True space flight requires something better then Roman Candle technology. Rockets are too slow, too expensive, too dangerous and too inefficient for anything but near space use. What is needed an Electrical solution. Everything in the Universe works under an electrical component. While early work in electricity was conducted in Electro-statics, current flow in a conductor to create Electromagnetic conditions was where most effort was placed.
For the last 65 years I have studied this problem, tried many solutions, walked down many dead ends. There must be a solution ! Nicola Tesla started working on this problem while in middle school. everything he developed was the result of this quest and the creation of the needed tools and parts. there must be a solution.
Flying saucers are saucers for a reason, form follows function, Eyewitness reports tell of electrical effects near them, quite Strong Electrical Effects from their operations.
There is not Nothing in space this proposal is to gain a grip / traction on the stuff of space Electronically.
Shaded torus representation of Electro-Static Effects in space caused by field effects at the edges of a highly charged capacitor disk plates.
By creating a very high charge between the capacitance disks we have high static charge but little current flow in the system. It is the losses caused by current flow that really eats up power. But it is the presence of Electron charge that causes the effects in the Aether
Cross section of stylized version of edge of capacitance disks
A couple of weeks ago I was studying Super condensers /capacitors and it dawned on me that I was looking at this field generation all wrong. I needed to be looking toward Electro-Statics. High voltage packing of Electrons rather then High current Electro- Magnetics. Tesla was always working towards Massive Capacitance not current caused magnetic fields. Back to ringing the bell to get a standing field. Now there are some parts of this that makes much better sense.
pg – see https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=FbuiiN5x38k for latest tests on leaky capacitors. 3.5kV so in the range you like (I’m trying to build something that works at 20Vor so).
@Simon; thank you for the link, watched it. Looks like they are revisiting T.Townson Brown’s experiments of the late 1930s that resulted in the Biefeld – Brown effect paper at the end of the 1930s; https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Biefeld%E2%80%93Brown_effect , Brown got side tract into the Ion Wind aspect of this but his original discovery was involved with the movements of a Crooks tube in suspension as it was charged and discharged. No doubt warpage of the tubes atomic dielectric. He then experimented with plate capacitors and found that they moved when they were charged. He always felt that there was an actual propulsion component there but could not measure it definitively.
In this particular case I was looking into creating a field effect outside of the device caused by the field of static charge and leakage at the edges in the plates at high voltage and frequency pulsing.
this thing was tested at 300 volts and it seems to work. The linked test above was tested at 3500 volts and worked as a 4cm x 4cm flat plate.
My thinking is that Kilovolts would be needed to pack enough electrons in one place to get significant Electro-Static warpage .
pg – there are various people getting good experimental results using several types of design and different theories as to why they work. I just pointed to the one that’s open-source and getting results, and also easy to replicate.
Point with that one is to get the gap as small as possible (here it’s 25 microns). I figure there should be a way to do this using anodising, and if that works out I’ll send you details of how I did it (as well as tell quite a few others). If you measure the thrust in newtons per watt, and invert that number, you get the break-even speed in metres/second at which speed it’s producing enough energy to just run itself (why it’s nice to use metric SI units here). If that speed is fairly low, and you mount a couple of these drives to spin a generator, that means you can generate more power from the generator than is needed to drive it. I figure you’d find that pretty useful…. It will also need a current-sourcing power supply that holds the current at around the 1µA level, and if we get the gap down to the 50nm range it should only need around 20V, so actual power draw is extremely low.
Though people have been looking at these electronic drives for use in space, and flying things, they have another major use in generating energy if they work sufficiently well. Because that use would obviously violate CoE, few people will actually test this, and this is also the reason why the EMDrive you pictured is also considered “impossible”. However, it’s not only possible, but possible using several different methods.
If it’s true, then my 2.5x3cm test should lift around 4kg from the ground. Seems too good to be true. More than enough torque available on a fairly small diameter rotor to drive a generator or a car alternator from the scrapyard, but that will also need some sort of controller so it doesn’t spin too fast.
Hi guys,I fear that this is going to drive me Nutz! I really need to test this, I have most everything I need to test the concept except the actual rings. wonder how big and how much time needed to create this. 2 – layered ring condenser plates. maybe adjustable spacing…… I can use the coil driver and the set of HV Diodes, that would give me 15KV @ 500 watts 25khz with polarity. Enough to make things jump if the concept is valid. I have lots of thin clad, just need to find the time, make the form..
Emmmm…. upper and lower flat cone rings of laid up on a form with distance adjustable edges .
Simon is talking millimeters and I’m thinking in inches…. LOl
Adolfo is cheering us on.
A big leaky flat plate condenser ! If this works the physics will yield all kinds of goodies
The trick is to prevent leakage except at the edges of the disk.
need semi insulated layers to form each plate to get the largest amount of charge carriers (electrons) at the edge of plates. Damn… 15,000 volts may be too much to contain.
pg – though they are using 3.5kV and a 25-micron dielectric, the formula there says that the lift goes up as 1 over d squared, so really we want a thinner dielectric (thus lower voltage) to get more thrust. Counter-intuitive. Needs less power the lower the voltage, too, since it’s the current that’s important.
So this is why I’m trying to do this using anodising. Gets me down to the range of 50nm dielectric and 20V. Just some problems protecting that thin layer. If I solve those, and it works, I’ll give you details.
You’d think this would have been noticed. However, most capacitors tend to be wound or multilayer with thicker dielectric, and don’t often get to just leaking without blowing up. We all know the way HV capacitors jump when they blow, but put it down to gases or chemical energy.
It might however need the right voltage, and 20V doesn’t do the job. May take a while to explore the best way. Enough others have found this works, so there is an effect there, just needs optimisation.
Simon; I used to think current was the thing but now think it is the presents of charge that creates the needed force, hence amount of charge volume in the condenser, capacitor plates, Electro-statics not electro-magnetic force. Warping space it’s self, not creating current flow in it. LOL, we shall see which direction is the right one. 8-).
pg – the theory as to why this is supposed to work doesn’t match your view of how things work. Thus you’ll need doublethink here, to accept two (at least) mutually-conflicting ideas as both true.
Mike is seeing a thrust of 10-20mg (weight change) so 100-200µN. Not a lot, and at these levels the weight-scale has some drift over time too. The area he used is 4x4cm, or around 1 and 5/8 inches square. Though IVO are producing 45mN for 1 watt input with this basic structure, which is obviously a couple of hundred time larger force, I don’t have any information about the design they use, except that they assemble it in a clean room. Dust can be a problem at these scales, and produce a weak point in the capacitor.
Though people talk about warping space, it’s more likely that what’s being warped is what’s in the space (let’s call it Aether for now) but the space itself remains unchanged.
Still, according to Mike’s theory, if you make the features small enough (of the order of 100nm double cavities) then you end up needing no power to produce the thrust. This goes against our normal experience that you don’t get something for nothing, but the earlier capacitor tests ( https://arxiv.org/abs/1810.04368 ) showed the thrust to increase as the dielectric thickness was reduced. Size does matter, and in this case the thinner the better. Probably still worth reading that to see what they did.
Main thing is that this idea is counter-intuitive. It seems impossible that it should work. But it does. We may be able to make it work better.
Hi Simon: Theories are wonderful mental games to play with. I can “see” them and decide if the facts fit into them and look at how well the facts fit together. My basic premise is that GOD works in simple things and if we see many different things then our understanding is wrong. If we see cows and horses, they are not all that different. The cells are the same, merely stacked a bit differently. The fundamental physics involved are the same.
