Epilogue: The Sound of Time

Use this section for any discussion specifically related to the chapters posted online of the unfolding biography, "Defying Gravity: The Parallel Universe of T. Townsend Brown

Postby AM » Mon Mar 31, 2008 3:16 am

Yes, I will my best.
AM
Senior Cadet
 
Posts: 340
Joined: Thu Feb 28, 2008 7:42 pm

racing to catch up

Postby Elizabeth Helen Drake » Mon Mar 31, 2008 6:12 am

I think you are all wonderful. Also taking quite a bit of time for me to just catch up.

And so far, I only have one meager thing to add to the conversation.........

AM .... with your list of things well connected I would add Dr. Sarbachers name ...... an expert in high frequency communications I believe ...........and connected to that famous quote that is bandied about in the UFO talk groups. Something about the message from Sarbacher ( actually through a third person) to Wibur Smith, the Canadian, in 1950 about there being a " project more secret than the hydrogen bomb" ..... or some such quote. And later in his papers Smith is quoted as saying he was conferring with .... his words .... " the boys " topside".

Dr.Sarbachers name also shows up in that daybook of Townsend Browns in 1962 and he was mentioned earlier while the Browns were living in Alexandria Virginia in 1960 ..... and even earlier in 1955 ..... The man is like a needle and thread tying some of these events together. Going even further back you can read about his connection with Dr, Brown in the chapter #56 " All Flags Flying".

Now back to my homework just trying to catch up AM. Thanks so much for all the talent and the effort!
And of course Mikado and Fred, I thank you also
And Trickfox. I know the feeling. Elizabeth
Elizabeth Helen Drake
Sr. Research Asst.
 
Posts: 1740
Joined: Fri Sep 23, 2005 6:11 am

Postby Langley » Mon Mar 31, 2008 9:10 am

Do neutrinos have mass?

Im stumbling around here. Of the sub atomic particles, only the electron is considered fundamental. Protons and neutrons are composed of sub sub particles. This isnt taught in high school but maybe should be.

http://www.sciencedaily.com/releases/20 ... 074620.htm

"Neutrino oscillations transmute one kind of neutrino, such as muon, into another kind, such as electron or tau. But for oscillations to occur, two phenomena must be true: neutrinos must have mass, and lepton number cannot be absolutely conserved."


Now neutrinos are extremely weakly interactive. They cannot be shielded against in all practicality.

An electron, sufficiently energised with a vector is called a Beta (minus) emission ie it is ionising radiation. It can be shielded against by a sheet of alfoil. It is strongly interactive. (it ionises many more times per mm of track than gamma)

But "Neutrino oscillations transmute one kind of neutrino, such as muon, into another kind, such as electron or tau......"

What is the basis for the transmutation of the neutrino to electron?

Would the environments constructed by a circuit such as that pictured earlier in relation to the Gunn diode or the ionic spin described by Ling Ni
induce such transformations? Are such settings attractors or drivers for neutrino streams?

Are Neutrinos subject to Coulomb's Law as an electron is? Probably not at all.

Is it possible that a conventionally ignored method of inducing neutrino transformations (in numbers not conventionally anticipated) produce a one way switch in which ambient neutrinos traverse unimpeded a coulomb barrier (naturally) to transmute into electrons on the enclosed side of the gate? And once electrons, the barrier is up until a setting is established which enables re transmutation. (with apparently an exception)

The neutrinos are not subject. The electrons are. The effect is seen within the confines of Coulomb's but did not commence there. A neutrino in designed setting becomes an electron and hence is found within Coulomb confinement.

Of the sub atomic particles (not the sub sub particles) only the electron can behave as either a particle or as a wave at non energised conditions.

(The proton and neutron at stability and without imposed energization are always particles. This only changes when energisation beyond a threshold imparts a vector. ie when energy is imparted to these particles by eg ionising radiation or by means of an imposed force such as that created within a cyclotron. )
Langley
Senior Officer
 
Posts: 620
Joined: Mon Dec 25, 2006 11:31 am
Location: AUSTRALIA

Postby Langley » Mon Mar 31, 2008 9:25 am

Do neutrinos have mass?

Im stumbling around here. Of the sub atomic particles, only the electron is considered fundamental. Protons and neutrons are composed of sub sub particles. This isnt taught in high school but maybe should be.

http://www.sciencedaily.com/releases/20 ... 074620.htm

"Neutrino oscillations transmute one kind of neutrino, such as muon, into another kind, such as electron or tau. But for oscillations to occur, two phenomena must be true: neutrinos must have mass, and lepton number cannot be absolutely conserved."


