NOTEPAD for RANDOM IDEAS

[AM]

QUESTIONS (Mr. Schatzkin and Ms. Drake I hope you are reading this):

1. When and where exactly did Dr. Robert I. Sarbacher pass away? I have it somewhere in my memory that it was in 1994.

2. Was Dr. Sarbacher married and did he have any children? If so, has anyone tried to contact them (including his wife)?

3. What about other member's of his family?

4. What happened to Dr. Sarbacher's private papers?

5. How about Jacques Bergier? Has anyone tried to contact his relatives or descendants?

6. What became of Mr. Bergier's private papers?

7. What was Mr. Bergier's role in the Caroline Group?

8. Did he personally know Dr. Kitselman and if so, what exactly was their relationship and field of co-operation?

Speaking of Jacques Bergier, look at the little gem that I found in his Wikipedia-biography:

Yakov Mikhailovich Berger, that later adopted the name Jacques Bergier[1], was born in Odessa in 1912.

He was a gifted child: at two he read his first newspaper and at four he could easily read Russian, French and Hebrew. He was a speed reader (until the end of his life he could read 4 to 10 books per day) and had an eidetic memory. He was a vivacious child, and he told fabulous sounding stories of discussing strategy with generals as well as talking with street prostitutes in Odessa. He never went to school but had private tutors.

In 1920 the Russian Civil War forced the Berger family to take refuge in Etlia's homeland in Krzemeiniec, Northwestern Ukraine.Young Yakov Mikhailovich went to a Talmudic school and he became enthralled with the study of the Kabbalah and its mysteries. Besides that he studied mathematics, physics, German and English. He read everything he could lay hands on, but his favourite reading was science-fiction.

WHO WILL FIND THE ANSWERS?

AM

[natecull]

Nate,
I agree with you. Some terms are really hard to understand. It might help if you are looking at Dads version of " Beneficiation" to check out this Canadian Patent.
http://ether.sciences.free.fr/patents/T ... 201973.pdf

Thanks for this! It gives a bit more information about the differential centrifugal hydroscopy process he had in mind. It does look like it would be a fairly involved process (eep, thallium formate - sounded like a scary toxic liquid and a bit of googling revealed yes, it is, a contact and inhalation poison, though quite well known by professional rock-sorters); and then flash-freezing a centrifuge full of vials of it while the whole lot is spinning at 'ultra-high' speeds (would probably require a liquid nitrogen bath)... rinse and repeat a zillion times with precisely calibrated mixes ... that seems like it would not be fun. The sort of thing you might go through if the finished materials were worth several orders of magnitude times their weight in gold, but not otherwise, I would imagine.

Thallium Formate Malonate, aka Clerici's Solution:
http://lists.drizzle.com/pipermail/rock ... 09151.html

What intrigues me, though, is this:

Most of the raw materials investigated (containing lighter gravitational isotopes) are characterized by being measurably warmer (0.002-0.005° C) than their surroundings. These raw materials are further characterized by a small but definite retardation in gravitational acceleration, i.e., a lower value of g in free fall. Some of the known raw materials are aluminum silicate, cobalt-nickel silicate, barium aluminate, beryl crystal (comprising pure beryllium aluminum silicate), and beryl ore (containing crude barium aluminum silicate).

Do you know what line of research led your father to look at these materials? He mentions Charles Brush, of course, who I haven't read, but these lists of ores, and the temperature measurement, seem fairly specific.

This: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Le_Sage%27 ... ravitation seems to be an interesting summary of the mainstream physics view of the kind of theory of gravity which Brush was interested in, and presumably also your father. Overcoming the objections listed here will be a large part of the challenge of opening this work to wider view.

The second section was interesting too. I remember when he was going through all of those " shaking" tests with the resultant measurements .... you will laugh .... I still have the old paint shaker that he bought just for those tests. In fact, used it just the other day ( painting a hallway) and I couldn't help but grin over it the use of it.
You will note that the date of the patent disclosure is, I believe April 1, 1973. And of course the results were as noted in the patent.

Heh. I remember my Dad scandalising Mum by using her kitchen stirrer to mix some plastic foam for an aeroplane modification he was researching. She was not impressed.

[Linda Brown]

AM,

Now do you see the fawn in the woods? Blended there, but there always?

We see, twigsnapper and I, and you see it too. We see it, and it sees us.

And you have the ability to help others see it. You have already begun.

But here is the hardest part. How do you introduce something so wonderful, so trusting. so magnificent, to a world that still has a very long way to go. Only mystics have had a hold on this idea and you see how easily they can be dismissed.