Using weight change as a measurement of thrust means you are changing local gravity effects, so are you accelerating the test object in space or are you changing the linear acceleration that is gravity? The physics involved in a single atom is just the same as a star’s worth of them. just the multiplicity of them muddies the result. We “see” different outcomes but actually the physics are all the same. As you get down to the atomic level you are dealing with the effects caused by one atom in it’s individual space. In the gross effects of the atoms in a star those effects are muddied, but still the same.
So if I want to create an Electronic space drive. Can this be done? How can I do it?
The Basic premise is that the Universe has a building block of charge, negative, or the lack of charge, positive. Neutral is +/- where positive and negative are balanced. If charge is put into motion it exhibits effects of EMF on everything around it. These effects are relative to the 3 dimensions of motion in these different things. As our testing devices give us different results, we say we have different physics involved but the basic physics are actually the same. If we are “seeing” different physics involved then our understanding is flawed. GOD is very simple minded or the Universe could not have been created from Chaos. The WORD, GOD , is creation. Energy in chaos is organized into the stuff of CREATION. Charge organized, becomes more powerful while taking up less charge space, creating a localize “hole” in the charge pressure or a positive area. but becomes harder to accelerate or exhibits increased mass/inertia. So is mass/inertia internal to Mater or external to Mater ? This matters because it directs us as to how to approach the solution.
At present I “see” Mass/Inertia as effects external to Mater, Mater warps local space to create effects , Mass/Inertia, Gravity are the result.
So anyway I am canning stores of food from the gardenand gathering fire wood as stores to survive the coming winter. Carving nice tools for food preparing and presentation……. bowls and spoons ,,, out of nice pieces of the Oak fire wood. Nice coveted Christmas gifts for special people. And if bored work on this physics problem of Electronic propulsion. Oh yes and a massive amount of time spent at the computer, in Acad or the Internet World Wide Web
pg – probably better to separate the production of a force (thrust) from any changes in gravity. For these thrusters, turn them up the other way and the weight goes up rather than down – they produce a force in a specific direction. They do not affect gravity.
That’s actually more useful than being able to change gravitational force, even though in some of the situations you see the same thing (the weight is measured as less or more). With these thrusters, you can direct the force sideways too – no change in measured weight, but can push something to the side.
Yep, my woodpile is looking sufficient to last the Winter out too. I buy in the “slabbing” from the local sawmill, so comes in lengths of 10′ or so of the outer bark and such sections. Some bits get put aside for better uses than burning.
@Simon; I have done that slabbing fire wood, sawmill waste utilization as well ,except now it is slabs and waste from My own milling. I built a track system to use a heavy chainsaw to slab logs……. if I can get them to the mill!..
It seems that I started “salvaging” Oak from firewood to make carvings and small constructs at an early age. Now I make firewood out of the logs after I remove the carving material. Right now I making a set of Oak spoons for my sister to use in cooking and serving…. Firewood Spoon Company.…. LOL
The more I look at these above drawings the more sure I am that they are wrong!
I’m not demonstrating the concept correctly and must re think this. Then I will try to do a better job creating a better representation. Sorry all.
pg – it’s a pretty good bet that if some method of doing this has been published for some time then quite a few people will have tried it, and will also have tried variations on it. If they had actually succeeded, we’d have heard about it, and more people would have tested it and found that it worked. Therefore I’d say that the old stories tell us what not to do if we want to succeed. Instead, we need to do something different.
The original Becker and Bhatt (2018) experiment followed on from an experimental anomaly where unexpected forces had been seen in leaky high-voltage capacitors, and also fits with the T.T.Brown observations as you mentioned. Something odd there. It’s now been tested by several other people who see the same results, so somewhat of a bigger chance of being true this time.
Question here, as always, is “what’s actually happening” rather than “what do we think is happening”. Thus it’s a good idea to look at the anomalies, which show us where what we think happens isn’t what actually happens. Also tells us that the theory is wrong in some way, so we need to re-think that.
Mike’s theory tells us that for the “leaky capacitors” you should get more thrust when the dielectric is thinner and thus you’ll be using a lower voltage and power. Rather than using as many kV as you can get, and expecting the effects to increase with voltage, it suggests going the opposite way and making it work with low voltages. Worth testing that out and seeing if this non-intuitive result actually happens in real life.
@Simon; As classical trained in Electrics we think in induction effects of energy flows and capacitance as a “spring” to bounce that energy back and forth to get the wanted effects. But we ignore the effects caused by the electro-statics of the density of a mass of stationary electrons. I think we need to look at the effects caused by massive electrical charges. This was the key that Tesla was investigating in much of his work. Capacitance created fields rather the induction created fields. As the electrons travel very little there would be very little resistance generated loses. To get the needed packing we need high voltages, to limit current flows we need high frequencies to induce the needed energy capacitance leakage without resistance caused waste. A space drive requires a warped field to provide directed movement, so we need to warp the leakage in the desired direction by shape.
If we warp the capacitance device dielectric shape it’s movement will be in the opposite direction of the Aether’s direction movement. which would result in real thrust! So “up” inside and “down” outside in the area of “leakage” during the pulse of the packing charge. Now the strength of the “lift” pulse verses the strength of the return could be modified through shaping and rectification.
pg – to carry a wave, we need analogues of springiness and inertia. The springiness is something we call the electric field, the inertia is something we call the magnetic field, where classical physics tells us what those fields do. That used to give me the feeling I understood them, but in truth it just hides the source of that springiness and inertia as fundamental properties and doesn’t explain why they are there.
The Aether explanations that use a lot of very small particles that bounce off each other and follow the equations of fluid dynamics may appear to explain what happens, but in truth they again just put that springiness and inertia as fundamental properties of the Aether and do not explain why they are there. Ditto for the wave-based explanations, since in order for the waves to exist they also need a fundamental springiness and inertia. Thus all the current theories are circular arguments (I call them recursive) and propose a more-fundamental springiness to explain the springiness we can measure, and ditto for the inertia. Also of course applies to String Theory, the current ultimate theory, where the little strings themselves must have springiness and inertia in order to vibrate, and so there must be *something* below that to supply those properties. Of course, aficionados of any particular theory can’t see that problem of circular reasoning and that ultimately their favourite theory doesn’t explain what they think it does, but just defines the existence of springiness and inertia as fundamental in the “stuff” that space itself is made of.
Thus I’m thinking we probably need to re-think all we know about fields, inertia, momentum, and energy.
Since it is obvious that momentum is only conserved normally because the fields that transfer the forces between objects are normally constant, and that if the field is changing then the limited speed of light makes the action and reaction no longer equal and opposite (so momentum is not conserved), it follows that energy itself (whatever it actually is) is also not a fundamentally-conserved quantity.
I haven’t got a solution to this that feels anywhere near right. If you go through the Unruh wave explanation, that needs both a limited speed of light c and also an instantaneous transmission of forces across universe-size distances. Following from that, Mike McCulloch’s QI theory (using Unruh waves) also requires that, but the equations he’s derived work to explain gravity, the deviations from Newton’s Law of Gravity at parsec distances, the way those deviations have changed over (so far) about 6 billion years, and of course the “leaky capacitor” thrusters and what thrust they produce over a range of thicknesses of dielectric. A few other anomalous things, too.
Given that, seems a good idea to see if Mike’s equations are good at predicting the thrust available for really thin dielectrics and low voltages too.