Now neutrinos are extremely weakly interactive. They cannot be shielded against in all practicality.

An electron, sufficiently energised with a vector is called a Beta (minus) emission ie it is ionising radiation. It can be shielded against by a sheet of alfoil. It is strongly interactive. (it ionises many more times per mm of track than gamma)

But ""Neutrino oscillations transmute one kind of neutrino, such as muon, into another kind, such as electron or tau......"

What is the basis for the transmutation of the neutrino to electron?

Would the environments constructed by a circuit such as that pcitured earlier in relation to the Gunn diode or the ionic spin described by Ling Ni
induce such transformations?

Are Neutrinos subject to Coulomb's Law as an electron is?

Is it possible that a conventionally ignored method of inducing neutrino transformations in numbers not convnetionally anticipated produce a one way switch in which ambient neutrinos traverse unimpeded a coulomb barrier (naturally) to transmute into electrons on the enclosed side of the gate? And once electrons, the barrier is up until a setting is established which enables re transmutation. (with apparently an exception)

The neutrinos are subject. The electrons are. The effect is seen within the confines of Coulomb's but did not commence there.

Of the sub atomic particles (not the sub sub particles) only the electron can behave as either a particle or as a wave at non energised conditions.

(The proton and neutron at stability and without imposed energization are always particles. This only changes when energisation beyond a threshold imparts a vector. ie when energy is imparted to these particles by eg ionising radiation or by means of an imposed force such as that created within a cyclotron. )
Langley
Senior Officer
 
Posts: 620
Joined: Mon Dec 25, 2006 11:31 am
Location: AUSTRALIA

Postby natecull » Mon Mar 31, 2008 10:38 am

I kind of wish we had a Wiki here... so many names, events, and organisations to juggle.

One thing I would like to know, having read the whole book and still feeling as much in the dark as ever, is how many scenarios we have of what the significance of Dr Brown's gravity research was?

IE, it seems reasonably clear to me that Brown was linked deeply into the UK/USA military-industrial-intelligence community (for want of a better name; I still am not entirely sure I believe in 'The Carolines' as a separate entity from just the folks who make up the core of Eisenhower's military-industrial complex), so I can buy that whatever he was working on at any given moment was Important at the time. But I can think of at least three broad outlines for how exotic ideas like gravity come into the mix:

1) His real classified work was mundane (radar stealth and ion wind) and talk of 'antigravity' was purely (at least after the 1930s) a disinformation smokescreen. However the 'mundane' technology he touched has led to currently deployed Very Fast/Quiet Bombers, and remains an exciting subject among military aviation geeks and spies, but holds no other interesting leads to strange technologies for the rest of us.

2) His real classified work was mundane, but he really was interested in cracking the 'antigravity' puzzle and indulged this as an ongoing hobby project (either with a misguided belief that ion wind could be scaled up, or with a real but not easily demonstrable 'weird' effect) - either way, his 'gravity' experiments haven't led to anything useful yet, but could conceivably be tinkered with, given a whole lot of time and funding. But there's no actual correlation between his personal antigravity hobby-horse and the bread-and-butter technology work (radar stealth stuff) he was actually paid to do by the US military.

3) His real classified work was antigravity, not just the fake ion-wind type propulsion, but the real deal, with all the sorts of neat spinoffs normally associated with 'warp drive' such as teleportation and time travel. Most mentions of Brown's mundane research is cover for his actual gravity work. This technology found its way into the US military where it is still being concealed for reasons unknown - possibly because its most immediate applications are in stealth and covert operations where revealing its nature would jeopardise ongoing operations, but despite its potential for total transformation of the entire planetary battlespace, gravity tech is not yet mass-producible or the bugs haven't been worked out, so it's still being hidden. A few whistleblowers in the system are trying to work around US military secrecy oaths by pointing private researchers to clues as to this technology because they believe it should not be hoarded.