See how much you have been able to share already.

YOU AM .... and you will not be alone. Look to the right and left of you on this very narrow road. Look for the hand that reaches out, the open palm to help. Linda

[Mikado14]

If I told you then you would know the direction that I am headed. Currently, If I am paying for the show, I control who comes through the door to watch the show and right now, the doors are closed. As I said, my bad for posting.

That is your choice of course, but I'm rather disappointed that you're choosing to hide information. I personally believe that alternative science research has no future except through a strategy of mass dissemination of material freely and without intellectual property restrictions. There've been too many good projects burned through commercial or other secrecy; I'd like it not to happen to people I know.

You are correct, it is most certainly my choice but your disappointment in me is wrongfully placed. I must say that your statement that I have highlighted, is not the first time I have seen that. If you took a risk with hard cash that you worked for, aren't you entitled to get a ROI? As to projects getting buried or burned, well, I have been living under a rock since 1981, I can either go back under it or I can come out but if I do, I do so for my children, my grandchildren and humanity, in that order but as sure as god made little green apples, I expect to get a financial reward for my work, even if it is to buy a cup of WaWa coffee.

I will say this much to hopefully satisfy your curiosity Alice, beneficiation and gravitational isotopes may have a connection via nanotechnology...nuff said.

I'm sorry again to be picky, but I'm having a hard job parsing that statement. By 'beneficiation' do you mean Dr Brown's proposed (but presumably as of 1973 untested) process, or the word as it is usually used in the ore processing industry? Because they are two very separate things, as far as I can tell.

I abhor the cut and paste method that I see so much here but in this case I will do so:

beneficiation

noun
crushing and separating ore into valuable substances or waste by any of a variety of techniques [syn: mineral extraction]

Now, if I am going to extract a gravitational isotope from a mineral, how is that not in keeping with the definition above?

And the phrase 'nanotechnology' today means a wide variety of things from anti-graffiti paint to DLP chips in data projectors. None of which have had the slightest whisper of gravitics on any of the tech forums I frequent.

In short, I am referencing the building of materials, as well as electronic circuits, from the atomic and molecular level. And you probably haven't seen it on any of the forums is because a good majority of the invidviduals attempting to work with gravitics are doing it through the brute force method. Tell me, does nature do things by brute force?

Mikado

[Linda Brown]

Nate:

You said to Mikado

" That is your choice of course, but I'm rather disappointed that you're choosing to hide information. I personally believe that alternative science research has no future except through a strategy of mass dissemination of material freely and without intellectual property restrictions. There've been too many good projects burned through commercial or other secrecy; I'd like it not to happen to people I know"

The first flash of response I have to your message above is also what I thought when one of the very first early site members posted the thought that the
" Brown family had no right to with hold information from the world. That they lost that right when they were born and they needed to make sure that the information was handed out to the world. That they owed it to the world." The quote is not quite correct but close and those of you who are old timers here will recognize it. My initial response was that " I have already done enough ...."

so what I have to say here below is no negative reflection on you Nate, I want information out there as quickly as anyone but that does not mean that I expect people to hand over their own intellectual property without proper compensation. There is room enough for it all to happen properly.

Mikado,

You just made a statement regarding expecting a Return on your Investment. All I have to say about that is ..... YEA! ... more power to you.

Mr. Twigsnapper has an old saying, which I think is appropriate here.
When others around him expected him to care not a whit about financial considerations. His response was that he " Gave up the vow of poverty when he gave up chastity." Which I always have assumed with a big grin that was quite a long time ago in his case.<g>

I would hope that people who involve themselves in any new enterprise here would be financially rewarded for the time and effort and yes, sweat that they have poured into this and will in the future. Thats the way this particular society rewards excellence in some fields. I hope all those involved make millions upon millions of dollars. And I expect many here will.

I am also very aware that those same people will turn around with large portions of that money to see it do some good in other areas. That they understand that money is a very useful tool for good. Thats the way this particular world works and I hope frankly that these new technologies will become a huge force in the economic health of the United States and other countries around the world.

But while that is happening I trust that others will pay enough attention to the spirituality which is involved in this project here also. That the flow of money in someones direction is basically a by product and not the goal of the passion that is found here. If you love what you aare doing, if you follow that passion then the money generally comes to find you. But its a separate and smaller reward than the entire picture.