Maybe useful to point out that these thrusters go against what we intuitively think ought to happen. It seems wrong, and of course they will obviously violate both CoM and CoE if they work, and those Laws have seemed inviolable for most of my life and I’ve relied upon them being right. I’ve come up against experimental evidence that they don’t always apply, and that calls into question everything that relied on them being always right, and that really makes everything I thought I knew a bit suspect.
If they do indeed work (and Mike’s experiments and those of IVO show that they do work when using a few kV and thicker dielectrics) then we need to re-calibrate our intuitive understanding of How Things Work. Part of this is that when we get down to sub-micron gaps things do not work the same as they do at more-human scales, and that Casimir forces are real and usable.
However, I’m quite happy if we can produce those forces and use them to create thrust and thus energy, even if we still can’t explain the fundamental reasons for them. Sorting out the explanation may after all take quite a long time.
@Simon; It just accrued to me, that The leaky capacitor and it’s dielectric warpage is the key. During the charge of the capacitor, the capacitor moves in the direction of the positive plate. once charged the capacitor has momentum/inertia. Once charged the “leakage” gains “push” against the Aether. there the quality and shape of the capacitor are critical to make the device work well. So “charge” and then “leakage”are important to make the device work. Voltage and frequency are functions that must match the device size and shape. In all cases it it the Electro-statics of charge quantity and not the Electro-magnetics of current flow that is the important thing as far as the propulsion is concerned.
Since Tesla and before it has been easy to measure EMF effects thru current flows, we tend to concentrate on current/magnetic as a measurement of circuit effectiveness, But we really want as little energy wasted in impedance/resistance losses as possible. Due to dielectric “springiness”most of the electrical energy is returned in the capacitance system.
T.Townson Brown pointed us in that direction in his Collage work with Biefeld.
See Biefeld-Brown effect https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Biefeld%E2%80%93Brown_effect
But he got lost in the “Ionic Wind” lifter thing and dropped his original work that pointed in the direction of Electro-static warpage and leakage.
We must have as great a charge as we can get without dielectric breakdown discharge of the field. That means that shape, size and material of the structures are important which dictates Voltage and frequencies needed.
pg – yep, the leaky capacitor does something different than we expect (in standard theory it does nothing but waste energy). The T.T.Brown thrust was however developed using DC, not AC. Yep, some of that thrust was ion wind, but a small amount of it was *something else* and continued to be there during high-vacuum tests. As I’ve said, it’s hard to produce a really hard vacuum because of outgassing of the parts, so seeing what amount of thrust was anomalous is difficult. If, as Mike says, the thrust of a leaky capacitor is proportional to the current, area, and 1/d², then the wide gaps T.T.Brown used aren’t the best way to see that anomalous thrust.
Once I’ve checked out the current tests using anodised Tantalum foil, and if that works, I’ll go on to seeing if Aluminium foil can do the same – really needs a very pure Aluminium here to achieve a good layer of oxide. Thus may need to find some old electrolytic capacitors and re-work the +ve electrode from that to get the right material (-ve electrode doesn’t need to be as pure, so isn’t, normally).
What we’re aiming for is the highest field strength possible. It doesn’t seem to matter what thickness we use here, so using half the voltage and half the dielectric thickness gives the same field strength and should work better, providing there are electrons being accelerated across it. You can of course look at an electric field as a distortion of the Aether, or a warpage of it. If this works as well or better at 20V on a 50nm dielectric as using 20kV on a 50 micron dielectric then I’d prefer the low voltage. In fact, if Mike’s equation is right, the 20V will deliver around 1000 times the thrust as 20kV for the same leakage current, so definitely preferable.
AFAIK, a Diamond layer would be the ultimate dielectric layer here, but Tantalum is almost as good. Aluminium Oxide some way down from that, but a lot easier to make and to get hold of the materials. Though a vacuum should work even better than a solid dielectric, making such a gap in the 20-100nm range is pretty difficult and, given the Casimir forces involved there, would also need a careful design to stop it from closing up.
Yep, we tend to think if we raise the voltage and power used we should get a bigger effect, but if the equations are right then this is exactly wrong here, and lowering the voltage and power gives a bigger effect when we also get the gap smaller.
As regards the shape, at the moment I’m only going to look at flat layers. There may be other shapes tried later, if the flat version works.
@Simon; A hint I picked up years ago was 19 layers made up of Magnesium on Bismuth about 3-5mm, plated on top of the Aluminum substrate. Bismuth is very Diamagnetic
Your idea of Aluminum Oxide as a dielectric should work for a thin film. I think that the amount of warpage in the Atomic structure is the most important thing. higher warpage is generally attained with higher voltages but that risks perforation and shortage failure. Also pulsed DC is the necessary way to go, possibly as slow as Kilohertz.
Yes “flat plat” would be the only logical choice. A thought is to think Lazar or actually Mazar so that only one side-edge “leaks” I think that you need both the dielectric warpage and the directional leak to actually get thrust.
pg – the problem with those “clues” is that if it was true then someone would have tested it and found that it worked. As with the “free energy” plans that are either sold or given away, there are a lot of people who will have tested those designs and yet no-one has demonstrated that it actually delivers on the promise. See Pat Kelly’s massive collection of such ideas, where nearly all have claims to have worked yet no replications have succeeded. Russ Griess did a fair number of competent replications of various such things, and they didn’t do what was claimed.
The warpage you want purely depends on the field strength. To get the maximum, we need a dielectric that as strong as we can get, so a thinner layer will withstand the same voltage difference across it. What we’re aiming for is acceleration of the electrons, and the distance over which they accelerate also needs to be as short as possible.
In the original paper, they tried different thicknesses of dielectric, and for the same leakage current they found that the 1/d² relationship held within experimental error. Use twice the thickness, and obviously you’ll need twice the voltage to get the same leakage current, but then you’ll only get 1/4 of the thrust but you’ll be using twice the power.
Thus the intuitive thing of “use twice the power you get twice the thrust” is exactly wrong. We don’t want a higher voltage, but instead we want that leakage to occur at a lower voltage and for the dielectric to be as thin as we can get it.
I’m not seeing the need for pulsed DC here. At the switching we’ll get transients that can exceed the dielectric strength. The only benefit I can see is that any arcing or dielectric breakdown will be limited in time and thus will have limited damage, but if a location is damaged then the next spike of power will tend to produce a new arc there because there will be a switching-spike of higher voltage. Thus probably better to use a DC with a longer rise-time to avoid those spikes, and for enough resistance to be built-in to the capacitor plate that any arc is damped. Again this isn’t normally how we’d design a capacitor, since generally we want it to be low-impedance.
It’s necessary to look at each design decision here, since there’s a lot here that goes against what we are used to.
pg – the idea of “Mercury vortex engines” has been around for a very long time, but it would be easy to prove it works (if it does). In fact, the video has a demo of Mercury being spun, but obviously no actual thrust is produced. Easy enough to put more power into that, and given the number of people who have been playing with that idea I’d have expected some back-shed experimenter to have succeeded. They’d have then told others what they did, and it spreads from there.
Looks to me that the drive function itself is possible, and that there are several ways to achieve that, not just one. Also seems to me that the designs that have been published (as here) are ones that do not work, since if you divert people into spending all their time and money going down the wrong path then they won’t find out the truth or a correct way, and you keep your lead. If you get people working with large quantities of Mercury, too, they’ll probably end up poisoned by it and die anyway.
I don’t know if the military have something that works, and if they do, how much power it needs or how risky it is to run it. May be all smoke and mirrors. Maybe now we have a method that demonstrably works to a small extent (leaky capacitor) though so far my anodised-dielectric idea isn’t working out that well. More on that when I’ve got over that problem.
