thus the thrust obtained from the vacuum is in the form of an > attraction of the ball. > > I think the capacitance of the ping pong ball is important to > creating a large effect with the device shown. The objective is to > selectively increase the gradient in *front* of the tip and thus the > virtual current in *front* of the tip. I suggest moving the ping > pong ball closer to the tip, therefore moving the back side of the > ball back away from the tip, so as to create a larger gradient in > front of the tip. A custom designed envelope would be better, but > not necessary. In the absence of a foil counter electrode on the > outside of the front of the ball, I suggest increasing the thickness > of the insulator in front of the tip to make available a larger > quantity of charge to oscillate in front of the tip and thus to > stimulate the motion of the vacuum pairs between the ball and the > tip, i.e. to increase the virtual current. This might be quickly and > easily be done by coating the outside of the front of the ping pong > ball with an insulating material, like silicone caulk. Using AC > should increase the virtual current through the vacuum, and thus the > pair motion and thus the sustained vacuum space charge in front of > the tip and thus the effect. A small tesla coil should work well. > The pulsating nature of the DC supply you used may have been > important to size of the effect you observed. The frequency of an AC > supply can be matched to the ball capacitance (or the size of the > ball and electrode matched to the supply frequency) so as to maximize > the virtual current to the tip through resonance. > > Regards, > > Horace Heffner >
