This week I got off on the topic of “sub-quantum kinetics.” I’m not sure why. I have a hard enough time grasping “quantum” physics without resorting to “sub-quantum” physics. I mean, how does anything get any more “sub” than “quantum” ? Well, anyway, after Googling “subquantum kinetics” I arrived at the webiste or one Robert Neil Boyd, and discovered that Boyd has written a bit about both Brown, and everybody’s favorite mad genius, Nikola Tesla. I found this article of particular interest:
Link: A matter of Gravity.
The Money Quote: [Tesla realized] …that there were incoming aether flux “waves” that were arriving with unfailing regularity. …. This situation provided evidence that aether flux from interstellar space is not a constant and smooth value, but varies with time. He realized that the Earth, as a massive whole, was modulating parts of the aether flux. He discovered a large number of various periodicities within the aether fluxes. He found the sources of all these various flux rates had several causes.”
That sounds exactly like the “Sidereal Radiation” that Townsend Brown spent the better part of his life investigating, trying to measure and comprehend. So if Tesla made similar observations, albeit with different vocabulary, then perhaps they were both on to the same thing…??
35 thoughts on “Were Tesla and Brown On To the Same Thing?”
I just found this!
“It turns out that a NASA scientist named Jonathan Campbell has a lifter-style capacitor.(Electrogravitic device) He was even granted a patent in 2001.
“It had been theorized that thrust generation from this phenomenon was feasible, but no working prototypes had been developed, until now,” boasts the NASA press release. The patent set off an uproar in the lifter community, with hobbyists penning bitter denunciations of Campbell. Most lifter builders, it seems, regard their invention as a classic open source project – antigravity for the public good, jet packs for all!”
This is the most rediculous NASA story I have ever seen. Right hand obviously unaware of left hand’s existence here!!
Raymond, do you have the number on that patent. Seems to me I recall the uproar you’re speaking of here… that the patent you describe was actually a replication of the original TTBrown patent(s). Somebody somewhere remarked on how bizarre it was that the USPTO had issued a patent on long pre-existing technology. But now I can’t find the patent or that reference. –PS
Paul and Ray,
That is U.S. Patent No. 6,317,310, “Apparatus and Method for Generating Thrust Using a Two Dimensional, Asymmetrical Capacitor Module.”
The link to that patent is on the Townsend Brown Technology website at http://www.qualight.com/general/patents.htm in the “Other Inventors” section. I also have a number of other associated patent links there as well.
Jeez, I go away and off line for a few weeks and all heck breaks loose. So … Andrew … are you “Qualight” now? We have always counted on your excellent flow of information and hope that it won’t slow up.This is just a new look, right? Speaking of looks … I really appreciated your list of TTB patents. Noticed “Guidence Technology” listed. Is this the same outfit that used to be on 22nd street in Santa Monica in the late sixties? If so … what were they doing with Browns work? They were into satellite technology. I knew a woman who used to work there. Don’t remember her last name but …. Rusty? are you still out there? What was REALLY going on at GTI then? Where did they go? because I don’t think they are in existance anymore. Anybody know? And Paul …. whats Morgan doing NOW? Victoria
I appreciate your kind words. It’s always nice to know that others appreciate this particular interest. It’s been so much easier since Paul has taken over the historical aspect of Brown’s life as he is much more qualified – I tend to be biased towards the technological aspect. As information comes across my radar screen that I can share, I will always be updating the site.
We recently filed the paperwork to form an LLC. We originally started with The Townsend Brown Foundation, but after two filing run-arounds and negotiations with the Federal IRS, we realized that was a dead end. Then we tried the Townsend Brown Group, but that wasn’t much better than what we already had, which was a loosely organized group of interested parties. Since our lab and budget have grown recently, we decided that a more formal organization would be more effective and offer more opportunities.
The name Qualight originates from some work Brown was doing with gravitational waves in the optical frequencies. He called it quasi-light, but that didn’t sound right as a company name. After mulling over to many possible names, the name Qualight got stuck in my head.
Yes, Guidance Technology was on the corner of Cloverfield and 22nd Street in Santa Monica. I used to live near there actually. In any case, during the period Brown was working with them, he was supposedly working on the precipitator; however, looking back that doesn’t really appear to be the main thrust according to Brown’s family. I do know that Guidance Technology had government contracts and Bill Lear and General LeMay were frequent visitors. I apologize for the blanks, but I’m sure Paul will fill them in his time.
SANTA MONICA CALIFORNIA http://www.psychopropulseur.com/downloads/img/patentapp.pdf
The exact address in Santa Monica is in this patent application.