@Simon ; entertainment value mostly, but there was a small mention to “Capacitance”, in fact a drawing that would indicate leaky capacitance. This seems to be a common in most of the things that I have seen that might show signs of working. Your insight on the possibility of rectifying energy struck me that we may have been seeing hints of that in some “zero point” energy batteries where various materials are ground very fine and packed into a cell. I would suspect that in addition to some amount of electro-chemical effects there is also some solid state rectification. with the help of gravity to bias it.
You are right that there is a lot of techno-babel out there deliberate to mislead people. But as we have better understanding then 99% of the people we should be able to see through their camouflage. While there may well be secret copies of operating craft I don’t believe that they understand what they have. or after all these years something would have leaked out. Keep looking, is what I do, and filter out the obvious BS.
Oh yes , I doubt that counter spinning Mercury could create a space warp bubble, anti inertia/gravity drive, But it could be a part of a energy accumulator
pg – yep, agree it’s possible that the capacitance in the base of the craft is in fact the drive and not just an energy store, and they didn’t know why it worked and so added some extra descriptions of other stuff to make it sound more believable. I think the “spinning Mercury” idea was started by Tesla, so some people will just accept it’s going to work even though they can’t make it work whenever they try it.
Also, yep the “zero-point” batteries are probably more likely to be violating 2LoT to produce the output energy. It just needs a rectifier that has a low-enough forward voltage and a high-enough speed.
There is also the possibility of making energy from *nothing* if you find the right symmetry to break and can break it. AFAICT nothing in the “historical” records has done that, though a couple of people I know have fairly recently found ways that I think will work. Also, of course, if we get the drives working, they obviously violate the symmetry of action and reaction being equal and opposite, and thus can also produce energy from *nothing*. This is something I always thought was impossible, but now I’m seeing that it’s logically possible and probably also practically possible.
At the moment my anodised capacitors look more like dead shorts (about 2 ohms) rather than capacitors. Once I figure out why and fix it, we’ll see what happens.
@Simon; It would appear to me that you are getting too many non converted (conductive ) metal atoms in your anodized layer.
Hummmmm, I had to refresh my memory on Anodizing.
Growing the converted layer tends to look more like a forest of conifers of dendrites with very thin areas between them, you would need to fill those areas with something that will discourage charge carriers.
As you have the ability to Anodize I would suggest you pursue the layering concept of creation of leaky capacitance through electroplating/anodizing.
The effects are the result of the degree of warpage times the volume of material warped. If you can only get 2 volts of warpage per layer (capacitance) you will need many layers of warped material. Not necessarily a bad thing.
This looks similar to working with Super capacitors where low voltage requires high volume to store large amounts of charge carriers in the dielectric. It is that high volume of warped material that is key.
This is where the specific layered material I pointed to might be key. The layer of Bismuth between layers of anodized Magnesium Laid over an Aluminum substrate, The Bismuth resists magnetic/EMF penetration and moves the lines of force into the adjoining material.
To get controlled leakage you will need to use laws of physics to help you direct the place and direction of the leakage. Consider on how a Lazar works to get photonic “leakage” in the desired place and direction.
I don’t know how authentic the layered material report was. It was reported to have been material removed from a wrecked Non-human flying device. the coupons were tested and the layering discovered. The philosophy for the layering of Magnesium and Bismuth are my own and not a part of the report.
There are hundreds of years of reports to examine. I have found many hints in those reports. So I prefer actual reports of observations and Ignore other’s opinions of why, as that might bias my own reasoning. So I am down to cause and effect or in these cases Effects are caused By ??? also form follows function as physics is a universal fact that can not be changed for liberal needs..
In my opinion other world flying machines are a fact. We merely need to reverse engineer them. I’ve been doing that all of my life. Making a “Basket case” even with parts missing, function again is what I do for fun. There a lot of parts missing here. pg
added note; I also know about “Wild Goose” chases, been on lots of them, often sent on them by others. Just observations from another “Old man”
pg – During anodising I left it for hours at the top voltage and looked at the current being drawn. When it was around 4µA and stayed there for an hour or so I figured the anodising was complete and the layer was a constant thickness. With voltage at 10V, that thickness (for Tantalum) should be around 17nm. Much the same sort of process is used to make Tantalum capacitors, except that the initial conductive layer applied is Manganese Nitrate, which is then heated to around 250°C to produce a layer of Manganese Dioxide, and then a layer of Mn02 and Carbon is added, with a final layer of Silver. Putting either Carbon or Silver in direct contact with the Tantalum Oxide layer is not good, since there’s a mutual reaction that damages the oxide layer. So far I’ve tried conductive oxide powders (including MnO2) and Gold leaf, since Gold should not oxidise and thus take the Oxygen from the Tantalum Oxide.
Possibly that supply of Tantalum foil wasn’t pure enough. Possibly also it’s necessary to use Sulphuric acid to anodise and though using Borax gives me a voltage-limited layer thickness it may not be pure enough. It may be necessary to form the oxide by heating in air instead. Thus some other things to try. I’ve got some blocks of Silicon to test as well.
Bismuth is only slightly diamagnetic, so if that’s what’s needed it’s better to use Pyrophoric Charcoal. If you use Bismuth, it will be for other properties.
Otherwise, many thin layers of metal and oxide should do the job, with the thrust for each layer being additive. Just looked up the properties of MgO and I suspect the breakdown potential will be way too low to be useful at only around 10MV/m (Kapton is around 400MV/m). Still, get enough very thin layers and it will do the job.
Yep, seems that those UFOs are probably real, though whether they are alien I don’t know. You’d think that reverse-engineering should be possible if they are alien, and that we’d thus see human-built ones in use, but there’s a lot of misinformation around.
So far no joy with experiments here (problems getting a good oxide layer that is non-conductive) but I’m now into pruning season rather than bench work.
Simon, I know that fun After nearly a month of being snowed in. 4 feet of snow followed by heavy rain, I am also in the middle of Pruning & gardening. The seasons wait for no one. California has 268% of normal snow pack in the mountains and more forecast, but above us,
We had several periods of the Grid being down for days. Telephone is still out. Thank goodness for battery backup and the satellite dish.
Thank you for the link, I did some research couldn’t find much except Iv0 seems to be a promotion firm.
the above is photo I found seems to be a sequential cascade of plate condensers in a test chamber.
This would be a test of the Biefild-Brown Effect paper without the Ion wind and with an added feature of pulsing the plates.
pg – it does seem that with with a good thin-film deposition system you could make some pretty good capacitors that leak nicely at a fairly low voltage rather than in the kV range.
IVO have been a bit quiet for the last year, having announced their drive a year ago and then no new press releases until now. They kept Mike McCulloch informed, but he was limited from telling people by his NDA. Mike’s experiments at https://physicsfromtheedge.blogspot.com/2022/11/on-cusp.html for interest.
IVO is around 3 people who are doing the development. I’ve no idea as to who’s backing them, but they also have other stuff they are selling for power-transmission, so maybe self-financed.
Thing is that this test will prove the drive works and accelerates the satellite. It stops being a lab curiosity and instead this is commercial, and for sale to anyone that wants to buy them (though may be a supply shortage if a load of people buy them). Once they are in use, and anyone can buy them and use them, it’s going to be indisputable that it actually works even if people don’t agree why it works.
pgtruspace's blog 
A couple of weeks ago I was studying Super condensers /capacitors and it dawned on me that I was looking at this field generation all wrong. I needed to be looking toward Electro-Statics. High voltage packing of Electrons rather then High current Electro- Magnetics. Tesla was always working towards Massive Capacitance not current caused magnetic fields. Back to ringing the bell to get a standing field. Now there are some parts of this that makes much better sense.
pg – see https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=FbuiiN5x38k for latest tests on leaky capacitors. 3.5kV so in the range you like (I’m trying to build something that works at 20Vor so).
