Loading ...
Sorry, an error occurred while loading the content.

Re: magnetic-gravity converter?

Expand Messages
  • Peter Fred
    ... described ... Here is my opinion at the risk of repeating my self. I think the remark in the discussion should be taken seriously: All the results we
    Message 1 of 2 , Sep 4, 2000
      --- In forcefieldpropulsionphysics@egroups.com, cyrano@a... wrote:
      > Dear Ross and Colleagues,
      > What is your opinion on this russian experience from Sergei Godin
      > below?

      Here is my opinion at the risk of repeating my self.

      I think the remark in the discussion should be taken seriously:

      "All the results we obtained are extremely unusual and require some
      theoretical explanation. Un-fortunately the interpretation of results
      within the framework of the conventional physical theory cannot
      explain all the observed phenomena and first of all the change of

      If we go to the work that Searl originally did we find that his
      antigravity effect was discovered by accident. Here is quote from
      that work:

      "By 1952, the first generator had been constructed and was about
      three feet in diameter. It was tested in the open by Searl and a
      friend. The armature was set in motion by a small engine. The device
      produced the expected electrical power, but at an unexpectedly high
      potential. At relatively low armature speeds a potential of the order
      of 10.5 volts was produced, as indicated by static effects on nearby

      The really unexpected then occurred. While still speeding up, the
      generator lifted and rose to a height of about 50 feet above the
      ground, breaking the union between itself and the engine. Here it
      stayed for a while, still speeding up and surrounding itself with a
      pink glow. This indicated ionisation of air at a much higher pressure
      of about 10.3 mm Hg. More interesting was the side-effect, causing
      local radio receivers to go on by themselves. Finally, the whole
      generator accelerated at a fantastic rate and is thought to have gone
      off into space."

      from http://www.starwon.com.au/~rayd/searl.htm.

      The traditional mass-based gravity theories of Newton and Einstein:
      theory are in trouble: (1) We have to now believe that 65 % of the
      mass of the universe resides in the vacuum!

      See http://www.spaceviews.com/2000/05/09b.html

      and (2)Very sensitive detectors and large well-financed study has
      failed to find statistical evidence for the dark matter.


      The Searl device gets cold before losing weight and the theory that
      de Aquino uses to get his 63 % loss of weight links gravitaitional
      mass temperature.

      Thus I feel that the signs are now beginning to come in which suggest
      an entirely new gravity theory in needed to understand
      the "accidental" Searl antigravity effect.

      I have such a theory. I do not base my theory on mass. I base it on
      the heat that flows through a sphere that contains the sphere's mass.
      As you may well know I have observed a ~3 % decrease in weight with a
      hollow aluminimm hemisphere which was subject to 3000 wats of
      infrared radiation.

      My theory would also work if a heat sink rather that a heat source
      were at the center of a sphere or hemisphere. In this case, the
      gravitational force would be directed radially away from the center.
      However, as with the case where the force that is directed towards
      the center, it would be strongest at the surface of the sphere or



    Your message has been successfully submitted and would be delivered to recipients shortly.