Victoria I have used several aspects of Brown’s original work in several of our projects, however be advised that the technology is MUCH MUCH more advanced these days. Hopefully as we begin to communicate, there will be more to share with all, but remember that we are not creating anything new here.
It’s just that NOW some of us are ready to deal with the consequences.
I have some “Intelligence Reports” that I can dig-up for people who are wondering how the Gov reacted to Brown.
I’ll be adding a new BRANE on the psychopropulsor.ca website. It will be exclusively taylored for conspiracy nuts.
IT,s the story of “DANGER MAN”. You will learn why there is so much controversy surrounding Brown.
Hello Paul … I have a response to Mr Tromprenard …Your comments are indeed interesting!And you are correct that there is an address listed for Townsend Browns patent application but that address was actually the “Embassy”…. a gracious apartment building on third street where Josephine, Townsend and their daughter Linda lived while working at Guidence Technology during 1967…(It is still there and very much the same as it was nearly forty years ago.) GTI was actually closer to the Santa Monica airport … on the other side of town. Thank you for calling that address to our attention … I had overlooked it, but darn … its not for GTI. Elizabeth Helen Drake
TESLA TO BROWN (Technology re-explored)
“Tesla Documents from Colorado Springs 1899-1900” These are from a Rare Yugoslavian published book (by the same name).
Also here is a drawing of Brown’s application for a “fluid control grid”. This device was later used in silent submarine propulsion. I’ve made a few of these over the years.
MORE TO COME LATER
Mr. Tromprenard … are you saying that you have knowledge of submarines using Browns system? Wouldn’t that be classified information?… ala … “Hunt for Red October” type technology? …. more and more interesting! Elizabeth Helen Drake
OK Now you guys have my attention too.
Raymond you make the comment that you have some “intelligence reports” available to you regarding Browns work. Are you able to name the agencies? … or are they private consulting groups? Have you worked with any security or intelligence agencies yourself? This is turning into a fasinating evening. Elizabeth …. I followed the Ionic Breeze trail. Good work. Mark
I have never actually seen the fluid propulsion systems, but I discussed this subject with another engineer, and we decided that despite the obvious salt-water conduction problem, it should be possible to construct some rather exotic fluid propulsion systems. The patent application specified that the “fluid Media” was “sound” in the drawing shown, however the idea was to taylor the usage to various fluid “dialectric properties” and determin if it could possibly produce enough thrusting force. Since our application had more to do with communication that propulsion, we had to reason to put any actual engineering into it. I suspect other researchers did come up with a working solution, so I’d say YES, the “hunt for Red October” made all of us scratch our heads when the movie came out.
Ray … so can you explain a little more about DANGERMAN. Curiosity here of course is running high. Elizabeth
Darn it I was hoping that I could avoid talking about my background too much, but it’s true there is some intelligence skullduggery in my past. (It’s an open sore for me).
The report I saw (and still have somewhere!) was conducted by Army CID (I think).
It was actually very complementing about T.T.Brown. It was more like “Let’s find out who this Brown fella is, and exactly how did he make this flying disc stuff work”(complete with math equations).
I wish I could remember the report more acurately however it’s been a decade since I even seen this loose group of papers. I’ll see if I can find photocopies here in a few days. When I do I’ll put it up on the Danger Man page.
The reason I obtained a copy is because someone had actually tried to reverse engineer the design for his high voltage supply to see if the power consumption and entropy figures balanced out to produce an actual “WORK” function. They did the math and it turned out to be inconclusive.
The work I did in the early 80s was more related to communications, so “work”, “thrust”, and “energy consumption” was less important to us than “signal to noise ratios” and “hardware operational bandwidth constraints”.
Aww,,… the good old days when I though I just had to cover my ears and keep my eyes and mouth shut like the three monkeys.
It’s all over. I’m in Dialysis three times a week for five hours at a time. I’m alive because of a machine and I will stay that way until my work is done and the “singularity” becomes “reality”.
I fear nothing as of this date. Please everyone do me a favor and let me tell my personnal experience with the spook world some OTHER time.
For now there are exciting new applications in nanotechnology to explore. let just MOVE-ON and let the past be.
Ray …. fair enough and understandable…. a question about the communications device then … is the application that you are working on along the lines of what called the “Big Unit” in one of Pauls earlier Chapters …. or are you perhaps on more exotic lines of research? Not that the electrokinetic apparatus wasn’t exotic enough in its time. Elizabeth
SORRY, I made a mistake
That last link was suppose to be http://www.singinst.org/kursweil.html
Gee, I guess I’ll have to read all about Paul’s chapters before making a comment.
