----- Original Message -----
From: "David Thomson" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
To: <[email protected]>
Sent: Saturday, February 17, 2007 8:29 AM
Subject: RE: [Vo]: Lifters
Hi Kyle,
Classical spacetime is not recognized as a medium, just some mathematics
and tensors.
And that means what? Do you really think the Universe is made out of
dimensionless math equations?
No I do not. However, this is what the accepted view of General Relativity
is. Whether or not I (or anyone else) agrees with that, is another matter
entirely.
It will probably be eventually recognized that there is a physical
"something" to the vacuum, but what it is, I don't know, and I doubt
anyone else knows for sure either.
You are wrong about that, too. I have fully quantified exactly what the
"physical something" of the vacuum is. I have written a white paper on it
and delivered it before the PIRT 2006 conference in London last fall. I
have also written a book on the topic (Secrets of the Aether) and last
weekend presented the theory before a group of scientists in Memphis,
Tennessee. If you want to know what the vacuum is, just ask or read the
paper.
You have to experimentally test any hypotheses. I do not regularly delve
into theory, not as much as I used to anyways. I prefer to do the work on
the bench and see what nature tries to tell me. In short, I feel that a good
oscilloscope and some well tuned senses are superior to formulae and
hypotheses.
I don't know what PIRT is. What is it?
I am saying you can, and I am not alone. General Relativity also says you
can.
General relativity is a mathematic framework with a lot of metaphysics
wrapped around it. The equations are there, yes, but how they are
interpreted is again another matter. Eddington had his own view of GR,
without the same assumptions of space curvature as is accepted today. As far
as I know, GR doesn't point directly at some form of reactionless drive.
I am just saying it looks as if the "lifter" isn't
pushing against anything but a normal dielectric medium of air or a
liquid.
I don't deny it looks that way to you. The physics of ion thrust are
valid,
but they are inapplicable to the lifter. Have you built a thruster
device?
How are they inapplicable?
http://www.fw.hu/bmiklos2000/unipolar.htm
I have seen it, haven't followed newelectrogravity for several months now, I
got tired of it. What he has seems to be just a new and novel form of
Lifter. Same effect, however. I worked on nearly the same thing he has a few
years ago, and came within striking range of being wooed by the "effect".
After careful investigation, I found that it was merely electric wind and an
interaction with nearby air and objects. Properly shielded from wind, and
the thing does not move. "Hermetically sealing" is not the same thing as
just wrapping typing paper around the sides of something. Paper is also not
a good insulator in moderate humidity. Many of the old "influence" machines
took into account paper's conductivity, small though it is.
I really have little else to say on this subject, I've done the
experiments
and found that, to my knowledge and experience, the Lifters do not
produce
anomalous, unconventional thrust. I have about a dozen other projects to
work on which may be promising, but if I continue to waste time with
things that I know don't work, I am not going to get anywhere. I posted
my
findings, and that is all.
It is one thing to get a negative result, it is another thing to assume
you
have fully understood the result. I can't blame you for wanting to do
other
projects, however. There is not enough thrust in the lifters or thrusters
for me to continue with them at this time, either.
All I know is, when properly shielded, the lifters and similar devices do
not produce anomalous thrust. Not only I have found this, but many others,
in particular, Xavier as Michel pointed out. But what we found is not really
very romantic.
--Kyle
