Townsend Brown, at the Philadelphia Naval Yard

Long-time Townsend Brown inquirer Jan Lundquist – aka 'Rose' in The Before Times – has her own substantial archive to share with readers and visitors to this site. This forum is dedicated to the wealth of material she has compiled: her research, her findings, and her speculations.
User avatar
Jan Lundquist
Keeper of the Flame
Posts: 357
Joined: Sat Jan 14, 2023 7:19 pm
Spam Prevention: Yes

Re: Townsend Brown, at the Philadelphia Naval Yard

Post by Jan Lundquist »

For new readers or those wanting more information, the TTB family archive, originally created by Andrew Bolland, founder of Qualight Engineering, has a very complete set of documents pertaining to TPX:

https://www.thomastownsendbrown.com/tpx/index.htm
natecull
Keeper of the Flame
Posts: 445
Joined: Sat Mar 22, 2008 10:35 am
Location: New Zealand

Re: Townsend Brown, at the Philadelphia Naval Yard

Post by natecull »

Jan Lundquist wrote: Wed Mar 22, 2023 2:48 amWilhelm Reich does not crop up in any of the credible scientific or military histories that i have seen any where else. Until it does, I will consider this just another story.
Yeah, the Reich fixation is very weird and doesn't hold together as science for me, but I note that it does appear as an obsession in the 1970s USPA/MUFON set in the 1970s, among people like Rolf Schaffranke, who like Mooore, exchanged letters with Townsend and received detailed replies. Also, Reich definitely exchanged letters with Einstein, that much is real science history, but Einstein wasn't at all impressed with him.
I have suspected that what drove Townsend to rage quit the Navy was that Bush had ignored the Navy's history of ground breaking research in the fields of RADAR and atomic energy, and given the prize plums to the Manhattan Project, US Army Signal Corps, and several university labs.
Townsend was directed to transfer "his equipment" to the Navy in July of 42, The MEP was formally established in August, 1942, and Townsend was out the door in September.
Oh, that's very good! I didn't know about the mass resignations at that time. That could very well put Townsend's quitting into perspective.

And wasn't also one of the sources of friction between the Navy and the Army on the atomic subject, that the Army wanted bombs while the Navy wanted ship propulsion? And as I recall, admirals were some of the first to go publically anti-nuclear in the sense of being against the use of nuclear power for bombs. (Although they dialled back that distaste once missile submarines became a thing.) Which suggests why Bradford Shank might have overlapped Townsend's circle.)

Regards, Nate
Going on a journey, somewhere far out east
We'll find the time to show you, wonders never cease
natecull
Keeper of the Flame
Posts: 445
Joined: Sat Mar 22, 2008 10:35 am
Location: New Zealand

Re: Townsend Brown, at the Philadelphia Naval Yard

Post by natecull »

Paul wrote:All of my correspondence with Morgan, Boston/O'Riley/Twigsnapper, Linda etal, was conducted using the Eudora email program on Windows. I migrated to the Apple/Mac platform starting in 2007 but was still running Windows in a Parallels window for at least another year. I exported the folders with all of those messages onto an archival hard drive here in The Garret, and those files are backed up locally and remotely. So the 'data' is safe, but retrieving the info is... umm... problematic at best.

As I was working my way through the rewrite over the past year, I managed to get all of the Morgan emails exported into a searchable spreadsheet. It does make for some interesting - if at times obtuse- reading. It's all there, but some of it is mixed up with a lot of HTML code (an artifact of the Eudora iteration). A couple of times I had to dump the marked up text into a Wordpress document so that I could see through the code.
Yay! I'm very glad you have the emails, and yes, dealing with "bitrot" from old formats is a major nuisance for me as well. The text is probably the main thing (metadata probably won't tell us much anyway if "Morgan" had decent tradecraft).

It's a very good time for the book. Here in 2023, with the David Gusch whistleblower complaint and very recent interest in the Wilson-Davis notes, and Jacques Vallee's diaries almost all published, suddenly forensic / archival data is really having a moment. "Who said who to what when in the UFO / Antigravity Invisible College" is becoming very interesting.