And Mikado, does nature do things by brute force? Sometimes! But even a tornado is elegant. <g> Linda

[FM No Static At All]

I don't feel that anyone here is obligated to reveal secrets. Those that wish to do are operating under their own free will and if they want to be reimbursed for the time and energy and financial sacrifices they have made, where is the problem? Dr. Brown's work may have been utilized in secret, and he may not have been adequately compensated, that I do not know. I do remember that Amex card Linda told Paul about and which he did include in the book. It also was mentioned that the Browns did not receive a statement. So there was some compensation. Whether or not it was adequate is a judgment that I choose not to make.

Now if there are those within this amazing gathering that wish to join forces, create a marketable product and share the rewards, that is another possibility. But again I cannot feel that anyone is obligated to do so. My friend and I have been promised funding that did not happen, so we are both working on shoestring budgets trying to maintain a forward progress and do so without having to file for bankruptcy or divorce. My wife is not interested in any of our discoveries or breakthroughs, as she says, "That doesn't pay the bills".

What I was looking at was this group's abilities and vast array of knowledge not ending as the book does. It seems that we all have come to seek something more, what I refer to is something greater than the sum of the parts.

Fred

[Mikado14]

And Mikado, does nature do things by brute force? Sometimes! But even a tornado is elegant. <g> Linda

Hello Ms Brown,

Now why am I not surprised that you answered in that way? I remember making a tornado machine for a High School science fair once upon a time. Now that I have you on the line, in a manner of speaking, I would venture to say that your Father was a curious sort but, if you could, or would share, who some or any of your Father's boyhood heros were if he had any?

Just curious but I have a nagging hunch.

Mikado

[natecull]

If you took a risk with hard cash that you worked for, aren't you entitled to get a ROI?

It's not a matter of entitlement, and I mean that with no disrespect to you or Linda or anyone else on this forum, and the sacrifices you've all made. It's just reality, in my opinion. I think that disruptive, 'known to be impossible' technologies simply *will not* be commercialisable in the ordinary way until extraordinary proof has been provided for our extraordinary claims, and that proof will not be believed until there has been free and wide sharing of implausible results. Even the results themselves will probably not be obtainable by any one researcher or even a large company or consortium; I think it will take an Internet-scale massive collaborative effort even to get beyond the 'giggle factor' attached to free energy or antigravity. In the 1940s, the US military-industrial complex was one option for this kind of funding; today, I think that door is closed and we have to look to the 'second superpower' instead.

Yes, it hurts to invest your own time and money in mind-blowing research you can't then sell. But whether you think this is fair or unfair, this is just how the universe seems to work. Look at what happened with Microsoft versus the commercial Unixes; they were divided, proprietary, secretive, MSFT ate them alive. Then comes Linux and the GPL, forcing bitter competitors to share information freely; a miracle occurs, Unix resurrects, and people selling Linux make money. Not all the money in the world, but enough to quietly get by.

The lesson I draw is that overthrowing an entrenched monopoly (and in unconventional physics we are opposing the toughest kind of monopoly, an entire scientific paradigm) requires adopting different tactics than the incumbent. The current physics lockdown is supported by commercial and military secrecy, bullying of investors by increasingly consolidated and narrow-minded venture capital, funding pressures and sneering dismissal applied to university researchers; to counter this we must mobilise a completely different support base, or we're outclassed before we begin.

Free dissemination of information does not mean that we can plagiarise other's research without due credit; both the open-source software community and the academic science community (from which the idea of 'free sharing of ideas' first originated) are *extremely* careful to document and attribute sources. But I think we must abandon the belief that by originating an idea we then *own* it, and have the right to deny its use to others. I don't think the universe will permit us to develop this technology on that basis. If you believe some of the 'spiritual' interpretations of the inspiration of Tesla and others, these ideas don't even come from us in the first place.

Should any of you succeed in commercialising your work in secret, I will of course be proved wrong. But I have a heavy heart when I see any researcher saying 'I'm going to keep this and sell it' without full disclosure, because that's usually the last thing anyone hears. Remember Steorn?

Do you realise why 'Lifters' have brought the name of T.T.Brown to the world, even if they don't exhibit the true vacuum effect? It's for one reason only: The device is freely replicable and easy to build.

There's only one way to win at this thing, IMO: Make plans for a kitset that millions of people can build in their garage, that does something obviously 'impossible'. Disavow all rights; make it public domain or some kind of copyleft or general public patent. Let the information travel far and fast, mutate rapidly, and create its own community. Individual inventors can be bought out, scared off, sued as a fraud, or otherwise silenced. And that's what's happened every time up to now. Those who go up against the big boys while playing by the big boys' rules, lose. But a mass movement of hobbyists armed with the freedom to replicate and innovate, though, can't be stopped.