I’d like to state for the record that several other scientists have since contributed much much more associated research results and everything was nicely combined to produce the next revolution we call the post-quantum communication revolution. This is scarry stuff if your not ready for prime time. I give it another 5 to 10 years before the public begins to understand how any of it could possibly work.
Paul ….Ray, Mark … Thanks so much for this line of discussion … I am folding my tent for tonight but look forward to more talks another time. So many mysteries …. so little time huh? Goodnight. Elizabeth
Bonne Nuit tous le monde.
Good Night to all.
Sleep is near.
I have a question for an issue that’s been on my mind for some time.
On the Qualight site in the Electrogravitation Setion, I have part of a preliminary patent document entitled “Electrogravitic Communication System (Section II)” assigned to Electro-Gravitics, Inc., Washington, D.C. by Townsend Brown in 1953.
I was reading a 2000 article at the Nexus Magazine site for an article entitled, “ParaSETI – ET Contact via Subtle Energies…” in which the author references “Brown, T. Townsend, “Electrogravitational Communication System”, US Patent No. 719,767, issued September 1956.”
The document is not in our or the Brown family archives, and a patent search links that patent number to a completely unrelated patent. It is the date of the supposed patent that intrigues me (1956) versus 1953 for the preliminary patent paper. I am pursuing the original author of the article, but perhaps one of you might be able to shed some light on this – whether it be imaginary disinformation or whether the patent does exist out there.
Also, I assume that the sister document “Electrogravitic Communication System (Section I) exists somewhere in someone’s filing cabinet.
Well well well… serves me right for taking a couple of hours to watch fictional espionage on the TeeVee last night (“24”) when I’ve got some vestiges of the real thing going on right under my nose here.
I’m a bit reluctant to continue this business in this particular space. Comment strings like this tend to stack up in the right column of the site and push other recent comments out of view. I kinda figured that this kind of dialog might be better exchanged in the “forums” section of the site
… but those forums have been rather dormant of late and not all that constructive when they’ve been used in the past.
I’ve created a new “extended website discussion” forum with the idea that threads like this might be better conducted there, but I’m not sure how we’d switch from one space to the other once something like this gets started.
Anyway, I’m looking at all this and would appreciate any comments any body has to offer on how best to accommodate this kind of dialog.
Regardless of how it’s handled, I’m very pleased to see it happening.
Well, Here is a webpage that starts to make more sense to me.
Puthoff is mentioned in it. Harold Puthoff is considerend to be a respectable contemporary peer by many of us who continued to worked on advancements in Brown’s “communication” technology from 1982 on. I encourage everyone to look over Harry’s work carefully. He’s very good and I certainly wish I could help him, -even today.
Back then (late 70s early 80s) Dr.Keith Harary worked together with Puthoff at a firm called “Delphi Associates” and I remember that there was some discussion about them possibly surpassing our efforts in the advanced communication project we were working on at the time.
At around the same time, we were trying to set up a meeting with T.T. Brown on Catalina island. I think we were unable to so because of Brown’s health problems.
What strikes me as odd, is the fact that several independant researchers had managed to approach this type of science from several angles, and several shadowy government types kept tabs on most everyone, however they (government)never bothered uniting anyone who did independant research.
They just grabbed a lot of the math formulas from their “inside sources” and dissapeared without leaving as much as a Thank you.
It happend to one of our founding organizations- a company called “Interprobe” located in Chicago. This was during contract negotiations for a military application of an exotic “weld cooling technique” for special aircraft wing-pin joints. We showed them, and they just copied us then claimed that they had originated the technology by themselves.
I have a copy of a non-disclosure agreement signed by an Air force official who ended up stealing the technology to help build the next generation aircraft hardware.
There is just no end to shamefull events surrounding the actions of SOME self described military representatives whom we dealt with in the past. We could not even contemplate trying to take them on legally without spending millions in attorney fees.
Sorry, I guess I’m just bitter with the way everything turned out. Many of my friends have suffered and continue to be prosecuted over all of this.
Paul … we will switch over to the forum, but patience with me ….. right now I have a comment for Ray.