4) Like 3, but as well as cracking gravity control, Brown was also a member of an elaborate, privately-funded conspiracy group (the Carolines) which was active at the highest levels of the US/UKA military research/intelligence complex, acting for all intents and purposes as a James Bond villain-type organisation (but with noble intentions), far more organised and effective than the Soviets and their moles, never once being detected until members of that group decided to contact Paul and 'spill the beans'. This group had the resources and political pull both to fully fund and develop antigravity technology using the full resources of the American science establishment, and then to completely bury it, cutting the Navy and Air Force completely out of the loop, in order to spare mankind the horrors of something worse than nuclear proliferation. But the Carolines are now leaking this information, slowly, to private researchers... for reasons still largely unknown.


Is it just me, or do others find the whole package of (4) rather a big bite to swallow all at once? I'm not at all sure, with all the evidence we've seen so far, that we've even established more than (1).

I really want there to be antigravity, and I'm an avid reader of all the fringe gravity control literature, but I also want to believe things not just because they seem cool, but because the truth points that way. I'd like to look at the big picture with 'scenario thinking', taking all the options separately, and ask why I *need* to believe that T.T. Brown actually *succeeded* in controlling gravity.

There's a little nagging voice inside me that keeps saying 'so if FTMs and magic teleporting submarines are REAL, why isn't a fleet of them pounding the Iraqi insurgency into ash right now?'
natecull
Senior Cadet
 
Posts: 273
Joined: Sat Mar 22, 2008 10:35 am
Location: New Zealand

Postby Langley » Mon Mar 31, 2008 12:04 pm

Hi natecull, I read Stan Deyo in the 80s, have a high regard. Which presents issues in some ways with the concept of human consortiums.
Remember his citation relating to an electrostatic motor powered by the atmospheric charge? here it is.
http://www.as.wvu.edu/coll03/phys/www/OJ/jefimenk.html
Langley
Senior Officer
 
Posts: 620
Joined: Mon Dec 25, 2006 11:31 am
Location: AUSTRALIA

why not pounding?

Postby Elizabeth Helen Drake » Mon Mar 31, 2008 1:42 pm

I have learned a long time ago that when a thought nags at you it means that there should be recognition of it, ( otherwise it wouldn't nag so, sort of like a back seat driver!)

So your question

There's a little nagging voice inside me that keeps saying 'so if FTMs and magic teleporting submarines are REAL, why isn't a fleet of them pounding the Iraqi insurgency into ash right now?'

Needs to be looked at. WHY INDEED IF WE HAVE SUCH A TECHNOLOGY ISN'T IT POUNDING THE IRAQI INSURGENCY INTO ASH? Double dog dare many of you to weigh in on that one!

And thank you Natecull for the earlier discussion which was a wonderful list of your conclusions. I would like to see what Paul thinks of some of those? I'll be back with my thoughts in a bit but I am really not the one who counts as much as the other readers out there. Thankyou for giving them the invitation to " talk amongst ourselves!" Elizabeth
Elizabeth Helen Drake
Sr. Research Asst.
 
Posts: 1740
Joined: Fri Sep 23, 2005 6:11 am

Postby Mikado14 » Mon Mar 31, 2008 2:21 pm

Langley wrote:Do neutrinos have mass?
They cannot be shielded against in all practicality
Are Neutrinos subject to Coulomb's Law as an electron is? Probably not at all.
The neutrinos are not subject. The electrons are. The effect is seen within the confines of Coulomb's but did not commence there. A neutrino in designed setting becomes an electron and hence is found within Coulomb confinement.


There are two ways of utilizing Coulomb's Law : scalar and vector

Normal everday applications are the scalar form for the unit charge and vector for the direction of movement.

In all derivations of Coulombs Law, it is only accurate when the charged particles are "stationary". Further, the gravitational constant is "ignored", and one more item, the particles mass is relative to the charge.

Neutrinos, I believe, are in the stable that the Creator has for certain particles.

A start AM? and Langley, I will clear a seat on the FTM for you.

Mikado
There are more things in heaven and earth, Horatio, Than are dreamt of in your philosophy
Mikado14
Mr. Nice Guy
 
Posts: 2343
Joined: Thu Aug 10, 2006 1:49 pm
Location: Somewhere in Pennsy

either /or

Postby twigsnapper » Mon Mar 31, 2008 2:23 pm

Nice summary there natecull with much meat on its bones. Calling your attention to one part of it.
"IE, it seems reasonably clear to me that Brown was linked deeply into the UK/USA military-industrial-intelligence community (for want of a better name; I still am not entirely sure I believe in 'The Carolines' as a separate entity from just the folks who make up the core of Eisenhower's military-industrial complex), so I can buy that whatever he was working on at any given moment was Important at the time"

For whatever my worth might be toward this I can say that he was indeed tightly wound with what you call the UK/USA military-industrial-intelligence community. But then you very quickly make an error when you try to make the Caroline Group THAT ... or something ELSE entirely. You can not get anything done from the outside of an organization. Not the kind of action that the Caroline members were interested in. Thoughout their history ( and trust me, it has been a long one) you could list Admirals, Generals, Political figures, Statesmen, Scientists, the list goes on and on and on ...... and be careful here to not isolate their interest in one country. This kind of effort has been ... always ... global ... in the largest sense.