Will you get rich that way? Maybe not. But you'll get *something* back; at the very least you'll get name recognition, like Linus Torvalds. If you invest all your time and money in a secret, private, commercial-rules venture, the odds are high that you'll wind up with *nothing at all*.

My apologies for the lecture; it seems this is a minority opinion here, and I'm quite possibly in the wrong. But this is something I have believed passionately ever since I encountered alternative physics twenty-odd years ago.

Best of luck to everyone, however you choose to conduct your research.

In short, I am referencing the building of materials, as well as electronic circuits, from the atomic and molecular level. And you probably haven't seen it on any of the forums is because a good majority of the invidviduals attempting to work with gravitics are doing it through the brute force method. Tell me, does nature do things by brute force?

Yes, I do know what nanotechnology is, or promises to be (the two are not the same). The problem I have is that the ultimate goal of nanotech, atomic assembling, is still a very long way away from our current capabilities (X-ray lithography, a few self-assembling organic compounds, and bacteria hacking), and whoever manages to produce a generalised atomic assembler will have something far, far more powerful than antigravity. Think a Star Trek replicator versus a Star Trek warp drive. It's actually the replicator which is the harder thing to think about.

So if you've invented one of those in your garage, in order to solve gravity control as a side effect... yeah, I'm impressed, and you can go directly to 'has won at life, the universe and everything'.

[Mikado14]

Yes, I do know what nanotechnology is, or promises to be (the two are not the same). The problem I have is that the ultimate goal of nanotech, atomic assembling, is still a very long way away from our current capabilities (X-ray lithography, a few self-assembling organic compounds, and bacteria hacking), and whoever manages to produce a generalised atomic assembler will have something far, far more powerful than antigravity. Think a Star Trek replicator versus a Star Trek warp drive. It's actually the replicator which is the harder thing to think about.

Here is what you originally said:

And the phrase 'nanotechnology' today means a wide variety of things from anti-graffiti paint to DLP chips in data projectors. None of which have had the slightest whisper of gravitics on any of the tech forums I frequent.

So let me get this correct, if YOU haven't seen it on another "gravitics" forum then it is bullscrap.

THIS IS AN EDIT!

I deleted my own self rightous, self aggrandizement diatribe. I don't need to do so for I can sit back and watch. Your understanding of established science is better than some but constipated in it's application for to understand where you wish to go, you have to know where you were. As I said a long time ago on this forum, I don't kick puppy dogs.

So if you've invented one of those in your garage, in order to solve gravity control as a side effect... yeah, I'm impressed, and you can go directly to 'has won at life, the universe and everything'.

Your sarcasm is noted, but try to do better, I am worth more scathing cuts than what you have posted. I feel short changed.

Mikado

[Linda Brown]

Nate:

You said

"There's only one way to win at this thing, IMO: Make plans for a kitset that millions of people can build in their garage, that does something obviously 'impossible'. Disavow all rights; make it public domain or some kind of copyleft or general public patent. Let the information travel far and fast, mutate rapidly, and create its own community. Individual inventors can be bought out, scared off, sued as a fraud, or otherwise silenced. And that's what's happened every time up to now. Those who go up against the big boys while playing by the big boys' rules, lose. But a mass movement of hobbyists armed with the freedom to replicate and innovate, though, can't be stopped."

Believe me, compared to trying to fight the big boys with their set of tools, this different set of tools and rules looks alot more appealing.

Paul, wasn't it Thomas Jefferson who developed the metal plow and then refused to patent it? He felt that it was too important a discovery and should be passed along. So this idea has merit of course. However .... jeffersons personal finances were in ruin during his declining years, which was sad and maybe could have been avoided.

Back to the development ....A kit? sold to individuals? It still would have to be an operation that would be fantastically coordinated and totally unexpected with no initial publicity at all.

But as I asked on my other thread. How does one maintain the secrecy that you would need to make a plan like this work? If it was a military project of course the whole thing could be classified and protected that way.

If you initially supplied these units to say fleet owners .... So .... have the engine compartment permanently sealed? Have an arrangement with the fleet drivers that they report once a week for " fueling and special maintenance". Maybe if the deal is so sweet certain fleet owners won't give a hoot what new development is under the hood as long as they get a really sweet deal on the rig ... and it does the job ... and their fuel costs ... disappear? Maybe thats worth signing a sort of special non disclosure contract? I am just talking about the initial entrance into the market. Once the tests have been run successfully then they would be allowed to simply buy the " Engine" to place in their other trucks. And thats all that the manufacturer and developer of the engine would be worried about producing, for sale to the general public.

A sort of magic box that just " attaches" to the frame of the car and then proceeds to take the car along with it? Now that would be interesting.