Dear P.G.:http://www.giurfa.com/arrangement.jpg http://www.giurfa.com/clouds.jpg
Adolfo Rios Pita GiurfaCodigo postal:Lima 15036Dirección: Calle Los Ruiseñores Oeste 249, San Isidro, Lima, Peru.Telf: +51-999408840 FaceTime (Apple): giurfa@giurfa.comWebpage: http://www.giurfa.com Unified Field Theory: https://www.dropbox.com/s/jhbzug848hcytog/unified_field_explained_12.pdf?dl=0 (Eng/S – Donar: https://www.paypal.com/donate/?hosted_button_id=B5A4EYHQSFPS8
@Simon; thank you for the link, watched it. Looks like they are revisiting T.Townson Brown’s experiments of the late 1930s that resulted in the Biefeld – Brown effect paper at the end of the 1930s; https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Biefeld%E2%80%93Brown_effect , Brown got side tract into the Ion Wind aspect of this but his original discovery was involved with the movements of a Crooks tube in suspension as it was charged and discharged. No doubt warpage of the tubes atomic dielectric. He then experimented with plate capacitors and found that they moved when they were charged. He always felt that there was an actual propulsion component there but could not measure it definitively.
In this particular case I was looking into creating a field effect outside of the device caused by the field of static charge and leakage at the edges in the plates at high voltage and frequency pulsing.
this thing was tested at 300 volts and it seems to work. The linked test above was tested at 3500 volts and worked as a 4cm x 4cm flat plate.
My thinking is that Kilovolts would be needed to pack enough electrons in one place to get significant Electro-Static warpage .
pg – there are various people getting good experimental results using several types of design and different theories as to why they work. I just pointed to the one that’s open-source and getting results, and also easy to replicate.
Point with that one is to get the gap as small as possible (here it’s 25 microns). I figure there should be a way to do this using anodising, and if that works out I’ll send you details of how I did it (as well as tell quite a few others). If you measure the thrust in newtons per watt, and invert that number, you get the break-even speed in metres/second at which speed it’s producing enough energy to just run itself (why it’s nice to use metric SI units here). If that speed is fairly low, and you mount a couple of these drives to spin a generator, that means you can generate more power from the generator than is needed to drive it. I figure you’d find that pretty useful…. It will also need a current-sourcing power supply that holds the current at around the 1µA level, and if we get the gap down to the 50nm range it should only need around 20V, so actual power draw is extremely low.
Though people have been looking at these electronic drives for use in space, and flying things, they have another major use in generating energy if they work sufficiently well. Because that use would obviously violate CoE, few people will actually test this, and this is also the reason why the EMDrive you pictured is also considered “impossible”. However, it’s not only possible, but possible using several different methods.
See http://physicsfromtheedge.blogspot.com/2022/07/how-to-maybe-see-qi-in-your-lab.html and http://physicsfromtheedge.blogspot.com/2022/08/glimpses-of-qi-in-lab.html for experimental details and the formula for the thrust expected. The thrust per µA leakage increases as the inverse square of the dielectric thickness, thus getting the dielectric as thin as you can increases the thrust, so surface layers of oxide (produced by anodising) is an obvious thing to test. According to the theory, this does not depend on the voltage, but only the leakage current. We’ll find out if that’s true.
If it’s true, then my 2.5x3cm test should lift around 4kg from the ground. Seems too good to be true. More than enough torque available on a fairly small diameter rotor to drive a generator or a car alternator from the scrapyard, but that will also need some sort of controller so it doesn’t spin too fast.
Hi guys,I fear that this is going to drive me Nutz! I really need to test this, I have most everything I need to test the concept except the actual rings. wonder how big and how much time needed to create this. 2 – layered ring condenser plates. maybe adjustable spacing…… I can use the coil driver and the set of HV Diodes, that would give me 15KV @ 500 watts 25khz with polarity. Enough to make things jump if the concept is valid. I have lots of thin clad, just need to find the time, make the form..
Emmmm…. upper and lower flat cone rings of laid up on a form with distance adjustable edges .
Simon is talking millimeters and I’m thinking in inches…. LOl
Adolfo is cheering us on.
A big leaky flat plate condenser ! If this works the physics will yield all kinds of goodies
The trick is to prevent leakage except at the edges of the disk.
need semi insulated layers to form each plate to get the largest amount of charge carriers (electrons) at the edge of plates. Damn… 15,000 volts may be too much to contain.
pg – though they are using 3.5kV and a 25-micron dielectric, the formula there says that the lift goes up as 1 over d squared, so really we want a thinner dielectric (thus lower voltage) to get more thrust. Counter-intuitive. Needs less power the lower the voltage, too, since it’s the current that’s important.
So this is why I’m trying to do this using anodising. Gets me down to the range of 50nm dielectric and 20V. Just some problems protecting that thin layer. If I solve those, and it works, I’ll give you details.
You’d think this would have been noticed. However, most capacitors tend to be wound or multilayer with thicker dielectric, and don’t often get to just leaking without blowing up. We all know the way HV capacitors jump when they blow, but put it down to gases or chemical energy.
It might however need the right voltage, and 20V doesn’t do the job. May take a while to explore the best way. Enough others have found this works, so there is an effect there, just needs optimisation.
Simon; I used to think current was the thing but now think it is the presents of charge that creates the needed force, hence amount of charge volume in the condenser, capacitor plates, Electro-statics not electro-magnetic force. Warping space it’s self, not creating current flow in it. LOL, we shall see which direction is the right one. 8-).
pg – the theory as to why this is supposed to work doesn’t match your view of how things work. Thus you’ll need doublethink here, to accept two (at least) mutually-conflicting ideas as both true.
Mike is seeing a thrust of 10-20mg (weight change) so 100-200µN. Not a lot, and at these levels the weight-scale has some drift over time too. The area he used is 4x4cm, or around 1 and 5/8 inches square. Though IVO are producing 45mN for 1 watt input with this basic structure, which is obviously a couple of hundred time larger force, I don’t have any information about the design they use, except that they assemble it in a clean room. Dust can be a problem at these scales, and produce a weak point in the capacitor.
Though people talk about warping space, it’s more likely that what’s being warped is what’s in the space (let’s call it Aether for now) but the space itself remains unchanged.
Still, according to Mike’s theory, if you make the features small enough (of the order of 100nm double cavities) then you end up needing no power to produce the thrust. This goes against our normal experience that you don’t get something for nothing, but the earlier capacitor tests ( https://arxiv.org/abs/1810.04368 ) showed the thrust to increase as the dielectric thickness was reduced. Size does matter, and in this case the thinner the better. Probably still worth reading that to see what they did.
Main thing is that this idea is counter-intuitive. It seems impossible that it should work. But it does. We may be able to make it work better.
Hi Simon: Theories are wonderful mental games to play with. I can “see” them and decide if the facts fit into them and look at how well the facts fit together. My basic premise is that GOD works in simple things and if we see many different things then our understanding is wrong. If we see cows and horses, they are not all that different. The cells are the same, merely stacked a bit differently. The fundamental physics involved are the same.