Very interesting post. Have you had a chance to read Pauls “Chapter 4 …. How many Generals Does It Take?”. You will notice the same kind of activity and disappointment that you mentioned. I have learned while researching to take note of the words “odd” and in Townsend Browns case “anomalous” …..(like finding the odd situation of a turtle on a fence post. It usually makes for an interesting investigation.) Note that Linda Brown used that phrase in that Chapter …. that she found it “odd” the way that the RAND officials reacted to their demonstration of the fan. I submit that much the same forces were at work that you described…. but now I have a question for you … in your case …. WHY do you think that no attempt at unification is made? I would be interested to hear your viewpoint ….Have you had a chance to take a look at the Forum section? Tell me if you think it might work to move our discussion to that framework …. (as well as anyone else who would like to join us and chime in ….it might work better for us ….) Your turn .. Elizabeth
Hello Paul …. I tried to get on to the forum but kept hitting “Site Not Found” so I gave up. Willing to go that route no problem … or would a “running comments” section work …. where, we could just sort of “talk amongst ourselves” one message just adding on to the next?
Speaking of that … I wanted to ask Raymond about Hal Puthoff …. I associate him with his “remote viewing” project but you associated him with a “communications device” of some sort? Can you tell me a little more about that?. Are you familiar at all with remote viewers or with that program? Did you ever associate Townsend Brown with that project or was his involvement with Hal Puthoff entirely different? Mark
Paul, do you remember what I said when I sent you a private e-mail?.
I said “I don’t even have to read too much on your website to understand what’s going on”
Now, I know for sure that I’m PROBABLY GOING TO BE UPSET ALL OVER AGAIN about this.
I’ve got to spend the rest of today reading over the whole book you wrote because THIS IS JUST TOO WEIRD.
Let me tell you about the two demonstrations we performed at the University of Colorado in March 2001.
Take a look!!
We demonstrated “a fan with no moving parts”
SOUNDS FAMILIAR DON’T IT?
That was just a warm up to the more important “cooling” experiment in which we managed to cool the center of a light bulb filament while it remained lit on both sides of the area being quenched.
REMEMBER we did this THROUGH A GLASS LIGHT BULB in which THE AIR HAS BEEN EVACUATED.(so much for the “ion wind cooling effect” right!).
Some science experts that we demonstrated this to just scratched their heads and said “well that’s impossible”.
HERE IS A PHOTO OF THE ACTUAL EXPERIMENT UNDER WAY.
Does any of this sound familiar to anyone else here????
Here is a photo of the METC we used in both experiments.
http://www.psychopropulseur.com/downloads/img/power supply_Green copy.jpg
An METC unit (Modular Energy Transfer Catalyzer) is a DC high voltage power supply which has specialized pulse width modulation control inputs, and a precision current feedback loop control circuit built in.
It’s the “electronic control circuitry” which is connected EXTERNALLY to the METC unit that performs all the “magic”.
Here is a “Building plan” of the HV probe we used to perform the light bulb experiment with:
This whole demonstration was just a method devised to stump those scientists who “THOUGHT” they knew what was going on with the physics of an “ion wind generator” ala “sharper image”(what a joke).
There was NO AIR in the light bulb, so HOW COULD AN ION WIND COOL ANYTHING inside an evacuated bulb???
As far as I can tell, The Scientist we demonstrated this experiment to was suppose to report to our prospective funding source, however, he looked “way to busy” and “uninterested in our demonstration”, and he remained unimpressed with it.(a real shame I might add)
We never got a chance to write up the math behind it all because he was in “too much of a rush to grade his students”.
I’d like to invite ANYONE to try and figure out how we quenched part of the lit filament THROUGH the light bulb using our probe and the METC unit!!!!!!
Obviously, some people were NOT impressed with what we did!!!
Are there any similarities to other stories here???
Yes I am also familliar with Puthoff’s work in Remote viewing (RV), but all of that “RV” stuff is really unimportant to anyone who is serious, and in reality Puthoff has been trying to discover and explain the “communication theory” which could explain how RV actually works.
This phenomena is now known as “LINK THEORY” or “link physics” and serious research has been performed by several other Phd scholars (including our little group)
For a primmer see http://www.boundaryinstitute.org/articles/Link_Physics_in_a_Nutshell.pdf
Hal Puthoff IS NOW considered to be one of a few select pioneers in this field.
RV and Link theory is ABOUT HOW SUPERSPACIAL COMMUNICATIONS can possibly function.
John Nash (a beautiful mind) was also a key source of knowledge,and suffice it to say that many of us (including myself) have suffered the “Nash syndrome” (subliminal messages from unknown sources).
Now we believe that we understand how the “connectivity” functions. (superspacial time loops in Clifford Space)
The math is sometimes reffered to as “Random Associative Symbolic Processing”.
Those of you who are bold enough to try and understand the math should read and understand one of the chapters (page 60)in the book “Stochastic Analysis on Infinite Dimensional Spaces” (ISBN 0-582-24490-0)
By the way I have collected ALL of Claude Shannon’s work on this. There is 500 lbs of documentation (raw Data) in my living room (not including the books). I am OBSESSED with this, and I have found myself thinking about VERY STRANGE visions in the middle of the night on several occasions. (Nash syndrome)
I don’t yet completely grasp all of the math in this book myself so please be patient with me OK???
My mentor (MJR) is partially responsible for introducing me into this field in 1983. He (MJR)was himself mentored by Nobel Laureate Dr. Arthur L. Shalow.
(MJR)is the infamous “Dangerman”. I’ll explain more about this in the future.
This is a long complex conspiracy story that many have refused to believe.
Well I LIVED IT MYSELF. It’s an open wound as far as I’m concerned.
Darned I messed up one of the links:
The METC unit is here:
Nod good morning to Paul ….. comment on Rays latest …. are you so sure Ray … that the individuals you demonstrated your equipment to were actually disinterested?. You already know the answer to that…. and wierd? You have just begun on this trip! Townsend Browns daughter invites you personally to step on this trail with us …your views and experience are valued…. as are all the other comments we have recieved from inspired readers.
Now to shift the topic and join with Marks question … what do you know about the Remote Viewing program sponsored by Hal Puthoff at SRI? Or should I even ask? Elizabeth
Ray … our messages are crossing in the ether …. (now if ever an inside joke) ….Thank you for the response on Remote Viewers … yes … the bottom line is …. just HOW … does that work ….. Paul has learned that in his journals and to his family Townsend Brown is quoted as saying that he had “discovered the nervous system of the Universe” ……. but the most important element to that statement is his belief that it is an INTELLIGENT nervous system … and we are all part of it. (Or …. we hope that we can eventually become part the intelligent part of it! ) More later? …. your lead. Elizabeth
I cried several minutes during the movie “A beautiful mind” The life story of John Nash.
-It’s the obsessive desire to understand “seemingly random information”.
-The little papers stuck everywhere in the room.
-The strings linking one item to another.
-The feeling that something or someone is trying to communicate with me (Nash Syndrome)
I broke down in tears as I realized I TOO AM NOW LIVING THIS!!!
I am in tear right now as I remember all the sleepless nights when I yelled out loud in my empty room……
-“WHAT IS IT”
-“What is going ON”
-“I have the right to know”
Some days I just got drunk to fall asleep instead of laying there going over first order logical equations in my head.(Prolegomena to Cardinal Arithmetic, Principia Mathematica, Russell and Whitehead, Pg 62)
I have a hard time talking about this stuff.
But then, NOW I’m begining to understand.
It’s not going to be easy to explain.
Darn, I made another mistake:
“Prolegomena To Cardinal Arithmetic” is a chapter in Pincipia Mathematica by Russell and Whitehead. It’s on page 362 (not 62)
Raymond ….Its all right ….We are familiar with information flow problems around here. Take a deep breath. All will be well. Elizabeth
OK!!!! thanks Elizabeth.
I’m having a bit of my usual angina pain, so I’ll take my medicine, go for a WALK, and relax a bit.
I’m a little fragile because of Dialisys and all the problems associated with “living on a machine”.
I’m not complaining, just happy to be alive
I’ll check back later tonight.
Raymond T wrote:
>>>>-It’s the obsessive desire to understand “seemingly random information”.
-The little papers stuck everywhere in the room.
-The strings linking one item to another.
-The feeling that something or someone is trying to communicate with me (Nash Syndrome)<<< Gee, doesn't that sound like a day in MY life, too. There are days I wonder if I'm handling it any better than Nash. I take Sundays pretty much off to give my brain a chance to recharge. So, I'll see you all next week, and, really, we need to take this to the forums: http://forum.ttbrown.com/
Does that link not work for everybody?
I have just posted a couple of messages on the forum side that Paul just mentioned and I invite others who would like to talk a little more to switch over there with me …
Ray especially … there is much more to discuss …..Hope you are feeling better. Elizabeth
OK, this has been a _very_ interesting discussion, and I’m loathe to do anything to truncate it, but it appears that most of the people engaged in this thread have found their way over to the forums:
So I am going to “close” the comments section of this original post.
I realize there are still some bugs in the forums, specifically the log-in issue, but my crack tech-support team is working on that and we should have a solution momentarily. So, I’ll see you all in the forums…
Comments are closed.