It wouldn't take people long though to get curious about what the heck was inside. You know ... the sort that shake their christmas presents to bits! What do you do with those?

Rambling, sorry. Good basis for a piece of fiction. Linda

[Mikado14]

Paul, wasn't it Thomas Jefferson who developed the metal plow and then refused to patent it? He felt that it was too important a discovery and should be passed along. So this idea has merit of course. However .... jeffersons personal finances were in ruin during his declining years, which was sad and maybe could have been avoided.

Ms. Brown, I believe you may be correct, however, it was the cast iron plow. John Deere invented what is called the self-scouring steel plow and he did it from a discarded saw blade, at least that is how the story goes.

Mikado

[Radomir]

As opposed to seeing both sides, which -- in memorium Morgan -- we would never stray to do, I would like to raise the concept of seeing and taking advantage of all facets of the situation.

Absolutely there needs to be the possibility for reasonable, just incomes to be made for effort expended, while bringing to fruition technology that stands to improve the situations of many. This has been termed a "social enterprise" or a "social benefit" business.

As well, once prototypes are available, yes a subversive tactic may be called for, and possibly a populist-guerrilla-viral approach might be just what the Dr. ordered to help promulgate the relevant TTB technologies to a user base who would adopt them like a four-slice toaster. Often I have been found saying that if the truly alternative energy source could be configured, we should ensure it could be fabricated from household items ranging from the hot iron to the microwave.

At the same time, one recognizes the spirit and dedicated approach of the early aviators, for instance. I believe there is plenty of historical evidence that even after the Wright brothers flew, much resistance and disbelief was accorded until the sight of airplanes became commonplace. But it took them and many others producing the basic components, assembling them, and then demonstrating (embodying the revolution) for others to catch the flame.

Let us not become too heated in our differences in approach. As mentioned in the past month, we are each as rocks on TTB's beach, resonating at different frequencies to what we are receiving. Every one is necessary and important in the overall project.

Excelsior. And I don't mean wood shavings.

R.

[FM No Static At All]

If you initially supplied these units to say fleet owners .... So .... have the engine compartment permanently sealed? Have an arrangement with the fleet drivers that they report once a week for " fueling and special maintenance". Maybe if the deal is so sweet certain fleet owners won't give a hoot what new development is under the hood as long as they get a really sweet deal on the rig ... and it does the job ... and their fuel costs ... disappear? Maybe thats worth signing a sort of special non disclosure contract? I am just talking about the initial entrance into the market. Once the tests have been run successfully then they would be allowed to simply buy the " Engine" to place in their other trucks. And thats all that the manufacturer and developer of the engine would be worried about producing, for sale to the general public.

I have been arguing that very same point for a year now. Electrolyzer to produce hydrogen fuel (and oxygen of course) from water and injected into the fuel injection system or carburetor. And I have the department of transportation as a fleet. I know at least one mechanic in the state maintenance yard, as well as a few in city and county governments. My idea is to supply each with one unit to demo and test for themselves without any hype. My only concern after thirty days of use is whether we can produce enough units for the demand.

Second idea is to use the same design as diesel locomotives, where the fuel engine runs at constant speed to spin a generator. The drive motor(s) are electric. In smaller vehicles we employ batteries and capacitors to provide storage. The more storage the less the fuel burner will have to generate power. With solar cells and wind turbines in the grill, along with regenerative braking that will reduce the necessity to burn fuel.

Both of these methods are intermediate steps to wean us off of our oil fixes, without going cold turkey. And once the drive trains are all electric, then we roll out phase two, to provide energy without burning fuels.

Fred

[greggvizza]

At the same time, one recognizes the spirit and dedicated approach of the early aviators, for instance. I believe there is plenty of historical evidence that even after the Wright brothers flew, much resistance and disbelief was accorded until the sight of airplanes became commonplace. But it took them and many others producing the basic components, assembling them, and then demonstrating (embodying the revolution) for others to catch the flame.

I couldn’t agree more. Stop all the worrying about public perception. Just build it and start using it.

GV

[Trickfox]

Great Scott!!!!
I just figured out where I can get way above 200 Kilovolts...In fact I can get 2.4 Gigawatts of power!!!!!


Yess 2.4 Gigawatts or more even......

During an experiment carried out in South Baldy Peak, New Mexico, European researchers using a high-power laser deliberately triggered electrical activity in two passing thunderstorms. Laser pulses created plasma filaments inside the clouds, through which electric current was discharged inside the clouds.

http://news.softpedia.com/news/Research ... 3301.shtml
Check it out:


Trickfox