Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

Skip to comments.

NASA Baffled by Unexplained Force Acting on Space Probes
Space.com ^ | 2/29/08 | Charles Q. Choi

Posted on 02/29/2008 5:48:51 PM PST by NormsRevenge

Mysteriously, five spacecraft that flew past the Earth have each displayed unexpected anomalies in their motions.

These newfound enigmas join the so-called "Pioneer anomaly" as hints that unexplained forces may appear to act on spacecraft.

A decade ago, after rigorous analyses, anomalies were seen with the identical Pioneer 10 and 11 spacecraft as they hurtled out of the solar system. Both seemed to experience a tiny but unexplained constant acceleration toward the sun.

A host of explanations have been bandied about for the Pioneer anomaly. At times these are rooted in conventional science — perhaps leaks from the spacecraft have affected their trajectories. At times these are rooted in more speculative physics — maybe the law of gravity itself needs to be modified.

Now Jet Propulsion Laboratory astronomer John Anderson and his colleagues — who originally helped uncover the Pioneer anomaly — have discovered that five spacecraft each raced either a tiny bit faster or slower than expected when they flew past the Earth en route to other parts of the solar system.

'Humble and perplexed'

The researchers looked at six deep-space probes — Galileo I and II to Jupiter, the NEAR mission to the asteroid Eros, the Rosetta probe to a comet, Cassini to Saturn, and the MESSENGER craft to Mercury. Each spacecraft flew past the our planet to either gain or lose orbital energy in their quests to reach their eventual targets.

In five of the six flybys, the scientists have confirmed anomalies.

"I am feeling both humble and perplexed by this," said Anderson, who is now working as a retiree. "There is something very strange going on with spacecraft motions. We have no convincing explanation for either the Pioneer anomaly or the flyby anomaly."

In the one probe the researchers did not confirm a noticeable anomaly with, MESSENGER, the spacecraft approached the Earth at about latitude 31 degrees north and receded from the Earth at about latitude 32 degrees south. "This near-perfect symmetry about the equator seemed to result in a very small velocity change, in contrast to the five other flybys," Anderson explained — so small no anomaly could be confirmed.

The five other flybys involved flights whose incoming and outgoing trajectories were asymmetrical with each other in terms of their orientation with Earth's equator.

For instance, the NEAR mission approached Earth at about latitude 20 south and receded from the planet at about latitude 72 south. The spacecraft then seemed to fly 13 millimeters per second faster than expected. While this is just one-millionth of that probe's total velocity, the precision of the velocity measurements was 0.1 millimeters per second, carried out as they were using radio waves bounced off the craft. This suggests the anomaly seen is real — and one needing an explanation.

The fact this effect seems most evident with flybys most asymmetrical with respect to Earth's equator "suggests that the anomaly is related to Earth's rotation," Anderson said.

As to whether these new anomalies are linked with the Pioneer anomaly, "I would be very surprised if we have discovered two independent spacecraft anomalies," Anderson told SPACE.com. "I suspect they are connected, but I really do not know."

Unbound idea

These anomalies might be effects we see with an object possessing a spacecraft's mass, between 660 and 2,200 lbs. (300 and 1,000 kg), Anderson speculated.

"Another thing in common between the Pioneer and these flybys is what you would call an unbound orbit around a central body," Anderson said. "For instance, the Pioneers are flying out of the solar system — they're not bound to their central body, the sun. For the other flybys, the Earth is the central body. These kinds of orbits just don't occur very often in nature — it could be when you get into an unbound orbit around a central body, something goes on that's not in our standard models."

The researchers are now collaborating with German colleagues to search for possible anomalies in the Rosetta probe's second flyby of the Earth on November 13.

"We should continue to monitor spacecraft during Earth flybys. We should look carefully at newly recovered Pioneer data for more evidence of the Pioneer anomaly," Anderson added. "We should think about launching a dedicated mission on an escape trajectory from the solar system, just to look for anomalies in its motion."