But you are right that some of them could have fit very nicely into that initial description ...Mr. Floyd Odlum for example, Sir William Stephenson, just to name two, both of which were closely interested in the thoughts and ideas of one Townsend Brown.

It is a big walrus with many whiskers. Maybe its helpful to just grab onto one at a time. twigsnapper
twigsnapper
Revered Elder
 
Posts: 839
Joined: Wed Mar 22, 2006 5:25 pm
Location: mobile

Re: why not pounding?

Postby Langley » Mon Mar 31, 2008 2:26 pm

Press releases and other information from the military on HAARP continually downplay what it could do. Publicity documents insist that the HAARP project is no different than other ionospheric heaters operating safely throughout the world in places such as Arecibo, Puerto Rico, Tromso, Norway, and the former Soviet Union. However, a 1990 government document indicates that the radio-frequency (RF) power zap will drive the ionosphere to unnatural activities.

" ... at the highest HF powers available in the West, the instabilities commonly studied are approaching their maximum RF energy dissipative capability, beyond which the plasma processes will 'runaway' until the next limiting factor is reached."

http://www.haarp.net/

An oldie but a goodie. Weather warfare. Weirdness in the target zone.
Maybe.
Langley
Senior Officer
 
Posts: 620
Joined: Mon Dec 25, 2006 11:31 am
Location: AUSTRALIA

Postby Mikado14 » Mon Mar 31, 2008 2:43 pm

natecull wrote:4) Like 3, but as well as cracking gravity control, Brown was also a member of an elaborate, privately-funded conspiracy group (the Carolines) which was active at the highest levels of the US/UKA military research/intelligence complex, acting for all intents and purposes as a James Bond villain-type organisation (but with noble intentions), far more organised and effective than the Soviets and their moles, never once being detected until members of that group decided to contact Paul and 'spill the beans'. This group had the resources and political pull both to fully fund and develop antigravity technology using the full resources of the American science establishment, and then to completely bury it, cutting the Navy and Air Force completely out of the loop, in order to spare mankind the horrors of something worse than nuclear proliferation. But the Carolines are now leaking this information, slowly, to private researchers... for reasons still largely unknown.


Is it just me, or do others find the whole package of (4) rather a big bite to swallow all at once? I'm not at all sure, with all the evidence we've seen so far, that we've even established more than (1).



May I call you nate for short? If not, let me know.

Nate, I rather like what you have put together here. However, I feel that I must comment on #4.

My Mother always claimed I had a very large and overactive imagination so with that in mind let's move forward. "What if" the individuals involved saw the potential of what Dr. Brown had? "What if" the technology did get to the public and/or military sectors? And "What if" that technology has the potential to cause the destruction of mankind or prevent the evolution of mankind from happening? And now I ask, what would you do? Perhaps "they" decided to develop the technology and by doing such, enabled them to monitor the development in the world? Just a little thought.

natecull wrote:I really want there to be antigravity, and I'm an avid reader of all the fringe gravity control literature, but I also want to believe things not just because they seem cool, but because the truth points that way. I'd like to look at the big picture with 'scenario thinking', taking all the options separately, and ask why I *need* to believe that T.T. Brown actually *succeeded* in controlling gravity.



The paragraph you have written here I believe is reflective of many individuals. After all, you are here in this forum, aren't you?.....

natecull wrote:There's a little nagging voice inside me that keeps saying 'so if FTMs and magic teleporting submarines are REAL, why isn't a fleet of them pounding the Iraqi insurgency into ash right now?'


Because it is my belief that the real reasons for the Iraqi "war" is the drug trade and not the oil. With a little research you will find that "Wall Street" has been braced up by the drug trade. If any of the technology that you mentioned were used it would bring it to the public eye and they, if they have it, don't want it out. Oil is being pumped out of the ground by US oil companies for less than $20 a barrell but they are selling it at a cost of $100+ a barrell. If that is not rape, what is?

