Is part one Shows that it's possible part 2 shows What part one didn't show And explains why you should do such a thing. If you want to go pass all the data in part 2 please go to the time line 7:40
Medialibraryinfo@gmail.com
+1-313-651-5349 Media Library
Text 313-777-3031
2.
I wanted to go into a little bit more death about overunity I end up just ranting and raving but the whole point is is that you start to understand it a little bit more you also get an idea that I'm using this technology in my home once you start to see how we can take a typical battery plug in something find out how many hours it will run and then increase that by putting a bare minimum of power back into it of course we call this looping which was derived out of over unity once you understand the definition, again no one has ever explained what over unity actually is that is the purpose of these videos. Of all the people out there who talk about overunity the only use the catch phrase more power out then in so I give some examples that is a lot of things that do that describe what overunity is but they can't this tells you that everything they said even what they put in dictionaries online or just made up because they didn't know what over-unity was. It's time to let you make your decision because it's not going to stop me from using it in my upcoming projects that I'm working on and showing. See the examples and tell me if it not worth having a battery that's only supposed to give you a certain amount of time and then doubling it, then we added a link to these videos that link let you know they even other people are looking at what we are saying and they're realizing that it is possible see link
This definition since 19 83 has never been spoken about even when people try to force me by making up different definitions for overunity. They were desperate to find an answer which when you start to look at it is easily broken down. So now that I'm in my 50s I decided to give them would they been wanting and tell the world about overunity and is actual definition of overunity, I know they won't accept it but that's okay I use it everyday which if you follow my YouTube channels you will see that I'm using the technology but none of the others are using their interpretation of overunity at all. So what's going on people don't want the truth anymore the lies seems more interesting than just the plain old truth. It is not going to stop me from using this it only stops you from using it and it is quite useful when you want to do certain things which in my upcoming books you will start to see all the things that can be done when you understand the principles of overunity.
Medialibraryinfo@gmail.com
+1-313-651-5349 Media Library
Text 313-777-3031
https://gofund.me/318b617b
We designed a new solar panel that does not need the Sun 🌞 and gives electricity 24-hour 7 days a week we would like people to donate money at least $5 to bring this? technology to the market we believe that people who see this would most definitely wanted, it is green's sustainable energy let's take a look at what we're talking about
The video you just watch above shows how you can take this technology completely off the grid and can run and off of its own power.
https://gofund.me/318b617b
Okay we're not done showing you videos we just want to show how and where this technology can go if they stop suppressing these types of inventions. It's been at least eight years that I've been using this type of technology, the more I use it the more advance I achieve
Let's look at this video which shows that we can size this to any size so this invention will be used to replace batteries, we're not going to talk about how we can achieve this is that we can and it has to do with a technology called pass through charging. With this you can now develop not only computers that self charge but every component from high-rise buildings to Electrical lawn mowers to two drones. This puts other companies at a disadvantage and it is likely they will try to stop this technology so we're putting it out in the public as much as we can without giving too much information, if you would like to see this type of technology and its advantages then please donate to our goal fund and get this technology up and going this could be powering your house in the next few years and be a contender to come back global warming.
Let's look at a few illustrations that we tend to develop with ISO linear solar remember solar can be made very thin wafers.
This is the future a self-powered chip with small wafers of solar embedded into them
These thin solar cells can be shaped and cut to any size and in planted into chips itself this is the future but where did this come from and how did the inventor name Lloyd g stovall invent and create this of course he got the idea from isilinear chips from Star Trek
Can you see the similarities
Let's bring in another video that shows you the concept on how this works.
We don't know how long it will take to bring this to market we're doing everything we can to raise the money and most people can see why they don't want this type of technology on the market but it's okay we're not going away this technology will come out it will show everyone that we can come back anything that's negative in our future and bring about a industrial high-tech age never seen before, there's got to be enough people out there who will see this and who will help donate to our fundraiser to start putting technology like this out on the market.
Medialibraryinfo@gmail.com
+1-313-651-5349 Media Library
Text 313-777-3031
i have ask for YouTubers help with this project, either they don't comment back or contact us at all and the ones that do just simply say no. Of course they don't want to see advances in solar energy by people like me, it's okay we are still moving forward and I'm documenting my work everyday. So did today's update will document proof on what I'm proposing
Medialibraryinfo@gmail.com
+1-313-651-5349 Media Library
Text 313-777-3031
Here is an update to the fiber-optic solar batteries, the battery that you see in this video is going to show you proof of concept. The next update will be on how to collect energy from the battery correctly since the industrial people have been doing it incorrectly. Remember I'm the father of overunity V / 1 is the physics behind it and when we use this formula punched into this new solar project you get something extraordinary but let's not get ahead of herself see the update here
Some updates on the experiment with the fiber optics solar cells
After watching this video from YouTube ( https://youtu.be/UWIccIrZMWI )
I got inspired to update my on Project I've been experimenting with, one of the things I wanted to mentioned when I believe people are right at the same time they're wrong. That happens a lot here in the USA what I agreed with is if you add ordinary batteries to your solar system then his statement about them are totally correct. But that's the problem we always think of dying instead of building, if you make your own batteries then the price of storing energy goes down drastically here's a links:
1( https://youtu.be/zyGX-VyXXTQ
1.5 ( https://youtu.be/ot9gz-bAIss )
Of course this is the most efficient ways to make your own batteries for your solar systems oh, yes it takes a long time but it is much better than the ones you buy out of the store. Of course on YouTube there are easier ways to make batteries but I find when I did this they don't last as long. The aluminum battery which is just simply taking crust charcoal croquettes You by at most grocery stores crushing them ups and putting them in aluminum here's a link to how to do that even though it is thousands of videos reference to this type of battery; https://youtu.be/Vy1oAeBxJ4A
So where are we at with this Tesla Park creation, not far again it's just in its infancy keeping the grass cut is more than just a chore it grows back so fast we call it supergrass.
But back to the fiber-optic batteries one of my first test that confirms that I can actually produce power from this idea by using string LED lighting which says on the package that they are 91% efficient oh, I wanted to put that to the test, those cheap solar lights they sell you was more than enough to make the voltage side of what I needed, even though the amps isn't very much it still takes a lot more solar to produce 1 amp then it does voltage. This causes the light's not to shine very brightly when you just use the voltage side even though they will light, so I sign using the batteries to run the efficient lights and using the solar to keep the battery charged successful. Of course if you want to know all the secrets on how to make this work in large scales you're probably going to have to call me 313-651-5349 but of course if you think you can figure it out with conventional science I'll tell you no no way. And the reason why Nikola Tesla had it right but of course it's a part of his story that most people miss so if you feel free to call my library the number is already given to you
Fiber optic Solar batteries created by Media Library Lloyd G Stovall we
If this information is correct and you apply it to the technology being mentioned in this picture, can you see the potential, ( link )
A solar panel will generate electricity when placed in the sun, Are new fiber optics solar batteries will not need the Sun,yet will still be connected from a cells to an electrical circuit, Called a charge controller. How many amps of electricity will it produce, depends on the Fiber optics solar batteries what size solar cell are because the fiber optics produce its own light, so they are constant when it comes to light. the characteristics of the circuit to which the panel is connected, how intelligent is your circuit or charge controller to maximize the voltage given, see number one in related articles. Calculate the amps produced by the cells were measurements using a digital multimeter.
1
Look at the back of the solar panel or consult the installation manual and find the maximum rated power of the panel in watts. Look also for the maximum power voltage, Vmp, which is in volts.
2
Calculate the current produced by the solar panel when it is generating its maximum power. Calculate the current in amps by dividing power in watts by the voltage in volts. For example, if the solar panel is rated at 175 watts and the maximum power voltage, Vmp, is given as 23.6 volts, then calculate the current as 175 watts divided by 23.6 volts, which is equal to 7.42 amps. This is current produced by the solar panel at full power.
3
Take a digital multimeter and switch the dial to direct-current volts. With the solar panel connected to an electrical circuit, measure the voltage between the positive and negative terminals of the solar panel. Make a note of this value. Disconnect the solar panel from the circuit and switch the digital multimeter to measuring resistance. Measure the resistance of the electrical circuit in ohms and write down this value. Reconnect the solar panel to the circuit.
4
Calculate the current in amps flowing through the circuit by dividing the voltage by the resistance. This relationship is Ohm's law (see References 1). For example, if you measured the voltage as 22.1 volts and the resistance of the circuit as 3.2 ohms, divide 22.1 by 3.2 ohms to get 6.91 amps. This is the actual current produced by the solar panel, given the amount of sunshine on the panel and the characteristics of the circuit.
Things You Will Need
Digital multimeter
Warning
Measuring the voltage of a single solar panel is not dangerous. If you have several panels connected together, however, consult a qualified technician to assist you in this procedure.
There are a few things you should know, 1 why did we put these solar in a Chase. Ass doesn't it diminish the light for the solar, again the project is called fiber optics solar, that means that these solar produced their own light, of course we can't talk about how they do just that until after the patent has been received. I will completely divulge the secret then, but it's a few things we can talk about and show a few videos so maybe you very intelligent people will catch on.
The size, and the area in which your solar's cover.
This was the first thing we wanted to correct (space issues)
In the three fiber optics solar batteries created in the upper left corner, consist of 18 sollars all coming from the same Source displayed next to them which are solar lights. As you can see 10 of those same solar lights compared to 18 in the battery experiment, space issues has been solved.
the next issue we wanted to solve was maintenance, putting solar on the roof and clean them, or having them out in the weather does things like this.
Medialibraryinfo@gmail.com
+1-313-651-5349 Media Library
Text 313-777-3031
In my counter with thousands of people, in the comments they make about what is possible and what is not possible. We must published things like this so you know they've already been done why these people are standing on their high horse scene it's not possible, and our world we have achieved so many things that people just don't know about in mostly don't care about. They care about the results only so why do they always try to talk about things they absolutely don't know or have any idea unless they study it.
Medialibraryinfo@gmail.com
+1-313-651-5349 Media Library
Text 313-777-3031 This paper is for my friend Jerry from Brazil, hope you like it. This project is called the magic box It comes with a few warnings, because of the abusive, and excessive destruction it could cause if you decide to make too much money in this project.
Mining Black Sand, Lingayen, Philippines The black sand of coastal villages facing the Lingayen Gulf, Philippines, is being mined for magnetite, a highly-valuable mineral used by industrial companies. The once pristine beaches are now destroyed and coastal erosion alarms residents. This is now illegal in the Philippines, remember don't let this happen to you. Try to find places people don't grow food or or abandoned, roads and streets that must be kept clean are places to mine black sand without being destructive. Underwater mining seems to be okay too unless you are doing it in a Marine equal area.
Keep in mind when you're mining for blacks and sometimes gold it's found, this will depends on what area you are mining for black sand.
If you follow these rules, then nature will always replenish the thing that you are seeking take a look at some of these pictures to understand when I run my magic box, which is a magnetic sweeper. Down the street that I'm just picking up what has returned to Nature.
Yes as these cars drive down the road and rushed it turns back to a valuable resource for me
These magnetic sweepers we call magic boxes can be made of various sizes, can be also made of wood. Let's look at a few videos to give you an idea on what we're talking about
Even though Media Library has a much bigger magnetic box and it has many more magnetic Wheels inside of it we're not going to tell you our secret but we will tell you exactly how we got the idea. And how to construct your own, this should give you an idea on how to make your own any size you would like just use that imagination we keep talking about.
Let's give some simple diagrams on how this machine you seen in the video is constructed
We wanted to show how the magnet stays stationary it's because of that square type that doesn't allow the magnet to move just the plastic pipe once the plastic moves above it is unmagnetized and falls into the tray, it's just a simple trick.
We gave you a few pictures from the below website in case you couldn't download it for yourself but if you are capable of it here's the information to read it in detail.
Remember if you're using your imagination you don't have to make this thing out of metal, it could be made out of wood easily. Even though it seems logical that metal would be more durable over the years, if you take your time and make this money a little at a time then you will be able to afford better and more extensive designs, let's look at some of the other designs like magnetic separators.
Let's look at a more simpler designs that you could easily build yourself, they all basically work the same way on permanent magnets or electromagnets.
to Poor your sand into the hopper above and it instantly separates out the sand and the magnetite, also known as black sand, but can be many colors
But how much saying can you pick up with a basic magnet in a plastic bag let's look at a few examples
There's so much more to say on this project but let's not make this paper super long so let's talk about the last thing for this paper and then we will update it later. As you learn more about this type of mining you will come across more valuable things in your sand in your dirt, the thing you step over all the time could be money in your pocket. But you will have to learn what those minerals are let's take a short review in this once and updated later
The more you learn about the valuables you look over everyday girl Richard you may become. Remember poor is not being poor of the pockets, it's being poor of your mind. That means people with the lack of imagination tend to be without, and those who become like Wizards wiseman's tend to have great wealth not only in just knowledge.
Medialibraryinfo@gmail.com
+1-313-651-5349 Media Library
Text 313-777-3031
Let's talk about another invention that here in the US tries to ignore, put on the back burner, stay away from these types of topics. Even though today the Discovery Channel and History Channel and other scientific discoveries have brought forth this information you just don't see it much today you must go looking for it. And like I said before most people don't go looking for it either because they don't know it exists or people don't use libraries like they used today. This is why we have to have did you call the library and get on the media in which people spend their times to let people know these things do exist. What am I talking about
Sandy Kidd
These are good ideas by Horst, the key new advance in UFT367 to UFT370 is the implementation of code to allow the integration of simultaneous partial differential equations, resulting in a new and detailed knowledge about the motion of a single gyroscope. So the code could be implemented for any configuration of experimental interest. Bold g = – bold Q dot is a very interesting equation. The idea is to get a positive g that would exceed the negative g due to the earth.
Dear Agatha,
the Shipov experiment I had in mind is that of Fig. 24 in the overview article I sent over, see attached image. The rotation direction of both gyros seems to be unclear when compared with Sandy Kidd’s construction. We would have to investigate both possibilities which is no problem.
Meanwhile I am not sure if the simple construction of Shipov as shown in the figure will work, it may be an oversimplification. The device of Kidd (described in his patent application) is significantly more complicated. It is not clear to me why he changed the angle between the gyro axis by a “cam”. If the angle has to be different from 180 degrees, why did he choose such a small value, and is this value allowed to change during operation?
Thank you for hinting to your second device on your web page, two gyros on a scale. This seems indeed to be the most simple experiment. I will propose our group to start with this.
Concerning the explanation of the impact of the gyro on gravity: The simplest approach from view of ECE theory would be a comparison with electrodynamics. As you know there is a one-to-one correspondence between the laws of electrodynamics and mechanics. A gyro with rotating masses corresponds to a coil with a circulating current. If the coil is mechanically rotated, the associated vector potential is rotated too. Its field vector A becomes time-dependent, and an electric field E is induced according to the law
bold E = – bold A dot.
The same should hold for a gyro under enforced precession. The gravito-magnetic vector potential Q is rotated, leading to an additional acceleration
bold g = – bold Q dot.
This was my first idea for Shipov-like experiments. It is probably not suited to explain the weight loss of a gyro. I will further think about this. The resonance mechanism described in the latest notes is a candidate but relies on certain resonance conditions. The weight loss of the gyro seems not to require such a condition which indicates another mechanism.
Because to my holoday it will take at least two weeks until we can start any experiments here in Munich.
Best regards,
Horst
Am 04.06.2017 um 03:40 schrieb Dr. Agatha Lorentz-Ferenstein, Ph.D.:
Gentlemen,
In case you have not noticed by now,
the SECOND, simpler, Nobel Prize winning
quantum gravity experiment :
is basically a much simpler and technically easierversion
of the Sandy Kidd’s device experiment ( see below ).
Thank you for your attention, Gentlemen.
Dr. Bill Ferrier of Dundee University had this to say
about Sandy Kidd’s device:
“ There is no doubt that the device does produce vertical lift. Several modifications were then made at my suggestions in order to disprove other possibilities of lift, particularly aerodynamic effects.”
I am interested in theoretical opinions of all scientists in our group
in respect to the purported lift effect produced by the Sandy Kidd’s device.
In your opinion, is this lift a genuine anomaly?
If so, how exactly your UFT (ECE2) could explain it?
And I am NOT asking for any mathematical equations, please!! :)) All I need from you is a short and clear explanation from the standpoint of general principles of physical phenomena involved :
According to our Quantum Antigravity Hypothesis,
the lift produced by the Sandy Kidd’s device (powered rotors)
is a genuine antigravity effect, exactly as understood
and predicted by our Hypothesis.
I would even dare to say that it does constitute
an empirical proof of the validity
of our Quantum Antigravity Hypothesis.
Looking forward to hear from all of you, Gentlemen.
Agatha
If it is so obvious to you, please try to find a precise scientific explanation of how a spinning gyroscope can stay suspended while rotating (precessing) horizontally, or evenbelow horizontal:
“ Scientific discovery consists of seeing what everybody has seen, and thinking what nobody else has thought. Scientific discovery must be, by definition, at variance with existing knowledge. During my lifetime, I made two. Both were rejected offhand by the Popes of that field of science.”
When the spinning gyroscope is rotating (precessing) horizontally, there is no vertical component of its angular momentum to prevent it from falling under the force of gravity.
If the spinning gyroscope were to be rotating (precessing) horizontally at a high enough angular velocity, then in this new way it could possibly produce enough of vertical angular momentum to keep it suspended horizontally. However, this is not the case, because as you can see in the video, its angular velocity is too slow.
And the following are two instances of gyro being dropped, and somehow being able to retain its stable operation after being dropped:
So, what keeps the spinning gyroscope from falling under the force of gravity while it is rotating (precessing) horizontally, or evenbelow horizontal?
Clearly, spinning gyroscopes alone, by themselves do not produce any antigravity. So, where this hypothetical antigravity could possibly come from?
For now, let me just say that the above effect is produced by the horizontally spinning gyroscope (angular momentum), which is under the influence of the Abraham-Magnus force.
Mass should be treated on the same footing as energy and angular momentum
Mainstream scientists brush-off any gyro “antigravity” effect as nonsense, saying that there is absolutely nothing anomalous there. Everything is fine. That is what plain gyros simply do! If we comb through all the gyro math, we will find no antigravity in them, nor anything else that could come close to “anomalous.” Neither we will find black holes, time travel, or spacetime in Newton’s gravity equation. Fortunately, there is mainstream empirical evidence demonstrating such anomalous effect. Several such experiments have been performed by Prof. Alexander L. Dmitriev, and their anomalous empirical results were described in his research papers:
Now, it will be much easier for us to understand what really is going on here:
Dr. Bill Ferrier of Dundee University had this to say about Sandy Kidd’s device:
“ There is no doubt that the machine does produce vertical lift. Several modifications were then made at my suggestions in order to disprove other possibilities of lift, particularly aerodynamic effects.”
Research physicist Dr. Bill Ferrier of Dundee Universityexamined the device on campus of the Dundee University. “Its potential is mind-boggling,” Ferrier announced. After Sandy Kidd moved to Australia, a second prototype was tested in Melbourne for three days under the supervision of specialist engineers. Placed in a sealed wooden box, it was suspended from a cord attached to an overhead beam fitted with sensitive measuring instruments. Powered by a model aircraft engine, the entire device due to vertical thrust overcame the force of gravity.
Dr. Bill Ferrier of Dundee University talking about Sandy Kidd’s machine in 1986:
There is no doubt that the machine does produce vertical lift. Several modifications were then made at my suggestions in order to disprove other possibilities of lift, particularly aerodynamic effects.
I am fully satisfied that this device needs further research and development. I have expressed myself willing to help Mr Kidd whose engineering ability is beyond question, and for whom I now have the greatest respect. I am currently trying to interest the university in housing the development and also in finding ‘enterprise’ money to fund the next stage.
I do not as yet understand why this device works. But it does work! The importance of this is probably obvious to the reader but, if it is not, let me just say that the technological possibilities of such a device are enormous. Its commercial exploitation must be worth billions.
In March 1990, Dr. Ronald Evans of BAe Defense Military Aircraft’s Exploratory Studies group, chaired a two-day University-Industry Conference of Gravitational Research, sitting around a table with a gathering of distinguished academics to identify any emerging “quantum leaps” that might impact on BAe’s military aircraft work. Gravity control figured extensively on the agenda.
Imagine it. A technology, popping out of nowhere, that rendered all of BAe’s current multi-billion-dollar work on airliners and jet fighters redundant at a stroke.
The company also undertook some practical laboratory work in a bid to investigate the properties of a so-called “inertial-thrust machine” developed by a Scottish inventor, Sandy Kidd.
In 1984, after three years’ work building his device—essentially, a pair of gyro-rotors at each end of a flexible crossarm—Kidd apparently turned it on and watched, startled, as it proceeded to levitate.
In May 1990, BAe began a series of trials to test whether there was anything in Kidd’s claims, knowing full well that he wasn’t alone in making them.
In the mid-1970s, Eric Laithwaite, Emeritus Professor of Heavy Electrical Engineering at Imperial College London, demonstrated the apparent gyroscopic weight loss.
The accepted laws of physics said that this was not possible, out of the question—heresy, in fact. But Laithwaite’s claims were supported by a top-level study into gyroscopes published by NATO’s Advisory Group for Aerospace Research and Development(AGARD) in March 1990.
The authors of the AGARD report concluded that a “force-generating device, such as Laithwaite’s, if integrated into a vehicle of some kind, could, in theory, counteract gravity. Clearly, if such a counteracting force was of sufficient magnitude it would propel the vehicle continuously in a straight line in opposition to said field of force and would constitute an antigravity device.”
The report went on to say that there was at least one “gyroscopic propulsive device” that was known to work and that the inventor, E.J.C. Rickman, had taken out a British patent on it.
The trouble was, the report concluded, the impulses generated by these machines were so slight they would be useless for all practical applications, except, perhaps, to inch a satellite into a new orbit once it had already been placed in space by a rocket.
It was hardly a quantum technological leap. But that wasn’t the point, Dr. Evans told me. What was being talked about here was an apparent contravention of the laws of physics; the negation, at a stroke, of Newton’s Third Law, of action-reaction. Which was why the BAe sponsored tests on the Kidd machine had a relevance that went way beyond their immediate and apparent value. If there were ways of generating internal, unidirectional, reactionless forces in a spacecraft, and in time they could be refined, honed and developed, the propulsion possibilities would be limitless.
The Incredible Genius Of Eric Laithwaite
By Richard Milton, 2003
Few people visit the Royal Institution, in London’s Albemarle Street, for amusement. There are not many laughs at Britain’s second oldest scientific institution, founded in 1799, where Sir Humphry Davy demonstrated his discovery of the elements sodium and potassium and where Michael Faraday discovered electromagnetic induction. It’s true there have been some lighter moments in the famous circular lecture theatre, especially since Sir William Bragg introduced Christmas Lectures for Children in the 1920s. But, on the whole, this is stuffed shirt territory.
One night in 1973 the stuffed shirts got a shock from which they have still not recovered. It was an experience at which, like Queen Victoria, they were not amused. Indeed it was so unamusing for them that it is the only occasion in the Royal Institution’s two hundred year history that it has failed to publish a proceedings of a major lecture, or ‘evening discourse’. The cause of this unique case of scientific censorship was the maverick professor of electrical engineering of Imperial College, London, Eric Laithwaite.
Laithwaite was no stranger to controversy even before his shadow fell across so distinguished an institutional threshold. In the 1960s, Laithwaite invented the linear electric motor, a device that can power a passenger train. In the 1970s, he and his colleagues combined the linear motor with the latest hovercraft technology to create a British experimental high speed train. This was a highly novel, but perfectly orthodox technology.
The advantages of such a tracked hovercraft are obvious to anyone who sees a hover-rail train running along,suspended in the air above the track — it is quiet, has no moving parts to wear out and is practically maintenance-free. The significance of this last point quickly becomes clear when you learn that more than 80 per cent of the annual running costs of any railway system is spent on maintenance of track and rolling stock because of daily wear. The British government at first invested in the development of his device but later, after a series of budget cuts, pulled out pleading the need for economy. Laithwaite, a blunt-speaking Lancashire man who did not shrink from speaking unpopular truths, told the Government and its scientific bureaucrats the mistake they were making in no uncertain terms, but its decision to cancel was unchanged.
Laithwaite refused to be beaten and took his invention one step further. He designed an even better kind of hover train — one in which his linear motor was levitated by electromagnetism giving a rapid transit system that not only provides quiet, efficient magnetic suspension over a maintenance-free track, but which generates the electricity to power the magnetic lift of the track from the movement of the train.
Speaking in the early 1970s, Laithwaite said of his new ‘Maglev’ system, ‘We’ve designed a motor to propel [the train] that gives you the lift and guidance for nothing — literally for nothing: for no additional equipment and no additional power input. This is beyond my wildest dreams — that I should ever see that sort of thing.’
Laithwaite’s Maglev design was not quite perpetual motion, but certainly sounded enough like something-for-nothing to make the scientific establishment turn its nose up in suspicion. But this project, too, was cancelled by the government and further development was halted. Today, Maglev trains are being built in Germany and Japan but Britain continues to spend 80 per cent of its railway budget on maintenance of conventional transport systems — several hundred millions every year.
With the Maglev project cancelled, the technology Laithwaite had devoted the previous twenty years to developing was put in mothballs. The object of his entire career for decades disappeared overnight. By an extraordinary chance atjust the same time that the Maglev project was cancelled, Laithwaite received an intriguing telephone call out of the blue from an amateur inventor, Alex Jones.
Jones claimed to have a remarkable new invention to demonstrate which he had tried to interest scientists and engineers in, so far without success. Would Laitwaite like to take a look at it? While others had dismissed Jones as a crank, Laithwaite, now with time on his hands, invited him to come to Imperial College.
When Jones arrived in the laboratory he had a strange-looking contraption to show. It was a simple wooden frame on wheels that could be pushed backwards and forwards on the bench top, like a child’s trolley. But suspended from the front of the frame was a heavy metal object that could swing from side to side like a pendulum. The metal object, Jones explained, was a gyroscope.
As Laithwaite looked on in puzzled amazement, Jones started the gyroscope spinning and then allowed it to swing from side to side. The wooden box moved along the bench top on its wheels although there was no drive to the wheels and no external thrust of any kind — something that shouldn’t happen according to the laws of physics.
‘When Alex switched his machine on,’ recalled Laithwaite, ‘it was quite disturbing to one’s upbringing. The gyroscope appeared to be producing a force without a reaction. I thought I’d seen something that was impossible.’
‘Like everyone else I was brought up on Newton’s laws of motion, and the third law says that for every action there’s an equal and opposite reaction, therefore you cannot propel a body outside its own dimensions. This thing apparently did.’
Laithwaite started some gyroscope experiments of his own, making large spinning tops with most of the mass in the rim of the wheel, and he found that, ‘these very definitely did something that seemed impossible.’
It was at this critical point in his career that he was invited by Sir George Porter, president of the august Royal Institution, to deliver a Friday Evening Discourse.
In retrospect it might seem to be rather risky for Sir George to have invited a blunt-speaking and controversial figure to address the Institution. But, until then, Laithwaite’s clashes with the government and scientific bureaucrats over the development of his Maglev train had been a conflict over money and over innovation: not over scientific principles. He had fought the same kind of battle as most senior scientists in Britain for scarce resources. He may have been the sort of outspoken individualist who finds himself in the headlines, but he was still a distinguished professional scientist, still a member of the club.
It was against this background that the Royal Institution invited him to deliver the lecture. But the Friday Evening Discourse is no ordinary lecture. It is a black tie affair, preceded by dinner amidst the polished silver and mahogany of the Institution’s elegant Georgian dining room, under the intimidating gaze of portraits of the giants of science from the eighteenth and nineteenth century, staring down from the panelled walls.
When you are invited to be thus feted by your fellow members of the Royal Institution and to deliver a Discourse from the spot where Faraday and Davy stood, it is usually the prelude to collecting the rewards of a lifetime of distinguished public service: Fellowship of the Royal Society; Gold Medals; perhaps even a Knighthood. In keeping with such a conservative occasion, those invited to speak generally choose some worthy topic on which to discourse — the future of science, perhaps, or the glorious achievements of the past.
But Laithwaite chose not to discourse on some worthy, painless topic but instead to demonstrate to the assembled bigwigs that Newton’s laws of motion — the very cornerstone of physics and the primary article of faith of all the distinguished names gathered in that room — were in doubt.
Standing in the circular well of the Institution’s lecture theatre, Laithwaite showed his audience a large gyroscope he had constructed — an apparatus resembling a motorcycle wheel on the end of a three foot pole (which, is precisely what it was). The wheel could be spun up to high speed on a low-friction bearing driven by a small but powerful electrical motor.
Laithwaite first demonstrated that the apparatus was very heavy — in fact it weighed more than 50 pounds. It took all his strength and both hands to raise the pole with its wheel much above waist level. When he started to rotate the wheel at high speed, however, the apparatus suddenly became so light that he could raise it easily over his head with just one hand and with no obvious sign of effort.
What on earth was going on? Heavy objects cannot suddenly become lighter just because they are rotating, can they? Such a mass can only be propelled aloft if it is subjected to an external force or if it expels mass, in a rocket engine for example. Had Laithwaite taken to conjuring tricks? Were there concealed strings? Confederates in trapdoors?
If Laithwaite expected gasps of admiration or surprise, he was disappointed. The audience was stunned into silence by his demonstration. When he went on to explain that Newton’s laws of motion were apparently being violated by this demonstration, the involuntary hush turned to frosty silence.
‘I was very excited about it,’ he recalled, ‘because I knew I had something to show them that was startling. And I did it rather in the spirit of “come and see what I’ve discovered — come and share this with me.” It was only afterwards that I realised no-one wanted to share it with me. The reaction was “the man’s obviously a lunatic”. “There must be some trick” was what people said.’
‘I was simply trying to tell them, “look, here’s something very unusual that’s worth investigating. I hope I’ve got sufficient reputation in electrical engineering not to be written off as a crank. So when I tell you this, I hope you’ll listen.” But they didn’t want to.’
‘After the Royal Institution lecture all hell broke loose, primarily as a result of an article in the New Scientist, followed up by articles in the daily press with headlines such as “Laithwaite defies Newton”. The press is always excited by the possibility of an antigravity machine, because of spaceships and science fiction, and the minute you say you can make something rise against gravity, then you’ve “made an antigravity machine”. And then the flood gates are unleashed on you especially from the establishment. You’ve brought science into disrepute or you’re apparently trying to because you’ve done something that is against the run of the tide.’
The resounding silence of his audience continued long after that fateful evening. There was to be no Fellowship of the Royal Society, no gold medal, no ‘Arise, Sir Eric’. And, for the first time in two hundred years, there was to be no published ‘proceedings’ recording Laithwaite’s astonishing lecture. In an unprecedented act of academic Stalinism, the Royal Institution simply banished the memory of Professor Laithwaite, his gyroscopes that became lighter, his lecture, even his existence.
Newton’s Laws were restored to their sacrosanct position on the altar of science. Laithwaite was a non-person, and all was right with the world once more.
For the next twenty years, Laithwaite carried on investigating the anomalous behaviour of gyroscopes in the laboratory; at first in Imperial College and later, after his retirement, wherever he could find a sympathetic institution to provide bench space and laboratory apparatus.
By the mid-1980 — what he called ‘the most depressing time’ — Laithwaite had conducted enough empirical research to demonstrate that the skeptics were right when they said that there were no forces to be had from gyroscopes. ‘The mathematics said there were no forces and that was correct’, Laithwaite recalled. The thing that wouldn’t go away was:
can I easily lift a 50 pound weight on a long shaft over my head with one hand, and with no obvious sign of effort, or can’t I? Of all the critics that I showed lifting the big wheel, none of them ever tried to explain it to me. So I decided I had to follow Faraday’s example and do the experiments.
After retiring from Imperial College, Laithwaite began a long series of detailed experiments. Sussex University offered him a laboratory and he formed a partnership with fellow engineer and inventor, Bill Dawson, who also funded the research. Laithwaite and Dawson spent three years from 1991 to 1994, investigating in detail the strange phenomena that had unnerved the Royal Institution.
‘The first thing I wanted to find out was how I could lift a 50 pound wheel in one hand. So we set out to try to reproduce this as a hands-off experiment. Then we tackled the problem of lack of centrifugal force and the experiments were telling us that there was less centrifugal force than there should be. Meanwhile I started to do the theory. We devised more and more sophisticated experiments until, not long ago, we cracked it.’
The real breakthrough came, said Laithwaite, when they realized that a precessing gyroscope could move mass through space. ‘The spinning top showed us that all the time, but we couldn’t see it. If the gyroscope does not produce the full amount of centrifugal force on its pivotin the centre then indeed you have produced mass transfer.’
‘It became more exciting than ever now because I could explain the unexplainable. Gyroscopes behaved absolutely in accordance with Newton’s laws. We were not challenging any sacred laws at all. We were sticking strictly to the rules that everyone would approve of, but getting the same result — a force through space without a rocket.’
The research of Laithwaite and Dawson has now borne practical fruit. Their commercial company, Gyron, filed a world patent for a reactionless drive — a device that most orthodox scientists say is impossible.
Sadly Eric Laithwaite died in 1997. His device remains in prototype form, comparable perhaps to the Wright Brother’s first aircraft or Gottlieb Daimler’s first automobile.
Shortly before his death, Laithwaite spoke philosophically about the long experimental road he had trudged virtually alone.
Why should people reject the idea of something new?’ he asked. ‘Well, of course, they always have. If you go back to Galileo, they were going to put him to death for not saying the earth was the centre of the universe. I’m reminded of something that Mark Twain once said; ‘a crank is a crank only until he’s been proved correct.’
‘So now I myself have demonstrated that I’ve been correct all along. Anyone seeing the experiments would know at once, if they knew their physics, that I’ve done what I said I could do, and that I’m no longer a heretic.’
Laithwaite’s reactionless drive is an extraordinary machine; a machine that orthodox science said could never be built and would never work. But though it may well eventually prove of great value — perhaps even providing an anti-gravity lifting device — it is a net consumer of energy, just like Griggs’s hydrosonic pump. There is no evidence at present that it is an over-unity device — merely a novel means of propulsion that proves there are more things in heaven and earth than are currently dreamed of by scientific rationalism.
After watching the videos and reading the information, it comes to the conclusion that is quite possible that the military use this law ( TheInvention Secrecy Act of 1951(Pub.L. 82–256, 66 Stat.3, enacted February 1, 1952, codified at35 U.S.C.ch. 17) is a body ofUnited States federal lawdesigned to prevent disclosure of newinventionsandtechnologiesthat, in the opinion of selectedfederal agencies, present a possible threat to thenational securityof the United States.
The U.S. government has long sought to control the release of new technologies that might threaten the national defense and economic stability of the country. During World War I, Congress authorized the United States Patent and Trademark Office (PTO) to classify certain defense-related patents. This initial effort lasted only for the duration of that war but was reimposed in October 1941 in anticipation of the U.S. entry into World War II. Patent secrecy orders were initially intended to remain effective for two years, beginning on July 1, 1940, but were later extended for the duration of the war.
The Invention Secrecy Act of 1951 made such patent secrecy permanent, though the order to suppress any invention must be renewed each year (except during periods of declared war or national emergency). Under this Act, defense agencies provide the PTO with a classified list of sensitive technologies in the form of the "Patent Security Category Review List" (PSCRL). The decision to classify new inventions under this act is made by "defense agencies" as defined by the President. Generally, these agencies include the Army, Navy, Air Force, National Security Agency (NSA), Department of Energy, and NASA, but even the Justice Department has played this role.)
to hold any More Public experiments top secret to produce what is shown in the video below.
keep in mind this is just a representative on what could be possible given all that we know or has been given to know.
there are works different but on the same level as the experiments that we are researching
it is why we are performing as many experiments as we possibly can hear at Media Library
Keep your imagination as fluid as you can and do the experiments to the best of your abilities, then go just beyond to create something new
Gyroscopic Propulsion rebuttal or!
Warning - Gyroscope propulsion is currently just speculative research and is not accepted by the scientfic community. These propulsion pages should be regarded separate from the rest of the site.
What do these "Propulsion devices" do?
The concept is to produce a gyroscope based device that can produce sufficient amounts of lift/force to be detectable and useful. In an extreme case this may mean that the machine could lift its own weight and hence is able to fly or just to push something along. However research is still in its early stages and I've yet to see one that can create any force under proper test conditions.
The use of the term "Anti-Gravity Device"
The use of the term "Anti-Gravity Device" is sometimes associated with this type of device. This is misleading and confusing in many ways and I don't believe the term should be used. It is highly unlikely that these type of devices effect gravity in any way. I believe the forces are independent of gravity and more related to the gyroscopic forces. From the evidence I’ve seen, if these devices really do produce force I believe energy is some how converting from rotational energy to a linear thrust.
Then these 'machines' can be put to better use in space with a zero or micro gravity environment.
Are these devices related to zero point energy?
As far as I'm aware none. In fact great amounts of energy has to be put in to get any linear force out (if any).
Uses for gyroscopic propulsion devices
Gyroscopic propulsion would have a number of uses on land, sea, air and space. What uses the device can do depends on the amount of force produced and its efficiency to produce that force. It may turn out that they can only ever produce a force a fractional of the weight of the device e.g. a 10Kg device give 1% thurst = 100g thurst. The weight to thrust ratio will define whether the technology can be used on land, sea and in the air.
However in space the devices come into there own and they would be useful even if they could only produce a small thurst compared to theier mass. Rockets are used almost exclusively as a means of propelling something in space and although inefficient, it is the best we have at present. Assuming gyroscopic propulsion does work it provides a means of getting from A to B in space without taking your fuel up too. The devices could simply be solar powered so the fuel won't run out. Of course the device still needs a way to get it into space in the first place.
Sandy Kidd and Force Precessed Gyroscopes
A simplified description of force precessed gyroscopes
In the following set of diagrams red arrows are used to show the force applied to the structure. Provided the gyroscopes themselves are rotating in the correct direction (not shown on diagram) the gyroscopes will produce a counter-acting force known as precession, as shown in the diagram as two blue arrows.
Normally this would produce a continuous torque as the whole device is revolving which would cancel it self out in the form of stress in the structure of the machine. However in Sandy's patent the gyroscopes are pushed in/out using cams resulting in the following motion (represented by the eight diagrams). As far as I can understand a number of up-ward pulses are produced due to the two gyroscopes (in this particular case, more can be used) exerting a force towards the centre of the structure (axle). This in effect is a vastly simplified version of what is going on. A number of independent tests have shown results for and against the machine.
While working in the Air Force, Dundee based engineer Sandy Kidd was one day taking a gyroscope out of an aircraft. Not realising that the gyroscope was still running, he came down the steps of the aircraft and turned at the base of the steps. At this point the gyroscope almost threw him across the floor. This stirred his interest in gyroscopes, Sandy spent many years and tens of thousands of pounds in his garden-shed/garage developing and working on gyroscopic devices. Trying to get a number of gyroscopes to react against one another to produce lift. In time he developed a device that he claimed could achieve this. Building other models using that principle and discussing his ideas with others, he came to conclusions of how it worked. Dundee University was interested in the invention and for a time worked with him, but long term could not supply the funds or enthusiasm that was needed. He tried obtaining funds to develop his invention in Scotland, but had to resort to looking for funds elsewhere. An Australia corporation BWM took the task on to develop a gyroscopic propulsion system but unfortunately the company went bust. British Aerospace has also been involved in the research with him but dropped the funding.
A UK/European patent for his invention was applied for (I have a copy of the application). I did try to find a granted patent for Europe but without success. I ended up phoning the European patent office to find out if one was granted. I was told that it would have been, but it was withdrawn at the last moment (funding dropped). I did however find a granted US patent (5024112). The fees for the patent have stopped being paid for some years ago. Which means anyone is free to copy, sell etc his invention (At least in the US/Europe).
Sandy is still working on various devices based around gyroscopes and hopefully we will be seeing more inventive designs from him in the near future.
Image: Copyright Grampian Television PLC
Dr Bill Ferrier of Dundee University talking about Sandy Kidd's machine in 1986:
"..............There is no doubt that the machine does produce vertical lift. Several modifications were then made at my suggestions in order to disprove other possibilities of lift, particularly aerodynamic effects.
I am fully satisfied that this device needs further research and development. I have expressed myself willing to help Mr Kidd whose engineering ability is beyond question, and for whom I now have the greatest respect. I am currently trying to interest the university in housing the development and also in finding 'enterprise' money to fund the next stage.
I do not as yet understand why this device works. But it does work! The importance of this is probably obvious to the reader but, if it is not, let me just say that the technological possibilities of such a device are enormous. Its commercial exploitation must be worth millions."
July 1999 I got in contact with Geoff Russell (Patent No.2,090,404). He tells me that the machine based upon his patent has changed quite a lot. Vast improvements have been made over the years and he now has a device that he says "weighing 22lb, which was able to consistently register weight loss or vertical lift pulses of 20lb, give or take the odd oz".
He has very kindly given me diagrams and notes on one of the ways that he tests his devices
"Notes on Fig 1 Vertical Lift Weighing Board
Fig 1 is designed to detect and measure any vertical lift being generated by your machine. This is achieved essentially by providing a stable base on which to test your apparatus. While leaving the base and apps free to tilt vertically upward, in response to any vertical lift being generated.
Fig 1 consists of a flat rigid wooden board approx. 1" Thick, the overall size of which should be determined by the size and weight of your own apparatus. The board has two L shape aluminium sections attached to its underside. With the first positioned at the central pivotal axis and the second positioned at one end of the board. A contact switch is attached to this aluminium section so that it operates, lighting an indicator lamp each time the board tilts upward loosing contact with the ground.
A counter weight approx. the same weight as your apparatus is also required to vary the balance of the board. By varying the position of the board movement of the counter weight towards the central pivotal axis of the board, would mean that your apparatus would have to generate greater vertical lift to light the indicator lamp. Moving it away from the control axis has the reserve effect.
To determine how much vertical lift your apparatus is generating, you must use a spring balance to measure how much upward force is required to raise your apparatus sufficiently to tilt the board upward, lighting the indicator lamp. The reading you get is the amount of vertical lift your apparatus is generating. You should make a position on the board at which your apparatus is placed for all tests, including the measurements you take before each test to determine how much weightless or vertical lift is required to light the indicator lamp...
...Geoff Russell July 1999"
Geoff Wilson and the Wilson-Fourier Impulse Engine
Geoff Wilson is part of team working which have been experimenting with gyroscopic engines for some 20 years. They now beleave they finally have both the mathematics (copyrighted 1999) and the principals fully understood. They hope to exploit this new engine commencing Y2k. Hopefully more details will be released soon.