Montana State University physicist Ronald Hellings, who did not participate in this study, said, "There's definitely something going on. Whether that's because of new physics or some problem with the model we have is yet to be worked out, as far as I know. A lot of people are trying to look into this."

Anderson and his colleagues will detail their latest findings in an upcoming issue of the journal Physical Review Letters.


TOPICS: Government; Your Opinion/Questions
KEYWORDS: anomalies; baffled; nasa; pioneeranomaly; spaceprobes; unexplained
Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first previous 1-2021-4041-6061-66 next last
To: NormsRevenge

Looks like “Dark Matter” is more powerful than all our “Grey Matter”.


41 posted on 02/29/2008 7:20:17 PM PST by fish hawk (The religion of Darwinism = Monkey Intellect)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: NormsRevenge
Did they factor in whether it was it an African or European swallow?

Seriously though, this sounds like a simple case of the so called "Transient G" effect. I'm sure they will figure it out within about six and a half years.

42 posted on 02/29/2008 7:24:21 PM PST by R_Kangel (`.`)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: R_Kangel
Did they factor in whether it was it an African or European swallow?

Aah! A fellow Monty Python fan! They'll always be near the top of my list. I think I'll throw in my Holy Grail tape tonight. Haven't watched it in about 2 or 3 years.

Check out this wacky physics site. They take the question very seriously!

Estimating the Airspeed Velocity of an Unladen Swallow

43 posted on 02/29/2008 7:33:58 PM PST by Eye On The Left
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 42 | View Replies]

To: NormsRevenge

Doppler effect... or alcohol.


44 posted on 02/29/2008 7:35:14 PM PST by Old Professer (The critic writes with rapier pen, dips it twice, and writes again.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: All

No problem...

Just go and see the Global Warming folks a few doors down the university corridor.

They will be able to fix those pesky computer models for you...:^)


45 posted on 02/29/2008 7:39:44 PM PST by az_gila (AZ - need less democrats)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 44 | View Replies]

To: Mr_Moonlight

“Like most pitchers, Perry was not renowned for his hitting ability, and in his sophomore season of 1963, he is said to have joked, “They’ll put a man on the moon before I hit a home run.” Other variants on the story say that someone else said it about him, but either way, on July 20, 1969, just minutes after the Apollo 11 spacecraft carrying Neil Armstrong and Buzz Aldrin landed on the moon, Perry hit the first home run of his career.”

>> Wikipedia


46 posted on 02/29/2008 7:48:53 PM PST by canuck_conservative
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 26 | View Replies]

To: canuck_conservative
on July 20, 1969, just minutes after the Apollo 11 spacecraft carrying Neil Armstrong and Buzz Aldrin landed on the moon, Perry hit the first home run of his career.

Was the pitch a spitball or a cutter? /laughs

47 posted on 02/29/2008 7:52:34 PM PST by Mr_Moonlight
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 46 | View Replies]

To: BenLurkin
They miscalculated the weight?

NASA has had problems with units conversion before.

Nah.

Couldn't happen again.

LOL

48 posted on 02/29/2008 7:52:57 PM PST by delacoert
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 2 | View Replies]

To: R_Kangel
Did they factor in whether it was it an African or European swallow?

Did they factor in the Monoliths in their equations?

49 posted on 02/29/2008 7:54:29 PM PST by TYVets
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 42 | View Replies]

To: NormsRevenge
The South Atlantic Anomaly (SAA)Zone perhaps????
50 posted on 02/29/2008 8:21:12 PM PST by Robe (Rome did not create a great empire by talking, they did it by killing all those who opposed them)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: BenLurkin
They miscalculated the weight?

Dr. Smith stowed away.

51 posted on 02/29/2008 8:43:26 PM PST by buccaneer81 (Bob Taft has soiled the family name for the next century.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 2 | View Replies]

To: Swordmaker; who_would_fardels_bear
Thanks swordmaker.

"Pioneer anomaly" site:freerepublic.com
Google

52 posted on 02/29/2008 9:36:46 PM PST by SunkenCiv (https://secure.freerepublic.com/donate/___________________Profile updated Tuesday, February 19, 2008)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 23 | View Replies]

To: NormsRevenge

Frame dragging?