Using weight change as a measurement of thrust means you are changing local gravity effects, so are you accelerating the test object in space or are you changing the linear acceleration that is gravity? The physics involved in a single atom is just the same as a star’s worth of them. just the multiplicity of them muddies the result. We “see” different outcomes but actually the physics are all the same. As you get down to the atomic level you are dealing with the effects caused by one atom in it’s individual space. In the gross effects of the atoms in a star those effects are muddied, but still the same.
So if I want to create an Electronic space drive. Can this be done? How can I do it?
The Basic premise is that the Universe has a building block of charge, negative, or the lack of charge, positive. Neutral is +/- where positive and negative are balanced. If charge is put into motion it exhibits effects of EMF on everything around it. These effects are relative to the 3 dimensions of motion in these different things. As our testing devices give us different results, we say we have different physics involved but the basic physics are actually the same. If we are “seeing” different physics involved then our understanding is flawed. GOD is very simple minded or the Universe could not have been created from Chaos. The WORD, GOD , is creation. Energy in chaos is organized into the stuff of CREATION. Charge organized, becomes more powerful while taking up less charge space, creating a localize “hole” in the charge pressure or a positive area. but becomes harder to accelerate or exhibits increased mass/inertia. So is mass/inertia internal to Mater or external to Mater ? This matters because it directs us as to how to approach the solution.
At present I “see” Mass/Inertia as effects external to Mater, Mater warps local space to create effects , Mass/Inertia, Gravity are the result.
So anyway I am canning stores of food from the gardenand gathering fire wood as stores to survive the coming winter. Carving nice tools for food preparing and presentation……. bowls and spoons ,,, out of nice pieces of the Oak fire wood. Nice coveted Christmas gifts for special people. And if bored work on this physics problem of Electronic propulsion. Oh yes and a massive amount of time spent at the computer, in Acad or the Internet World Wide Web
pg – probably better to separate the production of a force (thrust) from any changes in gravity. For these thrusters, turn them up the other way and the weight goes up rather than down – they produce a force in a specific direction. They do not affect gravity.
That’s actually more useful than being able to change gravitational force, even though in some of the situations you see the same thing (the weight is measured as less or more). With these thrusters, you can direct the force sideways too – no change in measured weight, but can push something to the side.
Yep, my woodpile is looking sufficient to last the Winter out too. I buy in the “slabbing” from the local sawmill, so comes in lengths of 10′ or so of the outer bark and such sections. Some bits get put aside for better uses than burning.
@Simon; I have done that slabbing fire wood, sawmill waste utilization as well ,except now it is slabs and waste from My own milling. I built a track system to use a heavy chainsaw to slab logs……. if I can get them to the mill!..
It seems that I started “salvaging” Oak from firewood to make carvings and small constructs at an early age. Now I make firewood out of the logs after I remove the carving material. Right now I making a set of Oak spoons for my sister to use in cooking and serving…. Firewood Spoon Company.…. LOL
The more I look at these above drawings the more sure I am that they are wrong!
I’m not demonstrating the concept correctly and must re think this. Then I will try to do a better job creating a better representation. Sorry all.
pg – it’s a pretty good bet that if some method of doing this has been published for some time then quite a few people will have tried it, and will also have tried variations on it. If they had actually succeeded, we’d have heard about it, and more people would have tested it and found that it worked. Therefore I’d say that the old stories tell us what not to do if we want to succeed. Instead, we need to do something different.
The original Becker and Bhatt (2018) experiment followed on from an experimental anomaly where unexpected forces had been seen in leaky high-voltage capacitors, and also fits with the T.T.Brown observations as you mentioned. Something odd there. It’s now been tested by several other people who see the same results, so somewhat of a bigger chance of being true this time.
Question here, as always, is “what’s actually happening” rather than “what do we think is happening”. Thus it’s a good idea to look at the anomalies, which show us where what we think happens isn’t what actually happens. Also tells us that the theory is wrong in some way, so we need to re-think that.
Mike’s theory tells us that for the “leaky capacitors” you should get more thrust when the dielectric is thinner and thus you’ll be using a lower voltage and power. Rather than using as many kV as you can get, and expecting the effects to increase with voltage, it suggests going the opposite way and making it work with low voltages. Worth testing that out and seeing if this non-intuitive result actually happens in real life.
@Simon; As classical trained in Electrics we think in induction effects of energy flows and capacitance as a “spring” to bounce that energy back and forth to get the wanted effects. But we ignore the effects caused by the electro-statics of the density of a mass of stationary electrons. I think we need to look at the effects caused by massive electrical charges. This was the key that Tesla was investigating in much of his work. Capacitance created fields rather the induction created fields. As the electrons travel very little there would be very little resistance generated loses. To get the needed packing we need high voltages, to limit current flows we need high frequencies to induce the needed energy capacitance leakage without resistance caused waste. A space drive requires a warped field to provide directed movement, so we need to warp the leakage in the desired direction by shape.
If we warp the capacitance device dielectric shape it’s movement will be in the opposite direction of the Aether’s direction movement. which would result in real thrust! So “up” inside and “down” outside in the area of “leakage” during the pulse of the packing charge. Now the strength of the “lift” pulse verses the strength of the return could be modified through shaping and rectification.
pg – to carry a wave, we need analogues of springiness and inertia. The springiness is something we call the electric field, the inertia is something we call the magnetic field, where classical physics tells us what those fields do. That used to give me the feeling I understood them, but in truth it just hides the source of that springiness and inertia as fundamental properties and doesn’t explain why they are there.
The Aether explanations that use a lot of very small particles that bounce off each other and follow the equations of fluid dynamics may appear to explain what happens, but in truth they again just put that springiness and inertia as fundamental properties of the Aether and do not explain why they are there. Ditto for the wave-based explanations, since in order for the waves to exist they also need a fundamental springiness and inertia. Thus all the current theories are circular arguments (I call them recursive) and propose a more-fundamental springiness to explain the springiness we can measure, and ditto for the inertia. Also of course applies to String Theory, the current ultimate theory, where the little strings themselves must have springiness and inertia in order to vibrate, and so there must be *something* below that to supply those properties. Of course, aficionados of any particular theory can’t see that problem of circular reasoning and that ultimately their favourite theory doesn’t explain what they think it does, but just defines the existence of springiness and inertia as fundamental in the “stuff” that space itself is made of.
Thus I’m thinking we probably need to re-think all we know about fields, inertia, momentum, and energy.
Since it is obvious that momentum is only conserved normally because the fields that transfer the forces between objects are normally constant, and that if the field is changing then the limited speed of light makes the action and reaction no longer equal and opposite (so momentum is not conserved), it follows that energy itself (whatever it actually is) is also not a fundamentally-conserved quantity.
I haven’t got a solution to this that feels anywhere near right. If you go through the Unruh wave explanation, that needs both a limited speed of light c and also an instantaneous transmission of forces across universe-size distances. Following from that, Mike McCulloch’s QI theory (using Unruh waves) also requires that, but the equations he’s derived work to explain gravity, the deviations from Newton’s Law of Gravity at parsec distances, the way those deviations have changed over (so far) about 6 billion years, and of course the “leaky capacitor” thrusters and what thrust they produce over a range of thicknesses of dielectric. A few other anomalous things, too.
Given that, seems a good idea to see if Mike’s equations are good at predicting the thrust available for really thin dielectrics and low voltages too.
Maybe useful to point out that these thrusters go against what we intuitively think ought to happen. It seems wrong, and of course they will obviously violate both CoM and CoE if they work, and those Laws have seemed inviolable for most of my life and I’ve relied upon them being right. I’ve come up against experimental evidence that they don’t always apply, and that calls into question everything that relied on them being always right, and that really makes everything I thought I knew a bit suspect.
If they do indeed work (and Mike’s experiments and those of IVO show that they do work when using a few kV and thicker dielectrics) then we need to re-calibrate our intuitive understanding of How Things Work. Part of this is that when we get down to sub-micron gaps things do not work the same as they do at more-human scales, and that Casimir forces are real and usable.
However, I’m quite happy if we can produce those forces and use them to create thrust and thus energy, even if we still can’t explain the fundamental reasons for them. Sorting out the explanation may after all take quite a long time.
@Simon; It just accrued to me, that The leaky capacitor and it’s dielectric warpage is the key. During the charge of the capacitor, the capacitor moves in the direction of the positive plate. once charged the capacitor has momentum/inertia. Once charged the “leakage” gains “push” against the Aether. there the quality and shape of the capacitor are critical to make the device work well. So “charge” and then “leakage”are important to make the device work. Voltage and frequency are functions that must match the device size and shape. In all cases it it the Electro-statics of charge quantity and not the Electro-magnetics of current flow that is the important thing as far as the propulsion is concerned.
Since Tesla and before it has been easy to measure EMF effects thru current flows, we tend to concentrate on current/magnetic as a measurement of circuit effectiveness, But we really want as little energy wasted in impedance/resistance losses as possible. Due to dielectric “springiness”most of the electrical energy is returned in the capacitance system.
T.Townson Brown pointed us in that direction in his Collage work with Biefeld.
See Biefeld-Brown effect https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Biefeld%E2%80%93Brown_effect
But he got lost in the “Ionic Wind” lifter thing and dropped his original work that pointed in the direction of Electro-static warpage and leakage.
We must have as great a charge as we can get without dielectric breakdown discharge of the field. That means that shape, size and material of the structures are important which dictates Voltage and frequencies needed.
pg – yep, the leaky capacitor does something different than we expect (in standard theory it does nothing but waste energy). The T.T.Brown thrust was however developed using DC, not AC. Yep, some of that thrust was ion wind, but a small amount of it was *something else* and continued to be there during high-vacuum tests. As I’ve said, it’s hard to produce a really hard vacuum because of outgassing of the parts, so seeing what amount of thrust was anomalous is difficult. If, as Mike says, the thrust of a leaky capacitor is proportional to the current, area, and 1/d², then the wide gaps T.T.Brown used aren’t the best way to see that anomalous thrust.
Once I’ve checked out the current tests using anodised Tantalum foil, and if that works, I’ll go on to seeing if Aluminium foil can do the same – really needs a very pure Aluminium here to achieve a good layer of oxide. Thus may need to find some old electrolytic capacitors and re-work the +ve electrode from that to get the right material (-ve electrode doesn’t need to be as pure, so isn’t, normally).
What we’re aiming for is the highest field strength possible. It doesn’t seem to matter what thickness we use here, so using half the voltage and half the dielectric thickness gives the same field strength and should work better, providing there are electrons being accelerated across it. You can of course look at an electric field as a distortion of the Aether, or a warpage of it. If this works as well or better at 20V on a 50nm dielectric as using 20kV on a 50 micron dielectric then I’d prefer the low voltage. In fact, if Mike’s equation is right, the 20V will deliver around 1000 times the thrust as 20kV for the same leakage current, so definitely preferable.
AFAIK, a Diamond layer would be the ultimate dielectric layer here, but Tantalum is almost as good. Aluminium Oxide some way down from that, but a lot easier to make and to get hold of the materials. Though a vacuum should work even better than a solid dielectric, making such a gap in the 20-100nm range is pretty difficult and, given the Casimir forces involved there, would also need a careful design to stop it from closing up.
Yep, we tend to think if we raise the voltage and power used we should get a bigger effect, but if the equations are right then this is exactly wrong here, and lowering the voltage and power gives a bigger effect when we also get the gap smaller.
As regards the shape, at the moment I’m only going to look at flat layers. There may be other shapes tried later, if the flat version works.
@Simon; A hint I picked up years ago was 19 layers made up of Magnesium on Bismuth about 3-5mm, plated on top of the Aluminum substrate. Bismuth is very Diamagnetic
Your idea of Aluminum Oxide as a dielectric should work for a thin film. I think that the amount of warpage in the Atomic structure is the most important thing. higher warpage is generally attained with higher voltages but that risks perforation and shortage failure. Also pulsed DC is the necessary way to go, possibly as slow as Kilohertz.
Yes “flat plat” would be the only logical choice. A thought is to think Lazar or actually Mazar so that only one side-edge “leaks” I think that you need both the dielectric warpage and the directional leak to actually get thrust.
pg – the problem with those “clues” is that if it was true then someone would have tested it and found that it worked. As with the “free energy” plans that are either sold or given away, there are a lot of people who will have tested those designs and yet no-one has demonstrated that it actually delivers on the promise. See Pat Kelly’s massive collection of such ideas, where nearly all have claims to have worked yet no replications have succeeded. Russ Griess did a fair number of competent replications of various such things, and they didn’t do what was claimed.
The warpage you want purely depends on the field strength. To get the maximum, we need a dielectric that as strong as we can get, so a thinner layer will withstand the same voltage difference across it. What we’re aiming for is acceleration of the electrons, and the distance over which they accelerate also needs to be as short as possible.
In the original paper, they tried different thicknesses of dielectric, and for the same leakage current they found that the 1/d² relationship held within experimental error. Use twice the thickness, and obviously you’ll need twice the voltage to get the same leakage current, but then you’ll only get 1/4 of the thrust but you’ll be using twice the power.
Thus the intuitive thing of “use twice the power you get twice the thrust” is exactly wrong. We don’t want a higher voltage, but instead we want that leakage to occur at a lower voltage and for the dielectric to be as thin as we can get it.
I’m not seeing the need for pulsed DC here. At the switching we’ll get transients that can exceed the dielectric strength. The only benefit I can see is that any arcing or dielectric breakdown will be limited in time and thus will have limited damage, but if a location is damaged then the next spike of power will tend to produce a new arc there because there will be a switching-spike of higher voltage. Thus probably better to use a DC with a longer rise-time to avoid those spikes, and for enough resistance to be built-in to the capacitor plate that any arc is damped. Again this isn’t normally how we’d design a capacitor, since generally we want it to be low-impedance.
It’s necessary to look at each design decision here, since there’s a lot here that goes against what we are used to.
@Simon ; you might find this amusing
pg – the idea of “Mercury vortex engines” has been around for a very long time, but it would be easy to prove it works (if it does). In fact, the video has a demo of Mercury being spun, but obviously no actual thrust is produced. Easy enough to put more power into that, and given the number of people who have been playing with that idea I’d have expected some back-shed experimenter to have succeeded. They’d have then told others what they did, and it spreads from there.
Looks to me that the drive function itself is possible, and that there are several ways to achieve that, not just one. Also seems to me that the designs that have been published (as here) are ones that do not work, since if you divert people into spending all their time and money going down the wrong path then they won’t find out the truth or a correct way, and you keep your lead. If you get people working with large quantities of Mercury, too, they’ll probably end up poisoned by it and die anyway.
I don’t know if the military have something that works, and if they do, how much power it needs or how risky it is to run it. May be all smoke and mirrors. Maybe now we have a method that demonstrably works to a small extent (leaky capacitor) though so far my anodised-dielectric idea isn’t working out that well. More on that when I’ve got over that problem.