Mikado
There are more things in heaven and earth, Horatio, Than are dreamt of in your philosophy
Mikado14
Mr. Nice Guy
 
Posts: 2343
Joined: Thu Aug 10, 2006 1:49 pm
Location: Somewhere in Pennsy

still not answered

Postby Elizabeth Helen Drake » Mon Mar 31, 2008 3:27 pm

Points well taken Mikado and Nate (?)

But the question still remains. As long as we are in some sort of " war" whatever the reasons then why isn't some of this technology in use. Well, perhaps it has been ... but we just don't know it yet?

I understand that mounted " Rangers" ( I'll call them that because I don't know what their official group is called) were able to lazer light targets that once lit would be hit by B2 Bombers. If that isn't a strange type of warfare. And if there was such a thing as a " Black Walrus" in operation with an unlimited ... what did they call it ? " Dwell time" then just what sort of communications platform would that provide for ground forces? With " Athena tags on the helmets of our troups, fairly easy to discern others from " friendlies" .... so ... with all of that technology why didn't we grab Bin Laden when he was between cross hairs at Tora Bora?

I don't know. But I suspect that situation was dictated by the politics of the time, not by the people on the business end of the cross hairs.

So I believe that you may be right Mikado. There may be other reasons that technology is not used sucessfully and its probably a very complicated web. Elizabeth
Elizabeth Helen Drake
Sr. Research Asst.
 
Posts: 1740
Joined: Fri Sep 23, 2005 6:11 am

Postby AM » Mon Mar 31, 2008 4:27 pm

Although I have shaved it does not mean that I am still not hazy in my mind. But since I already played so much racketball with my brain let me finish this game.

Ms. Drake - yes, Dr. Sarbacher. Let us not forget that it was him (along with his Irish co-worker) who fished Miether out of that internment camp.

And of course there is then the trip of those two young man before the Second World War. A trip to Italy. Casa Belluzzo.

Mr. Mikado, let me grab the Coulomb's law by it's horns. There is a truly seminal post that was made by Mr. Schatzkin i. e.
http://www.ttbrown.com/forum/viewtopic. ... 97ea7#1699. There he explains the whole notion of sidereal radiation in a very coherent and clear fashion. He also cites a letter of Dr. Brown (from 1977):

"It is manifested as a departure from the Coulomb Law of electrostatic attraction, in that the opposite forces are not equal. The negative electrode appears to 'chase' the positive electrode, so that there is a net force of the system (dipole) in the negative-to-positive direction."

Now, please bear with me, because I am a just a student of languages and culture and not a properly technically educated person.

What always attracts my attention are the little footnotes, the brief remarks in brackets. And so it was also here.

_____________________

DIGRESSION: FIRST IT WAS THE NET FORCE OF THE SYSTEM - THE DIPOLE. I KNOW THIS IS NOT THE SAME, BUT STILL. The magnetic dipole as a closed circulation of the electrical current. The simplest example would be a loop of wire through which a constant electrical current is flowing. PLEASE THINK OF WHAT WE DISCUSSED IN ANOTHER THREAD.

Konstantin Meyl's book on Neutrinos which is written in the form of an interview that was made by Johannes von Buttlar:

In zahlreichen Berichten ist in dem Zusammenhang von einer Antigravitation die Rede. Sie hingegen führen die Gravitation auf eine Wirkung geschlossener Feldlinien zurück, die sich so ohne weiteres nicht aufheben lässt.


Translation:

In numerous reports there is a reference to antigravity in this regard. You (i. e. Konstantin Meyl) reduce the notion of gravity to the action of CLOSED FIELD-LINES, which cannot be so easily annulled.
_____________________

I see here the principle of MIGRATION - "the negative chasing the positive". This might be indicative of the principle how gravity works.
Gravity itself might just be a function of electricity under certain specific circumstances.

Now where is the departure from Coulomb's law:

A movement which has a particular direction induced by the preponderance on one side. In normal conditions (Coulomb's law) both sides are equal in magnitude and equal in attraction. There is no preponderance on one side. But in Dr. Brown's case the preponderance induces a movement - the chasing, which could also be interpreted as pushing. A sign of the electrogravitic link and electricity inducing what we call gravity.

Mr. Langley said:

The neutrinos are not subject. The electrons are. The effect is seen within the confines of Coulomb's but did not commence there. A neutrino in designed setting becomes an electron and hence is found within Coulomb confinement.