53 posted on 03/01/2008 6:42:25 AM PST by Steely Tom (Steely's First Law of the Main Stream Media: if it doesn't advance the agenda, it's not news.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: doc1019
“The Lord God is subtle but, never malicious.” - A. Einstein
54 posted on 03/01/2008 7:04:43 AM PST by Lonesome in Massachussets (The women got the vote and the Nation got Harding.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 9 | View Replies]

To: ovrtaxt
Weird gravitational field maybe.

or maybe some oddness with the solar magnetic field

55 posted on 03/01/2008 7:11:12 AM PST by SauronOfMordor (When injustice becomes law, rebellion becomes duty)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 5 | View Replies]

To: NormsRevenge

It’s not an anomaly. It’s things working according to the laws of nature. We just don’t know all the laws of nature fully.


56 posted on 03/01/2008 7:13:09 AM PST by Leftism is Mentally Deranged
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Leftism is Mentally Deranged; Swordmaker

Plasma: The other 99.9%

http://www.thunderbolts.info/tpod/2005/arch05/051031plasma.htm


57 posted on 03/01/2008 3:47:44 PM PST by Fred Nerks (fair dinkum!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 56 | View Replies]

To: Swordmaker

Thanks for the ping.

The Pioneer Effect anomaly was predicted by another outlandish theoretician, Dr. Paul La Violette:

SubQuantum Kinetics, wide ranging unifying cosmology theory by Dr ...Posted on 08/22/2007 12:00:43 PM PDT by Kevmo ...... KEYWORDS: astronomy; catastrophism; cosmology; electrogravitics; grainofsalt; pioneeranomaly; science; ...
http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/f-news/1884938/posts

Physicists have ‘solved’ mystery of levitationAdditional information about electrogravitic propulsion may be found in the book Subquantum Kinetics: A Systems Approach to Physics and Cosmology, ...
www.freerepublic.com/focus/f-news/1877078/posts?q=1&;page=101

electrogravitics and an article published by Dr. Paul La Violette.

Electrogravitics Systems:
Reports on a New Propulsion Methodology

Edited by Thomas Valone

Integrity Research Institute, Washington, D.C., 1994
ISBN 0-9641070-0-7 $15 USD

The last I heard about him was that he was terminated from the US Patent office because he “believed in” Cold Fusion.

http://findarticles.com/p/articles/mi_m6052/is_2002_March/ai_86472886

Cold fusion confusion the Equal Employment Opportunity Commission’s incredible interpretation of religion in LaViolette v. Daley
Army Lawyer, March, 2002 by Drew A. SwankIs cold fusion (1) the equivalent of Catholicism? Is believing in extraterrestrials the same as being an Episcopalian? In the recent Equal Employment Opportunity Commission (EEOC) decision of LaViolette v. Daley, (2) the EEOC held that the complainant’s unusual beliefs regarding cold fusion, cryptic messages from extraterrestrials, and other “scientific” beliefs are entitled to the same protection in the workplace from discrimination as religious beliefs. (3) This note, by examining the facts of the case, the relevant statutes, agency regulations, and case law, will demonstrate that the EEOC’s ruling has impermissibly expanded the definition of “religion” to the point that it has created a new cause of actionable discrimination—something the EEOC has neither the power nor the authority to do.

Genesis

Paul LaViolette had been a patent examiner with the Patent and Trademark Office (PTO) until he was fired on 9 April 1999. (4) On 28 June 1999, LaViolette filed a formal complaint of discrimination, alleging that the PTO fired and refused to rehire him based upon his “unconventional beliefs about cold fusion and other technologies.” (5) The Department of Commerce, of which the PTO is part, dismissed LaViolette’s complaint on 13 September 1999, for failure to state a claim within the purview of Title VII of the Civil Rights Act of 1964. (6)

LaViolette appealed the dismissal, arguing that “`discrimination against a person on account of his beliefs is the essence of discrimination on the basis of religion.’ Therefore, he contends, his scientific beliefs in cold fusion are protected.” (7) The EEOC reversed the agency’s dismissal of his complaint and remanded it for further processing. (8) While an agency must dismiss a complaint of discrimination that fails to state a claim, (9) here the EEOC held:

In determining which beliefs are protected under Title VII, the Supreme
Court has held that the test is whether the belief professed is sincerely
held and whether it is, in his own scheme of things, religious....
Moreover, in defining religious beliefs, our guidelines note that “the fact
that no religious group espouses such beliefs ... will not determine
whether the belief is a religious belief of the employee ...

