>  
> If you buy my earlier contention that Electrons are actually Repelled by 
> Gravity/Protons,.....

A  ~ 2 meter vertical tube with a photo-emissive layer at the bottom
and a capacitor and/or electrometer connected to a collector plate
and a laser at the top should see gravity repelled electrons that drift 
up from the laser-pulsed photo-emitter.

Fred
----- Original Message ----- 
From: Frederick Sparber 
To: [email protected]
Sent: 11/17/2006 4:36:52 AM 
Subject: Re: E-Field Mass Cancellation


If you buy my earlier contention that Electrons are actually Repelled by 
Gravity/Protons, then the lift Buehler saw is an electrostatic/electrogravity 
field 
interaction between the charged single plates, or the capacitors and earth 
ground. 
This would explain why the positive plate was repelled due to it's electron
counter-charge added to earth ground.

Fred

Doyle Buehler's Experiments:

http://www.space-mixing-theory.com/article2.pdf

The NASA report on the Canning Cap Thruster:

http://gltrs.grc.nasa.gov/reports/2004/CR-2004-213312.pdf

"Electrostatic Forces without Current Flow
One possible explanation for lifters might be electrostatic forces due to a net 
charge on
the lifter interacting with induced charges (e.g. image charges) in the ground 
below. Lifters use a
stationary power supply, and how it is configured determines if there is a net 
charge on the lifter
(note the ground can be wired in different ways, and some examples are 
illustrated in figure 5
above). To investigate this possibility, assume the extreme case of a perfectly 
conducting ground
plane below a lifter, and also assume that its distance from the lifter is one 
hundred times the
distance between the charged plates of the lifter. If one plate is at ground 
and the other is at a
voltage such as 100 kilovolts, then the electrostatic force between the lifter 
and an image charge
is significant. Computations show it is about the magnitude necessary to lift 
the lifter. However,
this force is attractive, so it would pull the lifter down, not push it up.
The power supply could be configured so that the lifter has zero net charge. 
That is, one
plate could be positively charged and the other negatively charged, giving zero 
net charge. This
gives the electrostatic field of a dipole. If there were a perfectly conducting 
ground plane below
such a lifter, then an image dipole would be induced. The resulting force would 
be reduced from
that discussed above by a factor of one hundred squared, since each dipole 
would give a field
about one hundred times smaller than a single charge. However, using a 
dielectric of relative
dielectric constant one hundred would increase the force by a factor of one 
hundred squared.
This force would then be of about of the magnitude that lifters experience. 
However, the force
between a dipole and its image is attractive, so it would be a downward force.
These effects are not likely to be significant for actual lifters, since grass 
and even a concrete
floor (possibly with rebar in it) is not a good conductor. These effects may be 
more relevant for
ACTs which may operate near metal objects. However, when an ACT rotates within 
a metal box,
these effects may be expected to average to zero. These devices create a dipole 
like field for all
distances larger than a few times the distance between their electrodes. This 
field is the same in
front of the device as behind it, except for a change of sign. This symmetry 
causes a nearly total
cancellation of forces for a rotating device. We note that Talley’s experiment 
did not rotate, but
instead suspended the device from a stiff wire. Since that did not rotate, his 
design was
susceptible to electrostatic effects, as he reported.5
There are other plausible mechanisms for creating an electrostatic force. For 
example,
accelerating charges radiate. When this radiation is incident on a conductor 
(or dielectric), it
can cause a current. If the current and charge on the ACT were non uniform (as 
happens, for
example, when there are Trichel Pulses), then there could be an induced charge 
and a resulting
electrostatic interaction. We expect that such an effect would be quite small. 
Any charges that
accelerate also decelerate, either by collisions with air the other electrode. 
These effects tend to
cancel, so the net result should be quite small. Also, our experimental data 
using Argon show the
ACT still produces a force, which depends on the current, and voltage in a 
similar way to in air.
However, in Argon the current flows uniformly, and not in bursts. Thus, since 
this mechanism
would not give a force in argon, we conclude that it is unlikely to be 
significant.
Electrostatic Forces with a Current Flow
A simple model was found to explain all of our data. The thrust produced can be 
explained
by electrostatic forces moving ions, and by those ions transferring their 
momentum to the
surrounding air by collisions. Using some reasonable approximations, this force 
can be easily
computed. Later, some of those assumptions will be removed and the calculation 
made more
accurate. We assume for now that all of the current consists of N2 ions 
traveling directly from
one electrode to the other, and further assume that the voltage changes 
uniformly from one

Reply via email to