A neutrino in designed setting becomes an electron. And the setting would be something like we find in the Biefeld-Brown effect.

Neutrinos - ions - electrons. The Biefeld-Brown effect relies on corona discharge, which causes the ionization of air around the sharp points and edges. One of the electrodes is always smaller and/or sharper than the other one. When this occurs the electrons are "yanked" off the atoms in the surrounding air.

Like it was already stated above, the neutrinos are very similar to electrons - WITH ONE BIG DIFFFERENCE. They don't carry electrical charge - they are electrically neutral. And here comes in my lack of a physics-background: if you INDUCE or excite the neutrinos to acquire an electrical charge would this suffice for them to be transformed into electrons? Perhaps not directly, but indirectly - through the Bielefeld-Brown effect.

a.) "Yank" the neutral out of it's neutrality and cause a very specific configuration of charged particles to appear.

b.) Coulomb's law is accurate only when charged particles are "stationary", like you said Mr. Mikado. Now in the Bielefeld-Brown effect you cause a PREPONDERANCE in one direction. You cause movement and the inonization of air (ionized air is nothing but plasma) through corona discharge is a crucial element.

c.) When you have the charge, then the particle mass comes into play, because as you said Mr. Mikado particle mass is relative to the charge. According to Dr. Brown's paper:

" Studies to date would seem to indicate that gravitoelectric converters also exist in nature. The two-fold requirement, mass (high density) and high-K (electric permittivity) are found in many terrestrial rocks such as granite and various basalts."

You have two components:

- high K – the electrical aspect
- high mass/density – the gravitational aspect

But I am again playing it loose here. This is on the macro level.

Now there are different forms of neutrinos. The one I find particulary interesting is the ELECTRON NEUTRINO.

In 1968 there was the first experiment conducted to detected (electron) neutrinos produced by the burning of the Sun. DO NOT FORGET THAT THE SUN IS THE BIGGEST SOURCE OF NEUTRINOS IN OUR SOLAR SYSTEM. The same would be the case for black hole at the center of our galaxy.

And if you can transform neutrinos into electrons, then you can also do vice-versa.

The same with gravitoelectric converters - if Nature can transform sidereal radiation/gravity into electrical potential in the rocks, then you can design also an apparatus which will do vice-versa. Ok, now, here I am already treading on ice.

One last very important quote - again from Mr. Schatzkin's excellent posts:

"Sidereal Time" is defined as "Time based on the rotation of the earth with reference to the background of stars."


The element of rotation (----->unipolar inductors?). Background of stars - does this also include various form of radiation (sidereal radiation)?

SIDENOTE:

The acceleration and storage of radioactive ions for a neutrino factory

B Autin et al 2003 J. Phys. G: Nucl. Part. Phys. 29 1785-1795

B Autin1, M Benedikt1, M Grieser2, S Hancock1, H Haseroth1, A Jansson1, U Köster1, M Lindroos3, S Russenschuck3 and F Wenander3 (the beta-beam accelerator working group)
1 Fermilab, Batavia, IL 60510 USA
2 Max Planck Institut für Kernphysik, 69029 Heidelberg, Germany
3 CERN, CH-1211, Geneva 23, Switzerland

Abstract. The term beta-beam has been coined for the production of a pure beam of electron neutrinos or their antiparticles through the decay of radioactive ions circulating in a storage ring. This concept requires radioactive ions to be accelerated to a Lorentz gamma of 150 for 6He and 60 for 18Ne. The neutrino source itself consists of a storage ring for this energy range, with long straight sections in line with the experiment(s). Such a decay ring does not exist at CERN today, nor does a high-intensity proton source for the production of the radioactive ions. Nevertheless, the existing CERN accelerator infrastructure could be used as this would still represent an important saving for a beta-beam facility. This paper outlines the first study, while some of the more speculative ideas will need further investigations.


CONSIDER ALSO DR. BROWN's CANADIAN PATENT AND RESEARCH INTO GRAVITATIONAL ISOTOPES.
_________________________

Mr. Twigsnapper made a very important reference and due to my "irrational exuberance" as our friends on the Wall Street would say it the post somehow receeded into the background. But I constantly had it on my mind. Here I quote it again:

Grass ... and limestone ... and underground springs.... that combination helps create ( along with their natural abilities) some of the finest racehorses in the world.