In the instant case, complainant argues that his unconventional beliefs
about cold fusion and other technologies should be viewed as a religion and
therefore protected. Complainant claims he was terminated and denied the
opportunity to be rehired because of religion, which embodies his cold
fusion beliefs. Therefore, under the applicable law noted above, we find
that the agency improperly dismissed complainant’s claim of discrimination
for failure to state a claim. (10)
While the EEOC subsequently stated that it did not determine the validity of LaViolette’s complaint, (11) by allowing the case to go forward, it has extended Title VII protection to scientific beliefs. In doing so, the EEOC not only misapplied its own regulations, but also ignored the statutes and case law that govern it and exceeded its statutory mandate as well.

Numbers

The ultimate question presented by LaViolette’s complaint is whether his scientific beliefs deserve the same protection from discrimination as another’s religious beliefs. Title VII of the Civil Rights Act of 1964 (12) provides that it shall be an unlawful employment practice for an employer “to fail or refuse to hire or to discharge any individual, or otherwise to discriminate against any individual with respect to his compensation, terms, conditions, or privileges of employment, because of such individual’s race, color, religion, sex or national origin.” (13) It defines religion to “include all aspects of religious observance and practice, as well as belief, unless an employer demonstrates that he is unable to reasonably accommodate to an employee’s or prospective employee’s religious observance or practice without undue hardship on the conduct of the employer’s business.” (14) Title VII has been interpreted “to protect against requirements of religious conformity and as such protects those who refuse to hold, as well as those who hold, specific religious beliefs.” (15)

The EEOC, responsible for enforcing Title VII, (16) is required by its own regulations to adopt Title VII’s definition of religion. (17) As Title VII’s definition of religion is circular (religion includes all aspects of religious observance and practice), (18) the EEOC’s regulation further adds that

[i]n most cases whether or not a practice or belief is religious is not at
issue. However, in those cases in which the issue does exist, the
Commission will define religious practices to include moral or ethical
beliefs as to what is right and wrong which are sincerely held with the
strength of traditional religious views. This standard was developed in
United States v. Seeger, 380 U.S. 163 (1965) and Welsh v. United States,
398 U.S. 333 (1970). The Commission has consistently applied this standard
in its decisions. The fact that no religious group espouses such beliefs or
the fact that the religious group to which the individual professes to
belong may not accept such a belief will not determine whether the belief
is a religious belief of the employee or prospective employee. The phrase
“religious practice” as used in these Guidelines includes both religious
observances and practices, as stated in section 701(j), 42 U.S.C. 2000e(j).
(19)

http://blog.hasslberger.com/mt/mt-view.cgi/1/entry/45/print_entry

In 1978, while still a doctoral student at Portland State University in Portland, Oregon, Paul LaViolette made a prediction, which like Einstein’s prediction of the bending of starlight may one day be destined to shake the world. At that time, he was developing a unified field theory called subquantum kinetics. Unlike string theory, which has never made any testable predictions, LaViolette’s subquantum kinetics theory makes several, ten of which have thus far been confirmed. One in particular challenges the most fundamental of physical laws, the law of energy conservation. Subquantum kinetics predicts that a photon’s energy should not remain constant but rather should change with time, that photons traveling through interstellar space or trapped within stars or planets should continually increase in energy, although at a very slow rate. For example, his theory predicts that a photon traveling through our solar system should increase its energy at a rate of somewhat greater than one part in 1018 per second.

