NOTEPAD for RANDOM IDEAS

[Linda Brown]

The notebooks from Townsend Browns work begin again in 1967, after that nine year lapse. There are seven of these original notebooks. One, Two and I believe 4 have been copied and are available on the Internet. The other notebooks I hold. And that is not at all taking into consideration the other "black " notebooks that were kept during that nine year period and I think continued parallel to the other notebooks which I have. Before you ask where the second set of notebooks are, at one time Morgan said they were " somewhere safe"... and I believe that they are.

People have speculated that my Dad had "handed off work" that was then classified.

Certainly he " handed off the work on the fan precipitator to a person he hoped would continue with it. And they did, ( licensing finally to Smarter Image for the development of what was called the Ionic Breeze") though it took them several years to get that done, long after Dad had passed away.

Perhaps thats part of what you are feeling. The discouragement that( even with the material right in front of them) it still took so long. He was no longer interested in the fan precipitator but did want to see it out there so you can see why he might be frustrated .

And of course the frustration probably passed on to me. I was not interested in any financial reward but I was upset with them for not noting who the original inventor of the device was instead of having to listen to the line that " Sharper Image" had developed it in their own laboratory. Dad did tell them when he handed it off that " if you can get the ozone problem solved , you might have something here". A bit of irony in the fact that the ozone problem was something that Sharper Image apparently was never able to properly control.... for all of their credit grabbing, they couldn't even design their way out of that one. OK , done with the sour grapes!

So don't be too upset if it looks like he was discouraged and upset. It was a phase I believe and you just haven't enough information and can't read enough at this point to see the entire picture. Linda

[Mikado14]

Different patterns of movement cause the aether or space to manifest as time, gravity, magnetism, yodeling Austrians, etc.

Structure of Space.

Geometry, patterns, alignments...

Let us again think of chapter 48.

In the moment that he watched her do that — handing the stack of postcards to the clerk, their warped surfaces overlapping like rippled sheets of corrugated steel, it suddenly occurred to him that the Universe was formed just like that wavy stack of cards, one on top of the other; that the surfaces all had connections with each other, and that to describe one of those cards would describe the whole….

Now consider the whole quote from a slightly different point of view. The wavy stack of cards! Emphasis is on the wavy.

Think of how your crumple a piece of paper. First it's completely straight and flat and then your apply force.

Space as a piece of paper crumpled into special geometrical patterns through a force caused by the difference in potential between high K, high mu and low K, low mu areas.

The only difference here is that there are no hands from outside crumpling the paper, but it is the force INHERENT in the paper itself.

And what if this crumpling is a constant, dynamic movement?

AM

P. S. What is easier: teaching a raccoon basic Chinese or making him sing the Hank Williams classic "I saw the light"?

P. P. S. Mr. Mikado, I am still pondering the special diode and the triangle. It has just been a busy week - feeding giant centipedes and watching them spin their plates, etc., well, business as usual. Now we have a whole herd of them and they are getting bigger and fatter every day.

Actually, you ARE pondering very well, at least when it comes to the triangle. States.

Mikado

[Mark Culpepper]

After reading that second part of Journal #2 I have to disagree with you Nate that he was " trying to pick up threads" and that somehow the propulsion work had gone unrecognized. In 1958 He was talking about propulsion systems. Looks like in 1967 he is talking then about the fan. And then in #4 he doesn't mention either of the earlier work and is obviously fascinated by his work in Hawaii and with rocks and reading his " sensors" ( look at the location listed and follow some of the comments. He was trying to figure alot of things but none of them looked like the previous work. Does that mean that the previous stuff didn't " pan out". Not necesasarily. He was just done with that I think and moving onward.

" And then, looking at his later notes from Avalon, it has this rather sad air to it, picking up threads after a nine-year gap, as if the previous propulsion research didn't actually fly, or wasn't convincing enough somehow. It seems to be back to basic research and hypothesising again, with little support from previous work."