Fred..... you talked about recognizing the winning horse in a race. I wonder if there are places in upstate New York for example which are " aligned" properly for certain foals to realize their fullest potential? If it might be that children respond the same way to this influx of ... whatever it is that we are talking about here....( I will use Morgans "stuff") ... then as a horseman interested in such things I would be interested in finding the most optimum pasture to raise my foals?

Anyone wonder why Dr. Brown collected rocks from all over the world? Anyone think that was merely random? Anyone want to bet that he didn't have the exact location already plotted? " Where the four points meet" he said.


And Mr. Twigsnapper mentioned limestone previously - as a response to your thoughts Mr. Mikado. LET ME CONFRONT BOTH POSTS.

Mr. Mikado:

Minerals..... permitivity(permeability) - the ability of a material to carry lines of force.

Isogonic Lines of Force

Mikado


And Mr. Twigsnapper's answer:

Flow .....Ah, Ladies always let you chase them until they catch you.

Mikado ..... Limestone, anomolous grains of sand, things unseen but there.

Kevin ......A long journey Navigator.

Pleased to have your company.

twigsnapper


Let us tie in what Mr. (Kevin) B. said to me yesterday and the truly great article on Stonhenge, crystals, space-time, etc. that he showed us.

THREE HYPOTHESES:

a.) Crystals as detectors, recipients, transducers of gravitational waves/sidereal radiation

b.) Dr. Brown REPEATEDLY draws our attention to THE CRYSTALLINE STRUCTURE INSIDE ROCKES - GRANITE AND BASALT IN THIS CASE. EMPHASIS IS ON THE CRYSTAL STRUCTURE!

ROCKS ARE NOT ALL ALIKE:

In the course of these studies with rocks from various locations (Hawaii and mainland USA) it appears that the self-potential signatures of various rocks are quite different, one from the other. It is difficult to explain these individual differences unless one postulates a resonance characteristic inherent in the crystal structure of the rock. Such resonance may make the rock susceptible to on f; a specific, relatively narrow spectral bond of the incoming gravitic radiation. It is assumed, in this connection, that the natural gravitational radiation from space is a "white" or "noise" radiation of exceedingly broad frequency range. Individual rocks may resonate only on a relatively narrow band width, such as quasi-red, quasi-green or quasi-violet, with relative amplitudes which are continually changing. This could account for the wide variety of secular and diurnal patterns in self-potential exhibited by various rock specimens.


Mr. Mikado - what did you say about minerals and permitivity or permeability and minerals? What did Dr. Brown's say about gravity as a migration from low K and mu areas to high K and mu areas? And then consider high density/mass as a manifestation of the gravitational aspect?

WHY DID DR. BROWN USE HEAVY LEAD BALLS IN HIS ELECTROGRAVITIC COMMUNICATION APPARATUS?

And finally crystals! Mr. Twigsnapper says that children or sensitive persons are receptive to certain phenomena at certain places.

Just think of the use of crystals in various religious and MAGIC ceremonies.

HAVE YOU EVER HEAR OF MARCEL VOGEL?

Here a quote for you:

Marcel Vogel the Nobel prize winning scientist, was one of the early pioneers of the crystal silicon chip which works in computers.

The piezoelectric nature of crystals means pressure yields electricity and electric currents emit regular mechanical pulses. Marcel Vogel has done many experiments to document his quantum theories. (Research Marcel Vogel for more information). He states that the wearing of crystals actually work.

...

He was able to duplicate the Backster effect of using plants as transducers for bio-energetic fields that the human mind releases, demonstrating that plants respond to thought. He used split leaf philodendrons connected to a Wheatstone Bridge that would compare a known resistance to an unknown resistance. He learned that when he released his breath slowly there was virtually no response from the plant. When he pulsed his breath through the nostrils, as he held a thought in mind, the plant would respond dramatically. It was also found that these fields, linked to the action of breath and thought, do not have a significant time domain to them. The responsiveness of the plants to thought was also the same whether eight inches away, eight feet, or eight thousand miles! Based on the results of the experiments the inverse square law does not apply to thought. This was the beginning of Marcel’s transformation from being a purely rational scientist to becoming a spiritual or mystical scientist.


AND HERE COMES THE BIG BERTA – JAWOHL!!!! CONNECTION TO ESP, ANYONE, HM?