While this rate of energy change is far too small to measure in the laboratory, if present it would be extremely significant for astrophysics. Essentially, it would require that astrophysicists scrap all their existing theories on stellar evolution and stellar energy production. Subquantum kinetics predicts that all celestial bodies, whether they be a planet or star should produce energy in their interior. Although the energy excess produced by any given photon each second would be incredibly small, when the cumulative effect of trillions upon trillions of photons inside a planet or star are added up, the amount of energy becomes quite sizable. LaViolette coined the term “genic energy” to refer to this spontaneously created energy.

Thanks to Andrew Michrowski of PACE for sharing this release (PDF) by the Starburst Foundation in Athens, Greece. Read more...

- - -

The Pioneer Effect Discovery and the Amazing Theory that Predicted it
Journal article announces early prediction of the Pioneer Effect
Paul A. LaViolette, “The Pioneer maser signal anomaly: Possible confirmation of
spontaneous photon blueshifting.” Physics Essays 18(2) (2005/2007): 150-163. In print as of January 2007.

The article is available on line at arxiv.org:

The Pioneer maser signal anomaly: Possible confirmation of spontaneous photon blueshifting

The implications of LaViolette’s genic energy prediction may extend far outside the battle with the white tower physics establishment to embrace society as a whole. Routinely the U.S. Patent Office rejects patents on so called free-energy devices that claim to generate energy without burning any kind of fuel. To do this they cite violation of the First Law of Thermodynamics. Even though the inventor in many cases provides signed affidavits of witnesses claiming to have tested the device and affirming that it works just as claimed, usually the patent is rejected in deference to the sacred law of energy conservation. As a result, many inventions that attempt to provide us with an alternative to burning fossil fuels end up in society’s trash bin. By casting doubt on the absolute validity of this law, the genic energy prediction could help to thaw patent examiners’ prejudiced stance on these technologies. With global warming well upon us, it is time the physics community takes a fresh look at LaViolette’s prediction and does some deep soul searching.

In this context, see also another article by LaViolette:

Moving Beyond the First Law and Advanced Field Propulsion Technologies

and an article on self-organizing criticality:

Y-Bias and Angularity: The Dynamics of Self-Organizing Criticality

See also:

Subquantum Kinetics: A Systems Approach to Physics and Cosmology

Genesis of the Cosmos: The Ancient Science of Continuous Creation
by Paul A. LaViolette

Newfound Data Could Solve NASA’s Great Gravity Mystery
“I would like to see this story reach its finality,” said Slava Turyshev, an astrophysicist with NASA’s Jet Propulsion Laboratory (JPL) who has spent the last 14 years—some of it on his own time—studying the Pioneer Anomaly. “So if it’s conventional physics, that’s fine and we can all go about our daily business. But if it’s something else, there may be another page.”

.

.

.

Electrogravitics Systems:
Reports on a New Propulsion Methodology

Edited by Thomas Valone

Integrity Research Institute, Washington, D.C., 1994
ISBN 0-9641070-0-7 $15 USD

To order by check call 1-800-715-9993 or, click here to place an internet order.

The book contains:

1) the paper entitled “The U.S. Antigravity Squadron” by Paul LaViolette (© 1993) which presents evidence that the B-2 Advanced Technology Bomber may use electrogravitic propulsion to enhance its flight capabilities. This paper, the first to reverse engineer the mysterious B-2 bomber was presented in 1993 at the International Symposium on New Energy (Denver, Colorado) and reprinted in Electrogravitics Systems.

LaViolette’s findings about the B-2 were reviewed in 2000 in an article in Aviation International magazine. Nick Cook, former aerospace editor for Janes Defense Weekly also has described these findings in his book The Hunt for Zero Point.

Shortly after it was published, this copyrighted paper was illegally scanned and its text was posted on the internet. Even though copyright notifications have been posted at numerous websites, postings of it have reappeared from time to time, often with the author’s name omitted. Please help to stem further postings by emailing the author at SphinxStargate@aol.com to alert of pirate postings. Also, if you have read or downloaded this paper, we urge you to please invest in a copy of the book Electrogravitics Systems. You will find that the paper’s nine diagrams make its concepts much more understandable. The book also contains other very interesting electrogravitics papers, described below.