Maybe your interpretation is right. But I have a hunch that my interpretation of his attitude is every bit as valid. Old stuff to him was old stuff I think. MarkC

[Griffin]

AM-

YOU WROTE:
P. S. What is easier: teaching a raccoon basic Chinese or making him sing the Hank Williams classic "I saw the light"?

COMMENT:
How about teaching him or her to sing that song in Chinese? Learning a song in a foreign language is often easier. A female might well do better anyway. Remember the women!

Griffin

[twigsnapper]

I see that you are on the forum tonight Longboardlovely. So what do you think of this particular discussion? We need the feminine viewpoint here

Oh, too late. Gone I guess.

If I was going to say something regarding animals and songs and things I would be forced to mangle a recent Robin Williams quote ( he premangles them anyway so I don't think he would mind.)

"Things take on different meanings I think when you have been living near Moscow. You suddenly realize that " Midnight Train to Georgia" might have a whole different meaning to some folk." twigsnapper

[LongboardLOVELY]

Good Evening fellas,

I'm still around... Let me chew on the most recent posts for a minute and I'll be right back...

LBL

Ok, I'm back...

AM - I would pay some money to hear any animal sing any song in Chinese... I think my choice would be to teach a giraffe....
Do I think it could be done? I don't know, ask your professors.

Griffin -

COMMENT:
How about teaching him or her to sing that song in Chinese? Learning a song in a foreign language is often easier. A female might well do better anyway. Remember the women!

YES YES !! Definitely remember the women...! I wish I could have known Pearl Cornioley. I have a newspaper clipping of her that Andrew gave me.

I have heard that women learn foreign languages faster... is it because they use more of the right side of their brain? I think women have been programmed to think more abstractly and creatively than their counterparts...

When I was in Colombia, SA (the year before I met Andrew), I picked up on an Indian dialect more quickly than my colleague... I have always loved languages.

Though I agree somewhat w/ Mr. Twigsnapper ~ translating an English song into Chinese, the meaning of words and idioms would just not be the same. Don't you agree, AM?

** When Chevrolet took their Nova to Mexico, the product line did not sell at all. That is because Nova in Spanish means "It doesn't go" !!! **

And, Mr Twigsnapper,
I am glad you are doing better! Especially enough to find humor and irony in a Gladys Knight song.
I suppose the same could be said about "Georgia On My Mind"?
Drink more tea, sir, but don't forget the Vitamin C.

LongboardLOVELY

[natecull]

Certainly he " handed off the work on the fan precipitator to a person he hoped would continue with it. And they did, ( licensing finally to Smarter Image for the development of what was called the Ionic Breeze") though it took them several years to get that done, long after Dad had passed away.

And even then it seems like they never solved the ozone problem. I wonder if anyone at Sharper Image even understood that there might be non-conventional electrical physics involved in such a seemingly mundane product?

Perhaps thats part of what you are feeling. The discouragement that( even with the material right in front of them) ... it still took so long. He was no longer interested in the fan precipitator but did want to see it out there so you can see why he might be frustrated .

Yes, I suppose. I guess I'm going mainly by this:

Page 30 90. Tribo-Excitation of Sands and Clays In reviewing Record Book No. 1, I am impressed with the amount of thought I gave during the years 1955 and 1956 to the hypothesis of gravitationally anomalous materials and the methods by which these materials were (in nature) produced. Considerable thought was given to methods for artificially producing lighter-than-normal materials. In those days, such thoughts were rank heresy in respectable scientific circles and this is still the case today, although there are some researchers who tend to question some of the long-established postulates. One of these, of course, is the postulate of equivalence, accepted by Einstein and other leading theorists. Now there seems to be some question. The original Oetvos experiments equating gravitational mass to inertial mass have been repeated by Dicke to an accuracy of 1 x 10-11, seeming to confirm the equivalence. I firmly believe, however, that equivalence exists only when weak fields are present or utilized in the experiment. Strong fields would, I believe, show non-equivalence. Hence, the experiment described on page 40 of Record Book No. 1, entitled Centrifugal Differential Hydrometry might produce materials whose gravitational mass differed greatly from their inertial mass. This experiment certainly should be performed without further delay (it has already been 17 years! --- Inexcusable neglect)

I am quite confused by this note.

It was my impression, correct me if I'm wrong, that Dr Brown's notes around 1958 are all based on the assumption that a difference between gravitational and inertial mass had been demonstrated, and that the propulsion applications described during that research phase were about building devices out of such 'gravitational isotopes' and then 'charging' them via various techniques.

But if the initial experiment to prove the existence of such isotopes had never been done in the first place... then none of those test saucers (or presumably any later ones) could have been built from them. So very few of the techniques described in the 1958 notes could have actually been tried.

So what was going on in 1958, if it wasn't along the lines sketched out in those notes?

[Linda Brown]

Nate,

You bring up a VERY good point. The only suggestion I have is for all of us to read those words extremely carefully.

"Considerable thought was given to methods for artificially producing lighter-than-normal materials. In those days, such thoughts were rank heresy in respectable scientific circles and this is still the case today, although there are some researchers who tend to question some of the long-established postulates"

One wonders who he is talking about when he says .... "although there are some researchers who tend to question"

"I firmly believe, however, that equivalence exists only when weak fields are present or utilized in the experiment. Strong fields would, I believe, show non-equivalence. Hence, the experiment described on page 40 of Record Book No. 1, entitled Centrifugal Differential Hydrometry might produce materials whose gravitational mass differed greatly from their inertial mass. This experiment certainly should be performed without further delay"

And the last comment about 17 years being inexcusable neglect, I just wonder what he would say now, 50 years later.

As to what he was drawn into in 1958. Morgan left that clue when he spoke to Paul about Dr. Brown being " drawn into" the organization "I now call home." I am paraphrasing here and forgive me, I don't exactly know where that quote is. When I find it I will edit it in for you ...... but I agree with you. What was going on at the end of 1958?

Nate, you continued by saying this :" It was my impression, correct me if I'm wrong, that Dr Brown's notes around 1958 are all based on the assumption that a difference between gravitational and inertial mass had been demonstrated."

Nate, do you know where that reference to " demonstration" has been made? Help me see what you are seeing, or not seeing here, please. Its pretty important I think to understand this point and to have others think about this too. Thanks so much for bringing it up. Linda

[natecull]

So don't be too upset if it looks like he was discouraged and upset. It was a phase I believe and you just haven't enough information and can't read enough at this point to see the entire picture. Linda

I don't know if you've ever played any of the 'Myst' games, but some of these journals (like #4) feel very much like Atrus' journals from those games...

(Myst is all about the strange electrical-mechanical devices and power stations, along with notebooks of scientific observations. Half the fun in those games is trying to play scientist, as well as archeologist/sociologist. And it usually comes down to collecting rocks.)

[Linda Brown]

It strikes me that the "Myst" topic was brought up a long time ago. I vaguely remember reading about it but I am really sorry I don't really know that much about it. I just take it now as sort of our own particular brand of " cosmic haha" which I am sure you have been noticing also!

I suppose if we googled "Myst" on the site that those references might come up ... or was that even before the official forum when things were still in the " comments" section. Boy ... that was outgrown fast.

I know I have seen that reference but I just can't remember where. Collecting journals? Perhaps thats something that will someday happen here too.

Dad collected enough rocks for all of us. One of them, with the sensor tabs still attached to it .... is half buried in the concrete of a large shop that my husband and I have. I thought about it the other day and ( may sound silly) wondered if it was alright being there like that. At the time putting it there as the cornerstone was sort of a whim. You know , how you put your initials in fresh concrete to mark the moment. And it was just there. Now I am hoping that it doesn't mind. Silly thought perhaps but still flitted across my brain. Many of the other rocks I returned to the places he had collected them. Again, another sort of strange compulsion. Sort of ... "thank you for the time you have spent with us" ..... I don't know what I will eventually do with my cornerstone rock. Linda

[natecull]

"Considerable thought was given to methods for artificially producing lighter-than-normal materials. In those days, such thoughts were rank heresy in respectable scientific circles and this is still the case today, although there are some researchers who tend to question some of the long-established postulates"

One wonders who he is talking about when he says .... "although there are some researchers who tend to question"

Indeed. I've become aware of quite a few 'dissenting' physicists in recent years due to the Internet - but in 1973, who would there have been? Hmm.

Nate, you continued by saying this :" It was my impression, correct me if I'm wrong, that Dr Brown's notes around 1958 are all based on the assumption that a difference between gravitational and inertial mass had been demonstrated."

Nate, do you know where that reference to " demonstration" has been made? Help me see what you are seeing, or not seeing here, please. Its pretty important I think to understand this point and to have others think about this too. Thanks so much for bringing it up. Linda

'Demonstrated' is my word, I'm not sure it's in the notes. I guess what I am referring to is that it seems that a large number of the notes from the 1950s refer to either 'gravitational isotopes' or 'beneficiation' or 'G-I ratio' or 'Mg/Mi' or other references to substances having a differing 'gravitational mass' to 'inertial mass' ratio. Any such reference would mean that this note is based on an assumption that such ratios and substances exist (and are used in the experiments).

But since no experiment had ever been done (up to 1973) to obtain such substances, then presumably all such notes containing these phrases would be theoretical speculation, not descriptions of lab results.

This seems to be the first mention of the experiment he later refers to:

16. Beneficiation by Differential Centrifugal Action Leesburg, VA, Feb. 4, 1956. As described in the project submitted to DuPont, one method of beneficiating light gravitational isotopes is the centrifugal action upon materials floating in heavy liquids. To go into detail, the following may be said: To beneficiate kaolinite (aluminum silicate, density 2.5), the finely ground material is floated upon an aqueous solution of thallium malonate-thallium formate adjusted to approx. 3.0 density (sp. gr.). In a gravitational field, the material floats on the surface of the liquid, but in a strong centrifugal "field", the aluminum silicate particles having a low g/i ratio will sink. If the settlings are fixed, either by freezing or compaction, they may be removed en masse after the centrifuge has stopped.

I assume from his later reference that whatever the 'project submitted to DuPont', it was not followed through.

However, on rereading, I think I was actually mistaken to think that this focus carries through the 1958 'saucer' testing. There are indeed at least two streams of ideas: the notes from 1956-1957, focused on 'gravitational isotopes' and the notes from 1958 focused on capacitors and dielectrics (and the theory of 'dielectricity'). The two streams are not necessarily dependent on each other.

Presumably this is why there is a lot more interest in 'charged capacitors' in the 'antigravity underground', because they're easier to get hold of than 'gravitational isotopes' which may or may not exist (though those 'sensor rocks' from Honolulu sound interesting).

So it is perhaps entirely possible to think that there was an offshoot of technology based on the (simpler) approach of just flinging volts at high-K dielectrics, rather than finding exotic rocks... hmm.

[Linda Brown]

Looking back to 1956 and that note that you found is interesting to me because at the time I was just a kid much more interested in riding that fat pony around than paying attention to what Dad was doing in the lab. And of course what he discussed with me was filtered to meet my time and space.

I do know however that in 1956 while we were living out in Virginia horse country Dad was spending most of his working with Dr. Sarbacher. Now if you have done any in depth study of that individual ( as Paul and some others have done) it was always mentioned in the Washington circles that he had a LAB which was running various tests . It was eventually called the " Washington Institute of Technology". (I remembered that name particularly because in the 60s when they were back together again my Mother made a passing comment about WIT. ( At least its not "Half" and Daddy smiled and responded smiling " or NIT" ) . But in any case , Dr. Sarbacher brought my Dad out to the country on the times that he could get away .... and sometimes was there to pick him up. So ... if a little kids memory means anything I can put those two together and now, thanks to you, here is a note of something that they may have been testing at Sarbachers lab. Maybe what Dad was doing before , or immediately after his trip to Paris that year.

(Its fun seeing what the forum has already said about Sarbacher . Just google the name on the inforum Google and you will see what I mean. Dr. Sarbacher weaves through this entire story like a golden needle and thread.)

You are right though. When he got home from the Paris trips Dads focus seemed to change entirely. He came home, visited with us for just a couple of hours and then drove away ...thats where the title " Missing Daddy comes from" because I didn't see him again then for about a year!

Puzzles, puzzles, puzzles. Thanks for the company! Goodnight Nate. Linda

[greggvizza]

Dad collected enough rocks for all of us. One of them, with the sensor tabs still attached to it .... is half buried in the concrete of a large shop that my husband and I have. I thought about it the other day and ( may sound silly) wondered if it was alright being there like that. At the time putting it there as the cornerstone was sort of a whim. You know , how you put your initials in fresh concrete to mark the moment. And it was just there. Now I am hoping that it doesn't mind. Silly thought perhaps but still flitted across my brain. Many of the other rocks I returned to the places he had collected them. Again, another sort of strange compulsion. Sort of ... "thank you for the time you have spent with us" ..... I don't know what I will eventually do with my cornerstone rock. Linda

I don’t think it minds being there…..I mean, you guys are good people; it probably likes it there. It would be hard not to like a warm friendly family environment with all the feelings of acceptance and attention. Now as far as sensors being attached; I don’t know how it feels about that.

Just remember what happened to the killer whale actor who played Free Willy when they decided to release him back into the wild. They tracked him to see how he was doing and found that he was becoming more and more despondent and depressed and he eventually died. The conclusion was that he felt that his human friends (that he loved so much) had rejected him; they cast him off because they didn't like him any more, and he died of a broken heart.

GV

[greggvizza]

Linda,

I just re-thought it. How long have those sensors been attached? I remember being fascinated as a kid with my dogs attachment to bondage. One day, after I had been made to wear a necktie, I decided that I wanted to let my dog be free of neck constraint, so I took his collar off. To my amazement, instead of enjoying the lack of restriction, he kept trying to put his nose back through it, trying to put it back on. He was saying, hey, that is mine, gimmy that back. So on second thought you may want to leave the sensors attached.

GV

[kevin.b]

Golly,
I hope the rock doesn't break its heart in two, Lindas building may collapse.
Talking of these rocks, what rocks were they?, types, specific materials etc, any idea?
Did Dr Brown powder any of the rocks to reconstitute them at all?
Many rocks were once something else, LIFE.
Lots of the walls of my house here are ironstone, they are full of seashells.

There will be a geological map of the USA on google, it would be interesting to note the location of Dr Browns labs in relation to such a map.

The mass , whatever that is?, appears to directly manipulate what I can detect, we are fortunate here in the UK to have many megalithic structures and later constructions still in place, I can freely wander about them, and check and check.
Then if I check the same types of rocks away from any particuler crossing points, I can detect what they do individually.
I note where the structures are compared to specific layers of rocks under them.

If all of creation is a constant coalescence of the ether , then it made everything, it has an affinity to its creation, it is its creation.
If we therefore study space as much as we study mass, but study them as one, we may get somewhere.

Imagine space travelling through everything constantly, and everything been space thousands of times a second,as it switchs on/off. and that space is a dual flow with a predominant direction, TIME.
Nothing is mass, everything is space, it reforms constantly in a forward time flow, reverse or speed that process up, and go with the flows.
I miss flowperson.
kevin