@Simon ; entertainment value mostly, but there was a small mention to “Capacitance”, in fact a drawing that would indicate leaky capacitance. This seems to be a common in most of the things that I have seen that might show signs of working. Your insight on the possibility of rectifying energy struck me that we may have been seeing hints of that in some “zero point” energy batteries where various materials are ground very fine and packed into a cell. I would suspect that in addition to some amount of electro-chemical effects there is also some solid state rectification. with the help of gravity to bias it.
You are right that there is a lot of techno-babel out there deliberate to mislead people. But as we have better understanding then 99% of the people we should be able to see through their camouflage. While there may well be secret copies of operating craft I don’t believe that they understand what they have. or after all these years something would have leaked out. Keep looking, is what I do, and filter out the obvious BS.
Oh yes , I doubt that counter spinning Mercury could create a space warp bubble, anti inertia/gravity drive, But it could be a part of a energy accumulator
pg – yep, agree it’s possible that the capacitance in the base of the craft is in fact the drive and not just an energy store, and they didn’t know why it worked and so added some extra descriptions of other stuff to make it sound more believable. I think the “spinning Mercury” idea was started by Tesla, so some people will just accept it’s going to work even though they can’t make it work whenever they try it.
Also, yep the “zero-point” batteries are probably more likely to be violating 2LoT to produce the output energy. It just needs a rectifier that has a low-enough forward voltage and a high-enough speed.
There is also the possibility of making energy from *nothing* if you find the right symmetry to break and can break it. AFAICT nothing in the “historical” records has done that, though a couple of people I know have fairly recently found ways that I think will work. Also, of course, if we get the drives working, they obviously violate the symmetry of action and reaction being equal and opposite, and thus can also produce energy from *nothing*. This is something I always thought was impossible, but now I’m seeing that it’s logically possible and probably also practically possible.
At the moment my anodised capacitors look more like dead shorts (about 2 ohms) rather than capacitors. Once I figure out why and fix it, we’ll see what happens.
@Simon; It would appear to me that you are getting too many non converted (conductive ) metal atoms in your anodized layer.
Hummmmm, I had to refresh my memory on Anodizing.
Growing the converted layer tends to look more like a forest of conifers of dendrites with very thin areas between them, you would need to fill those areas with something that will discourage charge carriers.
As you have the ability to Anodize I would suggest you pursue the layering concept of creation of leaky capacitance through electroplating/anodizing.
The effects are the result of the degree of warpage times the volume of material warped. If you can only get 2 volts of warpage per layer (capacitance) you will need many layers of warped material. Not necessarily a bad thing.
This looks similar to working with Super capacitors where low voltage requires high volume to store large amounts of charge carriers in the dielectric. It is that high volume of warped material that is key.
This is where the specific layered material I pointed to might be key. The layer of Bismuth between layers of anodized Magnesium Laid over an Aluminum substrate, The Bismuth resists magnetic/EMF penetration and moves the lines of force into the adjoining material.
To get controlled leakage you will need to use laws of physics to help you direct the place and direction of the leakage. Consider on how a Lazar works to get photonic “leakage” in the desired place and direction.
I don’t know how authentic the layered material report was. It was reported to have been material removed from a wrecked Non-human flying device. the coupons were tested and the layering discovered. The philosophy for the layering of Magnesium and Bismuth are my own and not a part of the report.
There are hundreds of years of reports to examine. I have found many hints in those reports. So I prefer actual reports of observations and Ignore other’s opinions of why, as that might bias my own reasoning. So I am down to cause and effect or in these cases Effects are caused By ??? also form follows function as physics is a universal fact that can not be changed for liberal needs..
In my opinion other world flying machines are a fact. We merely need to reverse engineer them. I’ve been doing that all of my life. Making a “Basket case” even with parts missing, function again is what I do for fun. There a lot of parts missing here. pg
added note; I also know about “Wild Goose” chases, been on lots of them, often sent on them by others. Just observations from another “Old man”
pg – During anodising I left it for hours at the top voltage and looked at the current being drawn. When it was around 4µA and stayed there for an hour or so I figured the anodising was complete and the layer was a constant thickness. With voltage at 10V, that thickness (for Tantalum) should be around 17nm. Much the same sort of process is used to make Tantalum capacitors, except that the initial conductive layer applied is Manganese Nitrate, which is then heated to around 250°C to produce a layer of Manganese Dioxide, and then a layer of Mn02 and Carbon is added, with a final layer of Silver. Putting either Carbon or Silver in direct contact with the Tantalum Oxide layer is not good, since there’s a mutual reaction that damages the oxide layer. So far I’ve tried conductive oxide powders (including MnO2) and Gold leaf, since Gold should not oxidise and thus take the Oxygen from the Tantalum Oxide.
Possibly that supply of Tantalum foil wasn’t pure enough. Possibly also it’s necessary to use Sulphuric acid to anodise and though using Borax gives me a voltage-limited layer thickness it may not be pure enough. It may be necessary to form the oxide by heating in air instead. Thus some other things to try. I’ve got some blocks of Silicon to test as well.
Bismuth is only slightly diamagnetic, so if that’s what’s needed it’s better to use Pyrophoric Charcoal. If you use Bismuth, it will be for other properties.
Otherwise, many thin layers of metal and oxide should do the job, with the thrust for each layer being additive. Just looked up the properties of MgO and I suspect the breakdown potential will be way too low to be useful at only around 10MV/m (Kapton is around 400MV/m). Still, get enough very thin layers and it will do the job.
Yep, seems that those UFOs are probably real, though whether they are alien I don’t know. You’d think that reverse-engineering should be possible if they are alien, and that we’d thus see human-built ones in use, but there’s a lot of misinformation around.
More news when I’ve got it.
See https://finance.yahoo.com/news/ivo-ltd-launch-quantum-drive-100000456.html . Launch of a test satellite (with IVO drive) on June 10th. The ultimate test is whether it works in space, and I expect it will work as specified.
So far no joy with experiments here (problems getting a good oxide layer that is non-conductive) but I’m now into pruning season rather than bench work.
Simon, I know that fun After nearly a month of being snowed in. 4 feet of snow followed by heavy rain, I am also in the middle of Pruning & gardening. The seasons wait for no one. California has 268% of normal snow pack in the mountains and more forecast, but above us,
We had several periods of the Grid being down for days. Telephone is still out. Thank goodness for battery backup and the satellite dish.
Thank you for the link, I did some research couldn’t find much except Iv0 seems to be a promotion firm.
the above is photo I found seems to be a sequential cascade of plate condensers in a test chamber.
This would be a test of the Biefild-Brown Effect paper without the Ion wind and with an added feature of pulsing the plates.
pg – it does seem that with with a good thin-film deposition system you could make some pretty good capacitors that leak nicely at a fairly low voltage rather than in the kV range.
IVO have been a bit quiet for the last year, having announced their drive a year ago and then no new press releases until now. They kept Mike McCulloch informed, but he was limited from telling people by his NDA. Mike’s experiments at https://physicsfromtheedge.blogspot.com/2022/11/on-cusp.html for interest.
IVO is around 3 people who are doing the development. I’ve no idea as to who’s backing them, but they also have other stuff they are selling for power-transmission, so maybe self-financed.
Thing is that this test will prove the drive works and accelerates the satellite. It stops being a lab curiosity and instead this is commercial, and for sale to anyone that wants to buy them (though may be a supply shortage if a load of people buy them). Once they are in use, and anyone can buy them and use them, it’s going to be indisputable that it actually works even if people don’t agree why it works.