2) The book also contains the intelligence think tank paper “Electrogravitics Systems” (prepared in 1956 by the Special Weapons Study Unit of Aviation Studies Ltd., a UK-based aviation industry intelligence firm). Formerly classified as confidential, this paper is now available for public view and reveals early interest by the U.S. and European aircraft industry in pursuing the electrogravitics gravity control technology pioneered by Townsend Brown. Paul LaViolette first discovered this paper in 1985 while browsing a card catalog at the U. S. Library of Congress in Washington, looking for information on electrogravitics. He was keenly interested in anything on the subject because the field theory he had been developing predicted the electro-gravitic coupling effect. He was surprised to find that this study, the only one of its kind listed in the catalog, was missing from the stacks! A quick library search indicated that only one library in the U. S. carried this study, the Wright Patterson Air Force Base Technical Library. He submitted an interlibrary loan request and to his surprise a copy was sent.

3) The book also includes the 1956 paper “The Gravitics Situation” (prepared by a division of Aviation Studies Ltd.), a paper by Banesh Hoffman entitled “Negative mass as a gravitational source of energy in the quasistellar radio sources and a copy of Townsend Brown’s 1929 gravitor patent.

Excerpt from “The U.S. Antigravity Squadron”

by Paul A. LaViolette, Ph.D.


Electrogravitic (antigravity) technology, under development in U.S. Air Force black R&D programs since late 1954, may now have been put to practical use in the B-2 Advanced Technology Bomber to provide an exotic auxiliary mode of propulsion. This inference is based on the recent disclosure that the B-2 charges both its wing leading edge and jet exhaust stream to a high voltage. Positive ions emitted from its wing leading edge would produce a positively charged parabolic ion sheath ahead of the craft while negative ions injected into it’s exhaust stream would set up a trailing negative space charge with a potential difference in excess of 15 million volts. According to electrogravitic research carried out by physicist T. Townsend Brown, such a differential space charge would set up an artificial gravity field that would induce a reactionless force on the aircraft in the direction of the positive pole. An electrogravitic drive of this sort could allow the B-2 to function with over-unity propulsion efficiency when cruising at supersonic velocities.

For many years rumors circulated that the U.S. was secretly developing a highly advanced, radar-evading aircraft. Rumor turned to reality in November of 1988, when the Air Force unveiled the B-2 Advanced Technology Bomber. Although military spokesmen provided the news media with some information about the craft’s outward design, and low radar and infrared profile, there was much they were silent about. However, several years later, some key secrets about the B-2 were leaked to the press. On March 9, 1992, Aviation Week and Space Technology magazine made a surprising disclosure that the B-2 electrostatically charges its exhaust stream and the leading edges of its wing-like body.(1) Those familiar with the electrogravitics research of American physicist T. Townsend Brown will quickly realize that this is tantamount to stating that the B-2 is able to function as an antigravity aircraft.

Aviation Week obtained their information about the B-2 from a small group of renegade west coast scientists and engineers who were formerly associated with black research projects. In making these disclosures, these scientists broke a code of silence that rivals the Mafia’s. They took the risk because they felt that it was important for economic reasons that efforts be made to declassify certain black technologies for commercial use. Two of these individuals said that their civil rights had been blatantly abused (in the name of security) either to keep them quiet or to prevent them from leaving the tightly controlled black R&D community.

Several months after “Aviation Week” published the article, black world security personnel went into high gear. That sector of the black R&D community received VERY STRONG warnings and, as a result, the group of scientists subsequently broke off contact with the magazine. Clearly, the overseers of black R&D programs were substantially concerned about the information leaks that had come out in that article.

