The Parallel Universe

Well what do we have hear?
Someone organized a DANCE and picnic and did not tell me?
Mind if I crash the party?

Today I learned a very valuable lesson.
I once thought that having kilovolts x amperage=wattage was good enough,
especially if the wattage was high.

BOY WAS I WRONG!
In the 1929 issue of Science and Invention magazine, Mr. Brown states that applied amperage is only sufficient to overcome leakage and maintain the required voltage through the losses of the dielectric.
I must have read that article a ka-trillion times. I even owned an original at one time, many moons ago.
Have I forgotten my lessons or what?
Back around 1994 or so, I was experimenting with a power supply that had a constant output of 100kvdc at around 2mA.
That's 200 watts.
This power supply was strong enough to rotate (2) 6 inch hollow, plastic hvac diffusers around its multiplier stack at a very good speed.
Talk about being impressed. So I always knew that more power would equal more thrust.
Now, some 18 years later, I try the same experiment with a variable 50kv / 1-5mA output.
That's 250 watts. An increase over the first experiment of 50 watts.
Guess what happened?
Come on, say it together....
ZILCH, ZERO, NADA, NOTHING!
Not even a slight swaying so that I could do the cha-cha (you know how much I like the ch-cha).
So, what have we learned boys and girls?
Two things I hope if nothing else.
#1. This is the important one to me, trust what Mr. Brown tried to teach.
Doubt not or you will be sorry, regret it and later, remember he tried to tell you.
#2. More amperage does not equate to more thrust.
Say it together... "It's the voltage, stupid".
That plus the mass. But then again, we all knew that, didn't we?
Didn't we?
So, 250kv@1-2 milliamps is better than 100kv@5 milliamps?
Oh wait, I think I just heard the school bell ring.
I don't want to be late, Professor Brown is teaching today and he promises some jaw dropping results!
Gotta go......................
Mark

Mark,

What did you do with your 100kV supply?

One thing to note with these capacitor type devices. Current flow is not determined so much by the supply, but by the leakage of the capacitor. You could have a 1000 Amp supply and if you hooked it to a disk, the current flow would still only be 1mA or so. Voltage is determined by the supply, but the current flow is determined by the load.

The wattage does not increase with the supplies capabilities.

GV

As the immortal tv star Benny Hill would say,
"Learning all the time, learning all the time".
My 100kv power supply went into the aether I suppose, doing one of my many past moves over the years.
So, what you are saying is that if I can stop leakage I may obtain movement, even with 50kv@1-5mA?
And please, one more time, explain to me why I suffered leakage this time and not during the first time with the 100kv
power supply.
Or, tell me why leakage may not have mattered with the 100kv.
I think I see what you are saying, but what with all the corona/ozone/ hissing, I'm not 100% sure.
Assistance would be appreciated I assure you!
Mark

MARK MOODY wrote: #2. More amperage does not equate to more thrust.
Say it together... "It's the voltage, stupid".
That plus the mass. But then again, we all knew that, didn't we?
Didn't we?
So, 250kv@1-2 milliamps is better than 100kv@5 milliamps?
Oh wait, I think I just heard the school bell ring.

Hello Mr. Moody,

Now, before you run off into the building to get back to class remember this, there will be distinct ratios, some direct and some indirect in regard to the operating characteristics of a disc. You are correct, the higher applied voltage will increase the thrust on a GIVEN disc. If you change any characteristics of the disc, you will again change operational characteristics. For instance, as a rule, increase the disc area but maintaining other parameters will result in the need for a higher voltage proportionate to the original size to achieve the same thrust....horizontally. As for mass...I would say weight more in this instance. If you increase the distance between the electrodes on a disc you should find that the result will be a logarithmic decrease in the net thrust.

Mikado

MARK MOODY wrote:So, what you are saying is that if I can stop leakage I may obtain movement, even with 50kv@1-5mA?

Not what I was saying.

I was saying leakage determines current flow. If there is no leakage there is no current flow. If there is no current flow then there is no wattage. The only time that the current capabilities of your supply matters is if the amount of leakage tries to draw more current than the supply is capable of. In this case the voltage would drop.

Lets say that you had a 50kV supply rated at 2mA. If your load tried to draw 4mA the supply voltage would drop. If you had a 50kV supply rated at 6ma and your load drew 4mA then the voltage would remain at 50kV.

GV

Question,
If the push-pull effect works horizontally, would not it work also vertically?
MM

MARK MOODY wrote:Question,
If the push-pull effect works horizontally, would not it work also vertically?
MM

Uhhhh, Mr Moody, what do you mean by the term "push-pull"?

Mikado

Mikado, like shown in Mr.Brown's notebook.
There was a picture of horizontal motion being created by
-/+/- charge on a disc shape device.
Mark

Seems to me go big or don't go at all.

http://users.erols.com/iri/TTBROWN2.htm

The important fact from that book is that the DC power supply went up to 250 kV, with a substantial force being displayed starting around 150 kV.

Do we know how massive his gravitators were? How about the one in the 12 ft boat? Probably not table top models.
More mass more better!

It’s equally compelling to note that the 1929 article in Science and Invention, “How I
Control Gravitation,” includes not one but two potential nautical applications of the
gravitator. There is the rather elegantly tapered “model gravitator boat 12 feet long” in
one illustration, and a somewhat bulkier “model commercial gravitator for marine use”
that is sometimes referred to as the “gravitator barge.”

skyfish

In the published report, "The Gravitics Situation", mention is made of novel ways to turn capacitors inside-out.
Just wondering if the Paris experiments that show capacitors encased in plexiglass could be thought of as such?
Anyone know the dimensions/weight of those devices?
Also, since Mr. Brown and Bahnson were experimenting with different designs of an Adamski craft, including designing the central pylon, I wonder if a gravitor oriented vertically could have worked if constucted properly.
The Mark Cavendish craft shows alternating layers of material placed in the floorboards, so to speak.
Would not a central pole of alternating layers also suffice for a proof of concept?
Or, perhaps the central pole could be designed to encase a Cockcroft-Walton voltage multiplier?
Someone please help me with the rough math.
A six foot encased multiplier, could be expected to produce how much voltage?
Would the weight of such a device matter considering the voltage output?
Two more things.
Would a six foot operating gravitor be cool to the touch?
And just to mention displacement.
Could there be a way to cause displacement in a material to be permanent or always in the "on" mode?
MM