Regards, Nate
Going on a journey, somewhere far out east
We'll find the time to show you, wonders never cease
natecull
Keeper of the Flame
Posts: 445
Joined: Sat Mar 22, 2008 10:35 am
Location: New Zealand

Re: Townsend Brown, at the Philadelphia Naval Yard

Post by natecull »

Jan wrote:Also, re: the Ball Lightening monograph, written by James Dale Barry, I think your response indicated that you attributed it to "Morgan"...perhaps because Linda had settled on James Dave Barrett as her pseudonym for the Morgan character. The publication date of 1980 certainly makes it possible that the document was written at the behest of, or with the assistance of Townsend, toward the end of his life, but from what i know of "Morgan", he did not/does not have the type of science background that would have stirred an interest in the subject.
Thanks for this note Jan. No, I wasn't attributing the Ball Lightning monograph to Morgan because I haven't come across the name "James Dale Barry" before, and I'd even forgotten the name "James David Barrett" (I have another name in my head entirely that I thought Linda used for "Morgan" in "The Good-Bye Man".)

What I said was:
I find the Cutlass 1974 claim from Morgan et al interesting
and by "the Cutlass 1974 claim" I didn't mean a reference to ball lightning. Rather, I meant a claim that I believe I read on one of the Townsend forums from one of our mystery informants (someone claiming to be either "Morgan" or "Twigsnapper", and I'm not even sure that those Internet identities are two separate people).

The specific claim I was referring to, that I can't remember precisely right now, was to the effect that "the REAL TPX happened not in the 1940s on the Eldridge, but in the 1970s on the Cutlass". Or perhaps not even the Cutlass but another submarine.

I am sure that the claim made by our mystery men certainly wasn't just the sighting of a bit of ball lightning but something entirely more spooky. (Like "time travel / teleportation" level of spooky.) So much so that I didn't personally give it much credence, because I am always suspicious of anonymous Intelligence sources hinting at beyond-miraculous technology, and wonder what game they are playing.

Sorry I can't be more specific about that claim right now - I can try to search my archive for the exact reference but it will take some time.

On James Dale Barry:
JD Barry appears to be another of those one and done authors who left no discernable traces and who has, apparently, never published any thing else, scholarly or otherwise.
He appears in a NYT article from 1981 responding to his monograph:

https://www.nytimes.com/1981/05/26/scie ... ction.html
James Dale Barry, senior scientist at Hughes Aircraft Co. in Los Angeles, has studied ball lightning for the past two decades. After subjecting to scientific scrutiny some 1,800 reports and photographs of ball lightning collected from many places over the past 300 years, Mr. Barry has concluded that ball lightning probably exists.
If JDB was a senior scientist then he certainly wasn't Morgan.

Hughes is a vector of weirdness in itself which seems to have some Townsend flavour to it. They were doing gravimetrics research in the 1960s, weren't they? Submarine stuff of the kind that went public in "The Hunt For Red October" (the 1990 movie).
''One of the main problems,'' Mr. Barry said in a telephone interview, ''is that trained scientists are rarely the ones who report having witnessed ball lightning. I've never seen it myself, at least outside the laboratory. I believe its existence has been fairly well established, but it must be exceedingly rare - perhaps 10,000 times rarer than ordinary lightning.'' Mr. Barry's exhaustive survey on which he bases his conclusions is presented in a new book, Ball Lightning and Bead Lightning -Extreme Forms of Atmospheric Electricity (published by Plenum Press, New York).

But with the advent of new kinds of electric generators and batteries, the general scientific skepticism about ball lightning began to soften. For instance, luminous green balls sometimes formed and persisted for a second or so after accidental short circuits involving the high-current storage batteries and generators of diesel-electric submarines.
Emphasis mine. That bit sounds familiar.
Some investigators, including the Soviet scientist Pyotr Kapitsa, winner of the 1978 Nobel prize for physics, have hypothesized that ball lightning is actually a light-emitting plasma. Plasma is a gas whose atoms have been partly stripped of electrons, and which readily conducts electricity.

But Mr. Barry, himself a plasma physicist, believes that ball lightning is actually a term covering several very different phenomena.

''Some events described as ball lightning,'' he said, ''almost certainly were will-o'-the-wisps - burning hydrocarbons.'' Will-o'-the-wisps themselves have never been explained to the complete satisfaction of science. Usually described as vague, luminous shapes that flicker, move about the countryside and disappear abruptly, will-o'-the-wisps are thought to be pockets of burning methane gas generated by rotting vegetation.

In many other cases, Mr. Barry believes, putative ball lightning is not lightning at all. True lightning is an electrical discharge that carries a large current from an electron-rich object to an electron-poor object. Such a discharge requires a charged terminal at one end and an oppositely charged or grounded terminal at the other. Typically, the electrically charged base of a cloud and an oppositely charged tree serve as the terminals for a lightning discharge.

But a ball of ''lightning'' floating in space is not usually fixed between any identifiable terminals, and is therefore unlikely to be a true lightning discharge.

Some luminous objects mistaken for floating balls may actually be electrical ''brush'' discharges of the kind that sometimes appears on the branches of trees and inside airplanes in flight. This flickering high-voltage discharge, which is usually harmless despite its alarming appearance, is known as ''St. Elmo's fire.''

Another kind of discharge much rarer than St. Elmo's fire is bead lightning - strokes of lightning that look like strings of dazzling beads rather than the usual bright lines. The wave patterns believed responsible for such lightning may also cause ball lightning, which has sometimes materialized near bead lightning.

Some ''lightning balls,'' Mr. Barry said, may really consist of low-density, luminous plasma created when ordinary lightning passed through air under unusual conditions.

But an even likelier possibility, he believes, is that on very rare occasions, lightning discharges may create radio-frequency standing waves, which are capable of carrying, focusing and depositing energy in some confined region of space.
That's quite interesting, because I don't think I've seen the idea of "radio frequency standing waves" appear outside of the highly non-mainstream physics scene before (where standing waves of all sorts, particular as a model of matter, remain an extremely popular idea). It seems to almost have some aspect of John Wheeler's "geon" to it. But I'm not a radio head, so maybe RF standing waves really are oldschool and plausible?
Such standing waves may excite trace components of the air, especially carbon dioxide. When this happens, the energy levels of carbon dioxide molecules are pumped up to abnormal levels, from which they gradually dump their excess energy in the form of fluorescent light. Once excited, the carbon dioxide in a sphere of gas would continue to fluoresce for a second or so - long enough to account for many of the reports of ball lightning.

Folk stories likening ball lightning to the destructive Poltergeist - which unlike most other ghosts can move material objects - must be discounted as fantasy, Mr. Barry feels. Calculations made from observations of the luminous balls show that they must contain far less energy than the amount needed to smash furniture or boil buckets of water.

Most of the purported photographs of ball lightning made during the past century, Mr. Barry believes, are merely the accidental images of such ordinary objects as street lamps. In common with purported photographs of ''unidentified flying objects,'' such pictures result from camera movement and other misleading effects.

But a few pictures of ball lightning, notably those recorded by movie or television cameras, seem to Mr. Barry to be convincing. ''There may always be some argument as to the exact nature of ball lightning,'' he said, ''but science has taken a useful step just by determining that it is dealing with something real. And future research in the subject may have practical uses in the search for new sources of energy.''

A version of this article appears in print on May 26, 1981, Section C, Page 1 of the National edition with the headline: BALL LIGHTNING NOW SEEMS MORE FACT THAN FICTION
Another couple of references to James Dale Barry are on page 1197 of DTIC AD0680977: SCIENTIFIC STUDY OF UNIDENTIFIED FLYING OBJECTS, VOLUME 3, which seems to be from the Condon Report, in the Ball Lightning section. He did a master's thesis on the subject.

https://archive.org/details/DTIC_AD0680 ... 7/mode/1up
3. Ball Lightning, James Dale Barry: Master's Thesis, California State College, 1966
4. Ball Lightning, J. Dale Barry, Journal of Atmospheric and Terrestrial Physics, vol. 29, p. 1095, 1967
So one reason this ball lightning specialist is hard to find online is that he apparently went by "Dale" or "J. Dale" or sometime "J D" rather than "James". Searching for "Dale Barry" gets us:

https://ieeexplore.ieee.org/stamp/stamp ... er=1449058
PROCEEDINGS OF THE IEEE, JUNE 1969
J. Dale Barry (S’66) was born in Washington, D.C., on February 8, 1942. He received the B.S. degree in nuclear physics from the University of California at Los Angeles (UCLA) in 1964, and the M.S. degree in physics from California State College, Los Angeles, in 1966. He is currently a Ph.D. candidate in space physics at UCLA. Since 1963, he has been involved in space oriented research at the UCLA Space Center. He is associated with the Department of Planetary and Space Science and the Institute of Geophysics and Planetary Physics. Dr. Barry is a member of the American Geophysical Union and the American Association for the Advancement of Science.
A few years on, June 1974, someone by the name of Dale Barry appears in this General Dynamics / Convair report. This Dale Barry is associated with Wright Patterson Air Force Base.

https://ntrs.nasa.gov/api/citations/197 ... 004129.pdf
The Future Payload Technology Requirements Study was conducted from June 1974 to January 1975 by Convair Division of General Dynamics with support from Rockwell International Space Division and General Electric Space Division
10. PLANNED PROGRAMS OR UNPERTURBED TECHNOLOGY ADVANCEMENT:

The WPAFB is building laser communications terminals and will use the Nd:YAG laser. No information is available as to whether they are considering laser diode pumping. The AF program is non classified. Contact at WPAFB is Dr. Dale Barry, Technical Director.
And yes it's definitely our J. Dale Barry on that laser project. Here he is two years later, in 1976:

https://nyaspubs.onlinelibrary.wiley.co ... .tb41619.x
First published: January 1976

LASER COMMUNICATIONS IN SPACE: Nd:YAG TECHNOLOGY STATUS

J. Dale Barry

Space Laser Communications, Program 405B
Air Force Avionics Laboratory (AFAL/405B)
Wright-Patterson Air Force Base
He appears to have been doing space and plasma science as late as 1997, writing with his old colleague R C Snare:

https://www.researchgate.net/publicatio ... _Satellite
A Fluxgate Magnetometer for the Application Technology Satellite

January 1997 IEEE Transactions on Nuclear Science 13(6):326 - 332

Authors:

J. Dale Barry
R. C. Snare University of California, Los Angeles


A satellite-borne magnetometer used to detect magnetohydrodynamic wave propagation within the magnetosphere is introduced. The instrument is a biaxial, closed-loop, fluxgate magnetometer. The unit consists of the basic magnetometer plus additional sections, including a data processor, a field nulling section, and sensitivity selection logic. The basic magnetometer is discussed briefly, the additional sections in greater detail. It is shown that the use of sum and difference amplifiers in the data processor enable the derivation of magnetic field vectors transverse and parallel to the spacecraft spin axis. The field nulling section involves the use of an offset-field-generator to apply discrete current steps to the sensor offset winding in order to null the ambient sensor field. The use of three sensitivity levels is shown to maintain the analog output within the dynamic range of the instrument. An in-flight calibration section is discussed and referenced to instrument stability and sensitivity. A brief discussion of the ATS satellite mentions the advantages of its orbit, which is favorable for the study of long-term magnetic field variations and for correlation with plasma and particle experiments also onboard.
Regards, Nate
Going on a journey, somewhere far out east
We'll find the time to show you, wonders never cease
User avatar
Jan Lundquist
Keeper of the Flame
Posts: 357
Joined: Sat Jan 14, 2023 7:19 pm
Spam Prevention: Yes

Re: Townsend Brown, at the Philadelphia Naval Yard

Post by Jan Lundquist »

Thanks, for digging out the JD Barry research, Nate. I love it when these names get fleshed out by academic interests.

Linda and Paul, too, I believe recall being told to stick like glue to ball lightning. I have just taken that to mean that some of the answers to the questions I don't know enough to ask yet lie within the realm of "delve into plasma physics,

Hughes, btw, was the contractor for the CIA sponsored Glomar Explorer project.
User avatar
Paul Schatzkin
The White Rabbit
Posts: 142
Joined: Tue May 20, 2008 12:50 am

Re: Townsend Brown, at the Philadelphia Naval Yard

Post by Paul Schatzkin »

Magnetohydrodynamics... you don't say?

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Magnetohydrodynamics

Something I heard on a podcast recently triggered a recall a reference to Hannes Alfven in the 2008 manuscript that was edited out of THWMG. I'm working on another 'outtake' post now.

Here there be rabbit holes.

--P
Paul Schatzkin, author of 'The Man Who Mastered Gravity' https://amz.run/6afz
.
It's "a multigenerational project." What's your hurry?
.
"We will just sail away from the Earth, as easily as this boat pushed away from the dock" - TTB
User avatar
Paul Schatzkin
The White Rabbit
Posts: 142
Joined: Tue May 20, 2008 12:50 am

"Cutlass" References

Post by Paul Schatzkin »

FWIW, a global search of all the fora here produces seven pages of posts with the word 'Cutlass' :

search.php?st=0&sk=t&sd=d&sr=posts&keyw ... s&start=15

Y'all have fun with that but be careful (if you can do both at the same time).

--PS
Paul Schatzkin, author of 'The Man Who Mastered Gravity' https://amz.run/6afz
.
It's "a multigenerational project." What's your hurry?
.
"We will just sail away from the Earth, as easily as this boat pushed away from the dock" - TTB
natecull
Keeper of the Flame
Posts: 445
Joined: Sat Mar 22, 2008 10:35 am
Location: New Zealand

Re: Townsend Brown, at the Philadelphia Naval Yard

Post by natecull »

Hi Paul!
Something I heard on a podcast recently triggered a recall a reference to Hannes Alfven in the 2008 manuscript that was edited out of THWMG.
Alfven is definitely one of the more interesting mad scientists with Nobel Prizes! I've always wondered just how much he and Townsend had in common. If nothing else they both had out-of-the-box ideas about the influence of electric fields at the cosmic scale which were not shared by most of their contemporaries.
FWIW, a global search of all the fora here produces seven pages of posts with the word 'Cutlass' :

search.php?st=0&sk=t&sd=d&sr=posts&keyw ... s&start=15

Y'all have fun with that but be careful (if you can do both at the same time).
Cool! Yeah, I know what you mean. I'm a bit nervous of wading back into 2008 too, but I'm sure the Cutlass did feature a lot. I should take a look to find out just what really was said about it (other than the circa 1950 Project Rainbow allegedly to do with paint colour schemes, and the 1974 ball lightning incident).

Okay, yeah, just from that search result, here's a list of the Dramatis Personae from back then:

Paul S.
Linda Brown
Elizabeth Helen Drake (Linda's original "official" sockpuppet)

AM (who had a habit of deleting his account - was name a dig at FM?)
kevin.b
flowperson (real, I think?)
FM No Static At All (Frank Mars, I think a real person)
Gewis
grinder
htmagic
James Barrett (alias for Morgan, but I think actually Linda sockpuppet)
Justice League
Ladygrady
Langley
LongboardLOVELY (a real person I think?)
Mark Culpepper
Martin Calloway
Mikado14 (alias for a real person, possibly also a sockpuppet of another account?)
twigsnapper (a Linda sockpuppet imo)
Victoria Steele (Linda again, I think)

Linda had a unique stylistic quirk of using a lot of .........s in her post, and "James Barrett" appears also to have done that.

Whew! That was a big cast of possibly fictional characters, just on the "Cutlass" posts, and I haven't even started reading them yet. No wonder the board (and the book) was exhausting.

I mean here's this post (Jan 4, 2008):
I am that way too. I may not be able to PROVE exactly what happened in Philadelphia during the years of 1966 and 1967 but I sure as heck now can start to pay attention to what was going on that had gone un noticed before Paul brought all of this to my attention.

The question is of course. What is the thread of common ground between an accident in 1945 and the summer of 1966. Right now there are two crossing threads ...... The Cutlass herself ....... and the Philadelphia Navy Yard ...... so .... this is an odd thought here folks .... really out of the box .... Exactly WHERE was she docked during those two incidents? Anybody see where I am going here folks? Remember here. Time manipulation could manifest itself in events ....... in two directions .......

I would think that someone as venerable as " Boston" would have to be given some room here. When he says that the OLD CUTLASS is important she just is more than just a little important. I'll take the mans word for it.

Paul. More than just good work. It will stand. JDB
I'm sorry, I really want that to be Morgan / James David Barrett, but in my opinion, that piece of writing is 100% Linda.

Regards, Nate
Going on a journey, somewhere far out east
We'll find the time to show you, wonders never cease
natecull
Keeper of the Flame
Posts: 445
Joined: Sat Mar 22, 2008 10:35 am
Location: New Zealand

Re: Townsend Brown, at the Philadelphia Naval Yard

Post by natecull »

Yep, after scanning the search results, in my opinion the "Cutlass == Maybe Real Philadelphia Experiment" associations started just with the Defying Gravity chapter about the 1966/1967 coincidence of it being in Philadelphia for repairs while Townsend Brown was there, and the forum personas, primarily Linda, became very excited about that idea and kept hinting about it.

And I then further confused that 1966/1967 coincidence (that became a forum legend) with the documented 1974 "ball lightning" event on the Cutlass, from the James Dale Barry book. Which I assume must have been known on the forum before 2008, or whenever it was that the "James David Barrett" account was created. Assuming, that is, that Linda created that alias and then account deliberately based on the association with "James Dale Barry".

Regards, Nate
Going on a journey, somewhere far out east
We'll find the time to show you, wonders never cease
User avatar
Paul Schatzkin
The White Rabbit
Posts: 142
Joined: Tue May 20, 2008 12:50 am

Re: Townsend Brown, at the Philadelphia Naval Yard

Post by Paul Schatzkin »

natecull wrote: Mon Jun 19, 2023 9:14 am I'm sorry, I really want that to be Morgan / James David Barrett, but in my opinion, that piece of writing is 100% Linda.
I mean no malice when I say this but... trust me: Linda might be the most 'unreliable narrator' who ever pounded a keyboard.

And there is no dearth of observers who would seek to discredit her completely.

Which might explain her continued radio silence, though it has been more than a year now since I first advised her that the long-ago abandoned project was being resumed.

Whatever.

--P
Paul Schatzkin, author of 'The Man Who Mastered Gravity' https://amz.run/6afz
.
It's "a multigenerational project." What's your hurry?
.
"We will just sail away from the Earth, as easily as this boat pushed away from the dock" - TTB
User avatar
Jan Lundquist
Keeper of the Flame
Posts: 357
Joined: Sat Jan 14, 2023 7:19 pm
Spam Prevention: Yes

Re: Townsend Brown, at the Philadelphia Naval Yard

Post by Jan Lundquist »

Paul, I found Linda to be rock-solid on her memories of life as Townsend's daughter, and always consistent when questioned about them.

As I missed most what was going on here in the forum and with the MIN in Black, in the Before Times, all I can say is that if the intent was to revive interest in the Townsend Brown story, it was a rousing success. Thank you for taking it on, even though it added to your struggle to get your arms around an ever-expanding story.

Much of the pertinent material has been declassified in the years since then makes it clear, to me, at least, that contrary to being a fringe scientist, Townsend Brown was deep on the inside of some world-changing 20th century events.
Last edited by Jan Lundquist on Thu Jun 29, 2023 5:00 am, edited 1 time in total.
User avatar
Paul Schatzkin
The White Rabbit
Posts: 142
Joined: Tue May 20, 2008 12:50 am

Re: Townsend Brown, at the Philadelphia Naval Yard

Post by Paul Schatzkin »

Jan Lundquist wrote: Wed Jun 28, 2023 4:24 pmcontrary to being a fringe scientist, Townsend Brown was deep on the inside of some world-changing 20th century events.
And I believe as well that that is what compels this whole enterprise.

Which triggers the wonderment: what is the possibility that looking under the lid of the Townsend Brown story open the lid of... not Pandora's Box (he said, stretching for a benevolent metaphor), then certainly "The universe of magical things."

If ever humans are truly worthy.... 🤔

--PS
Paul Schatzkin, author of 'The Man Who Mastered Gravity' https://amz.run/6afz
.
It's "a multigenerational project." What's your hurry?
.
"We will just sail away from the Earth, as easily as this boat pushed away from the dock" - TTB
natecull
Keeper of the Flame
Posts: 445
Joined: Sat Mar 22, 2008 10:35 am
Location: New Zealand

Re: Townsend Brown, at the Philadelphia Naval Yard

Post by natecull »

Paul, I found Linda to be rock-solid on her memories of life as Townsend's daughter, and always consistent when questioned about them.
That was my impression too, based only on my forum interactions with Linda, when she was writing as Linda, on her own forums ("Lights on the Runway", "The Quonset Hut" and "The Cosmic Token").

Where things get blurry for me is that I feel Linda also wrote as other personas. Since she often mentioned that she had a visionary side to her personality, I wonder if perhaps she felt she was "passing on messages" conveyed to her intuitively from the real identity of those other persons? That would explain some of the evasive "hinting". When writing as "Twigsnapper" or "Barrett", for instance, she might have been evasive because she simply didn't know what it was that was being hinted at, but felt it was worth both identifying and separating out from her "daytime" persona.
Which triggers the wonderment: what is the possibility that looking under the lid of the Townsend Brown story open the lid of... not Pandora's Box (he said, stretching for a benevolent metaphor), then certainly "The universe of magical things."
That possibility seems indeed to be a thing, in my experience. I don't understand how or why, but for me, opening my mind to the Townsend Brown story and just honestly looking for the truth (antigravity or no antigravity) does seem to have opened up some kind of warm and loving intuitive space for me.

To be clear, I do have a spiritual belief system, so I think there literally does exist something much like a "Galactic Federation". I just don't think that Federation is physical in the sense that we understand physics today. I think the bulk of intelligent life in the universe exists in other "planes of reality" which do interact with our own, but via extremely subtle mechanisms we have not yet identified. So I'm very dubious about any stories about "recovered materials" because I don't see how the "vehicles" used by the actual Galactic Federation would leave any material residue in our dimension. Their work is usually done at the level of emotions and intuitions. Usually, but not 100% always: in the Spiritualism wave of the 1850s, for instance, very dramatic telekinetic manifestations ("table-tipping") occurred, as well as actual manipulation of objects (science fiction received the words "(de)(re)materialisation" and "teleport" from the psychic scene, which needed new words created to describe their experiences).

This data should have fed into our physics at that point, but mostly didn't, because it was almost impossible to replicate and hard to even observe. Jung did his best to alert the quantum physics people, and still mostly failed.

So I can quietly see a line drawn between:

* TTB's idea of gravity and electricity combined forming the "nervous system of the universe"

* his feeling that changes in Earth's cycles of electricity/gravity might relate to mass emotional mood swings in the human population, which would explain the interest in correlations of his Differential Electrometer with the stock market, and therefore the interest of Floyd Odlum and Roger Babson and others.

* "electroculture" as another angle on how the electric field of biological organisms might relate to the psi or qi fields.

* the idea, emerging at least in the 1970s but I think there in the 1950s, that the gravitational field might be a potential carrier wave or medium for psi interactions (since EM didn't seem to be as directly linked to psi as Mesmer and then the Spiritualists had thought)

TTB's specific personal theories about electrogravity are interesting, but I don't need them to be 100% true in order for his lifelong interest in the mind-body interaction problem, and how physics might shed light on that interaction, to remain insightful and relevant in the 2020s.

Regards, Nate
Going on a journey, somewhere far out east
We'll find the time to show you, wonders never cease
User avatar
Paul Schatzkin
The White Rabbit
Posts: 142
Joined: Tue May 20, 2008 12:50 am

Re: Townsend Brown, at the Philadelphia Naval Yard

Post by Paul Schatzkin »

Hey guys...

My head is spinning a bit.

I plunged into this thread while looking for an angle on something I want to post to the ttbrown.com website.

It started when somebody in the fusor.net forums posted a link to this YouTube video:

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=iQOibpIDx-4&t=1058s

This is a long conversation between the physicist/financier (there's an interesting combination for you) Eric Weinstein, Hal Puthoff (a name familiar in these circles) and a current-generation Investigator of Great Mysteries (and one-time colleague of Peter Thiel) named Jesse Michels.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Eric_Weinstein
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Harold_E._Puthoff
https://www.youtube.com/@JesseMichels

I have been fixated on the part of the discussion that starts at about 11 mins goes to about 14 mins. During this segment, Weinstein to talking about the ‘gravity research’ bubble that popped in the mid 1950s. Of course the part that got my attention was this clip of a news item from that period:
Pasted Graphic 1.png
And what name do we see there? Why if it isn’t our old friend, Agnew Bahnson!

That’s what I’d call a “Townsend Brown Adjacent” revelation – the sort of thing Jan and Nate are have done such a good job of conjuring up and tossing into the stew. I came back here to find some other examples when I landed on this tread and see how long it’s been... urgh.

Anyway, I highly recommend this video because in addition to being specifically ‘Townsend Brown’ adjacent, it also addresses the Big Questions that this material keeps running into.

According to Weinstein:
I think because we've been failing at physics for 50 years. We've gotten out of the habit of thinking physics is really dangerous. And you have to track every single important physicist, because any change in our physical understanding of the universe can unlock holy hell.
To which Jesse Michels asks: “Were there actually updates in physics, maybe mid-century that were not disclosed to the public?”

And Weinstein replies:
Another puzzle we would love to have cleared up is an understanding of the role of aerospace companies as holders of potentially basic scientific knowledge not shared with the academic world. Is it possible? It seems very wrong to me....it would change our entire concept of who we are, if somebody kept fundamental physics secret in the years since we became capable of exploding fusion devices...
Ya think? Well, maybe... it depends on what kind of “holy hell” is being unleashed - and contained.

With his reference to “exploding fusion devices” Weinstein is suggestiong that detonating atomic explosives sent a signal into the cosmos that humans were fiddling with the Keys to the Cosmic Ferrari, and...

Well, that’s the point where my head starts spinning and I can’t qute get a handle on what comes next.

Now here’s where it gets really interesting.

Yesterday I got an email from somebody who’d read the book and wanted to talk with me abbout it. It took me a minute to make the connection, but it was the same Jesse Michels who set up this conversation with Weinstein and Puthoff. I was surprise / not surprised. We spoke for about an hour yesterday.

It seems like Fellow Travelers... are starting to find each other along the trail.. or into the rabbit hole.

--PS
Paul Schatzkin, author of 'The Man Who Mastered Gravity' https://amz.run/6afz
.
It's "a multigenerational project." What's your hurry?
.
"We will just sail away from the Earth, as easily as this boat pushed away from the dock" - TTB
User avatar
Jan Lundquist
Keeper of the Flame
Posts: 357
Joined: Sat Jan 14, 2023 7:19 pm
Spam Prevention: Yes

Re: Townsend Brown, at the Philadelphia Naval Yard

Post by Jan Lundquist »

Love the synchroniciousness of that story, Paul, and I thought the video was quite wonderful. I can see that Jesse will be able to do Townsend justice, as far as any interviewer can, from high level scientific perspective.

Puthoff is certain that the Aerospace firms hold proprietary knowledge on some exotic materials. Townsend's correspondence, from the mid senventies onward, refers to his work having been taken over by one of these firms. Trickfox was insistent that the B2 bomber incorporated some unusual mathematics that had evolved from Townsend's work.

Interestingly the family archives at also hold a letter sent to Townsend, around. this time, addressed to "Dr. Townsend Brown, Department of Physics, University of North Carolina." I had wondered if he had reconnected with the old gravity crews there.
Post Reply