To completely understand the significance of what was said about the B-2, one must first become familiar with Brown’s work. Beginning in the mid 1920’s, Townsend Brown discovered that it is possible to create an artificial gravity field by charging an electrical capacitor to a high-voltage.(2) He specially built a capacitor which utilized a heavy, high charge-accumulating (high K-factor) dielectric material between its plates and found that when charges with between 70,000 to 300,000 volts, it would move in the direction of its positive pole. When oriented with its positive side up, it would proceed to lose about 1 percent of it’s weight.(3, 4) He attributed this motion to an electrostatically-induced gravity field acting between the capacitor’s oppositely charged plates. By 1958, he had succeeded in developing a 15 inch diameter model saucer that could lift over 110% of its weight!(5) Brown’s experiments had launched a new field of investigation which came to be known as electrogravitics, the technology of controlling gravity through the use of high-voltage electric charge.


Additional information about electrogravitic propulsion may be found in the book Subquantum Kinetics: A Systems Approach to Physics and Cosmology, by Paul LaViolette. The book presents a field theory which forms an excellent basis for understanding electrogravitic phenomena. This new physics framework played a key role in allowing Dr. LaViolette to reverse engineer the B-2’s propulsion system.
We believe that in the future subquantum kinetics will be the main physics reference that will allow engineers to construct the aerospace vehicles of the future. When these principles are completely understood, superluminal propulsion is real, not science fiction. Future aerospace pilots will use the term “gradient drive,” not “warp drive.” As pointed out in subquantum kinetics, gravitational force is created not through the “warping” of space-time (that is an impossibility), but through the imbalances which gravity energy potential gradients induce, which alter the reaction-kinetic processes that continually generate the field patterns composing material bodies. Those who have no previous exposure to subquantum kinetics may find the above terminology confusing. However, things should become clearer once you have made the paradigm shift that subquantum kinetics entails.

Acclaim for Electrogravitics Systems

This 111-page book presents information indicating that antigravity has been and is being seriously investigated by leading aircraft companies as well as governments. An underlying theme is that T. T. Brown propulsion, once developed, will usher in an age of flight so revolutionary it will make all previous aviation, from the Wright brothers to space shuttles, constiute the Stone Age of flight.
This book can be appreciated by anyone who is interested in electrogravitics. It contains basic information for the neophyte (such as glossaries, patent lists and basics on T. T. Brown research) as well as clippings and information which make a case for the reality of electrogravitics technology. . . The book is thought-provoking.
Having made a theoretical case for electrogravitics, the book also makes a historical one. Hints of electrogravitics in the history of aviation, revealed through developments and statements made by major aircraft companies in articles from Aviation Report in the mid-1950’s are reprinted. T. T. Brown’s work is described in detail.
The paper by Paul LaViolette is an intriguing speculation that the B-2 stealth bomber operates on T. T. Brown’s principle of propulsion. Statements from government and ex-government workers and officials are shown to fit in nicely with this possibility. LaViolette argues that several disclosed as well as probable technological details of this classified design are consistent with design specifications for a would-be T. T. Brown aircraft.

Leslee Kulba,Electric Spacecraft Journal

Accidental B-2 Electrocutions?

According to a former WW2 pilot, it is rumored that up to 20 ground crew may have been fatally zapped by touching the B-2 too soon after it landed. Also the tires were reportedly built with external stainless steel casings to permit charge bleed off at touchdown.


58 posted on 03/04/2008 11:24:38 AM PST by Kevmo (SURFRINAGWIASS : Shut Up RINOs. Free Republic is not a GOP Website. It’s a SOCON Site.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 23 | View Replies]

To: NormsRevenge
The researchers looked at six deep-space probes — Galileo I and II to Jupiter

Um... There was only one Galileo to Jupiter, and it eventually crashed into Jupiter's atmosphere.

Methinks they meant "Voyager".

59 posted on 03/04/2008 11:27:27 AM PST by r9etb
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: NormsRevenge
Oh, wait... Galileo flew a VEEGA trajectory, with flybys of Venus, Earth, Earth, and Galilean Asteroids.

So one Galileo, two flybys.

60 posted on 03/04/2008 11:29:01 AM PST by r9etb
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]


Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first previous 1-2021-4041-6061-66 next last

Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.

Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

FreeRepublic, LLC, PO BOX 9771, FRESNO, CA 93794
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson