US Has Heavily Researched Anti-Gravity, Book Says

Reuters ^ | Friday September 7 12:15 PM ET | By Bradley Perrett

[Paul_E_Ester]

By Bradley Perrett

LONDON (Reuters) - The U.S. military may have conducted serious research into anti-gravity based on Nazi studies, a top defense journalist suggests in a new book.

In ``The Hunt for Zero Point,'' journalist Nick Cook says, based on a decade's research, he believes by the 1950s the U.S. was seriously working on anti-gravity ``electrogravitics'' technology, which would lift and propel vehicles without wings or thrust.

``I feel intuitively that some vehicle has been developed, particularly given that there is this wealth of scientific data out there, and the Americans have never been slow to pick up on this sort of science,'' Cook, the aerospace consultant for Jane's Defense Weekly, told Reuters in an interview.

Cook uncovered reports and sightings of a Nazi research device that had been hidden in a remote part of Poland, where it had apparently been supplied with great quantities of electricity -- which an electrogravitic experiment would require.

Curiously, barely a hint of such Nazi research appeared after the war, suggesting that whoever captured it -- probably the United States -- immediately stamped it ``secret,'' he said.

Cook noted that, as a respected expert, he is risking his reputation by writing seriously about a technology associated with UFOs, which most scientists dismiss as science fiction embraced by ``hocus-pocus'' believers.

The United States is known to have a huge budget for so called ``black projects,'' because it spends more on defense than can be accounted for by adding up the value of public programs.

Cook admitted he cannot produce a conclusive case. But that is the nature of black projects, in which even the workers usually have no idea what they are working on.

In 1947, amid the early craze of UFO reports, an air force general reported on the possibility of the United States building disc-shaped objects with extreme rates of climb and maneuverability but without noise or evident propulsion.

In the mid 1950s electrogravitics was the subject of a few press reports, including one that described work by most of the United States' major defense contractors, Cook reported.

And then it all went quiet -- just as stealth technology suddenly disappeared from view in the mid 1970s, only to re-emerge as operational aircraft in the late 1980s.

Academic papers on the subject have mysteriously disappeared from libraries.

There is still no firm evidence that electrogravitics is more than science fiction. Civilian scientists and amateurs have experimented with it, and while some have reported success, no one seems to have reproduced their results to prove that it works.

[XBob]

150- good question - "We are in fact slidding down a slope created by the gravity of the center of the earth. The old 'curved-spave' analogy is useful. But what force is making us "slide down" these four-dimensional curves? "

[longshadow]

are you trying to tell me that one photon of light will cancel out another photon of light?

No.

"Physicist" was trying to explain to you that "regular" particles have "mirror image" (in a manner of speaking) counterparts, called sometimes called "anti-particles." The counterpart to the electron is called a positron. It has exactly the same properties of and electron, except its electric charge is the positive instead of negative; thus the charge "cancels" that of an electron.

In the case of some particles that have no electric charge, the mirror-image particle turns out to be the particle itself. This is the case for photons, and, as "Physicist" has been patiently trying to explain, under any prosed formulation of quantum gravity, for a gravity particle. In such cases where the particle is its own conjugate (self-conjugate), they do not cancel each other out. That's the whole point.

"Physicist" is trying to explain that there is NO theoretical basis on which to hypothesize an "Anti-gravity particle" (which would posess the property of "cancelling" gravity), as this role is reserved for a particle's anti-particle, but when that role is played by the particle itself (when a particle is self-conjugate), there can be no cancellation effect, because in that case the anti-particle possesses the SAME, not the opposite, characteristic needed to cancel that of the regular particle.

I regret having attempted to explain Physicist's point; I seem to have caused more confusion than clarity.

[XBob]

keep trying, and thanks for trying. It is sometimes hard to get down to an understandible level, as one is used to using the jargon of the technical specialty with which you are familiar. Thanks to both of you, I am beginning to understand.

[membrsince]

Yeah, the "Al Martin Raw" site is good on that connection.