IBM RESEARCHER MARCEL VOGEL WAS A PIONEER IN MANY AREAS, INCLUDING SUBTLE ENERGY RESEARCH. VOGEL WAS ABLE TO CAUSE ELECTRICITY TO BE PRODUCED FROM A COIL WRAPPED AROUND A SPECIALLY MANUFACTURED QUARTZ CRYSTAL, USING PULSED BREATH COMBINED WITH INTENTION. SUCH PHENOMENA WERE REPEATEDLY WITNESSED AND INSTRUMENTED


Mr. Twigsnapper or anyone who has already figured it out - can you give us a nudge regarding the upstate New York area and THE FOUR POINTS?

THIS IS EXTREMELY IMPORTANT. Do you remember Strabo and all those psychic horses from North Africe, Mr. Twigsnapper? The one's which performed even in dire circumstance of WWII so well - before the gates of Moscow?

I rest my case here. Mr. Natecull an excellent post. One of the most sober analysis of the possible interaction between the Caroline Group, the COMPLEX and Dr. Brown. I would definitely like to respond

But let us also concentrate on Mr. Twigsnapper's answer. Every word is important. He does not speak a lot, but says volumes
AM
Senior Cadet
 
Posts: 340
Joined: Thu Feb 28, 2008 7:42 pm

Postby AM » Mon Mar 31, 2008 4:55 pm

DIELECTRIC CRYSTALS - what do you say about that?

An electrically non-conducting crystal. K and mu <-> high mass/density. -------> the regular structure.

In chemistry, mineralogy, and materials science, a crystal is a solid in which the constituent atoms, molecules, or ions are packed in a regularly ordered, repeating pattern extending in all three spatial dimensions.


Eestor company and barium titanate - the process of sintering. Remember barium titanate being used in the Cutlass-experiment. Remember barium titanate supercapacitors and Dr. Brown's interest in barium titanate ---> ceramic supercapacitors?

EEStor's technology, described in its patent, involves sintering very small grains of coated barium titanate powder into a bulk ceramic. The process is designed to eliminate the pore space left by sintering. Barium titanate crystals have an extremely high permittivity; however, voids allow current to arc through the dielectric (voltage breakdown), causing the capacitor to self-discharge. By eliminating the voids, the bulk ceramic has properties similar to that of individual barium titanate crystals.


THEY ARE ELEMINATING THE VOIDS! THEY TURN THE WHOLE MATERIAL INTO ONE BIG COMPACT CRYSTAL!!!! IN DR. BROWN'S EYES BARIUM TITANATE ALWAYS (!) HELD HIGH PROMISE DUE TO HIGH K AND HIGH DENSITY/MASS!!!

AND WHAT IS GRAVITATION IF NOT THE MIGRATION FROM LOW K AND MU TOWARDS HIGH K AND MU!?

Still have to be careful with the pesky mu here. Let me not get too loose here.

Sintering is a method for making objects from powder, by heating the material (below its melting point - solid stage sintering) until its particles adhere to each other. Sintering is traditionally used for manufacturing ceramic objects, and has also found uses in such fields as powder metallurgy.
AM
Senior Cadet
 
Posts: 340
Joined: Thu Feb 28, 2008 7:42 pm

Re: still not answered

Postby FM No Static At All » Mon Mar 31, 2008 5:33 pm

Elizabeth Helen Drake wrote:... why didn't we grab Bin Laden when he was between cross hairs at Tora Bora?

Elizabeth


Just wanted to jump in here while having some coffee, and say that it may have to do with connections to the Saudis, and the fact that we didn't really want him, it was Saddam that G. W. Bush wanted all along. That was made known when General "Stormin' Norman" retired and said "we should have plowed right into Baghdad and taken him out" but G. H. W. Bush said, "No."

Oil? Nah, Mikado is right, there is less oil being pumped out of Iraq now than before the "war" started.

Some of the technology that you speak of Elizabeth is being used covertly. The SR-71 was flown more than a decade before it was made public. The stealth bomber and fighter as well. And I don't think for a minute that they were deployed publicly until there was at least one or two more advanced designs being deployed covertly.

And I still think we have a base on the Moon and have had one there since the fifties. I have see some photos before they were airbrushed, and that is all I will say about that.

Play Ball!

Fred
FM No Static At All
Senior Officer
 
Posts: 558
Joined: Sun Mar 02, 2008 4:34 pm
Location: Pacific Northwest

PreviousNext

Return to Defying Gravity: The First Draft

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 3 guests