View Full Version : Grebennikov Bio-gravitics anti-gravity discovery


techstuf
12-18-01, 11:16 PM
Is anyone familiar with this man's work? I just need to know what type of insect was used to make the discovery.

http://www.amasci.com/greb/greb2.html

Boris2
12-20-01, 04:25 AM
I have read of this guy before and read some of your link techstuf, I would not waste my time with pursuing this line. Sorry to be a killjoy, but this is my opinion.

techstuf
12-20-01, 12:32 PM
Perhaps antigravity is much simpler than pre-supposed.......perhaps you only have to have the right material subjected to the right electromagnetic frequency....after all, the german discovery of antigravity in the 1920's involved subjecting quartz crystal to the propagation of the correct electrical frequency to get the crystal to "stretch" many times it's original size.....thereby making the substrate matter very porous inside perhaps allowing the "charged" matter to interact and avert or "soak up" gravity waves from below.......much as in the discovery made by Grebennikov. Only Grebennikov's discovery related to small plates of material at the base of the wing casing of certain insects. What if that microscopically and geometrically intriguing and coherent structure acted much the same as the quartz crystal? being subjugated to the correct frequency of perhaps static electricity........whose standing wave propagation was in direct correlation to the insect's wing beats? Hey, just speculation.....but much better than a hollow suggestion. And by the way.....boris2.....why not try and make a go of providing at least a hint of reason as to why you chose not to research Grebbenikov any further........giving an opinion is one thing.....not backing it up with facts or even incoherent reasonings doesn't fly in these forums. That is unless you were simply trying "help a poor sap out of trouble" in which case I would suggest sending a private message?

YAH bless,

TechStuf

Boris2
12-20-01, 03:53 PM
Gravity is caused by mass warping spacetime and forming a "well" into which objects tend to "fall'. To produce anti gravity you would need to shield yourself from this mass. There is no known method to do this. The device that this guy stands on is a fraud, it is just a piece of wood with a handle and lever. If antigravity was this simple we would all have it. The money to be made with a simple demo would be hard to resist. The drawings are childlike. His paintings are ok though:-)

Hows that for an answer techstuf? :-)

Just a longwinded way of saying that I wouldn't pursue this line.

techstuf
12-20-01, 05:38 PM
Just as I thought..........you confirm my point. Anyone out there with any REAL information that can also apply Boris2's maxim rather than just write it? For it truly is better NOT to know something than to be WRONG. How about this maxim:

If you are not moving forward on the road to knowledge...how about getting off so you don't get run over by those making progress? Exit next right.

Or how about:

Silence is golden...except to the ignorant it may embolden.

TechStuf


P.S. to whom it may concern....in the future.....please consider other's threads and their topics rather than ringing in just to register one's ignorance.

P.P.S. and a competley unqualified: " I would not follow this line" does not, er, qualify.

Any TRUE antigrav researchers please respond........?

daktaklakpak
12-20-01, 07:56 PM
Based on this opening and by using bionics principles, the author designed and builded antigravitational platform, and also, practically, developed principles manned flight with the peed up to 25 km/min. Since 1991-92 years the device was used by the author as a means of fast movement.
Look at the above quote. That dude built a Mach 1.2 capable platform without any aerodynamic background? Do you believe that? :confused:

Chagur
12-20-01, 08:37 PM
I most certainly do!

I remember going almost Mach 3 one time!

But then I was on an acid trip and I don't know where I went or how, but I
do remember going almost Mach 3 ... at least that's what Herbie told me we
were doing ... I think. And I'm sure he was right because the stars just kept
whizzing by ... or were they just whizzing?

Take care ;)

techstuf
12-20-01, 08:58 PM
Uh guys, the thread is a request of Antigravity researchers......not Anti-intelligence afficianados....whose only form of real research is "researching" the depths of self ignorance.

SeekerOfTruth
12-21-01, 06:45 AM
Originally posted by Boris2
Gravity is caused by mass warping spacetime and forming a "well" into which objects tend to "fall'. To produce anti gravity you would need to shield yourself from this mass. There is no known method to do this. ....

That is not exactly true Boris2.

Read this article....

http://focus.aps.org/v7/st27.html


:D

daktaklakpak
12-21-01, 12:06 PM
Look, AG only makes you float, never makes you zoom.

What makes you think he could make such platform that moved faster than sound? Why there is no picture of such platform/device? Why only used between 1991 and 1992?

Maybe you think this kind of questioning is anti-intelligence. :rolleyes:

techstuf
12-21-01, 01:05 PM
Your reply does not help your cause! If you'd care to look, I started this thread as an inquiry into the history of this man's work. Not as a course in intellectual charity work!



and by the way, you may want to crack a book now and again as Gravity contains the "fastest" quantum component, other than light, in the known universe, and even that theory is being re-evaluated.

TechStuf

p.s. a quote from one of our thread posters.... "anti-gravity just makes you float"........perhaps in your mind, that is all it does, but it lacks the power to do even that for those whose task is simply to waste other's time. That just doesn't "float" in here. This is NOT a thread about Gravity wells, or Time sinks, (the latter of which take many forms I am coming to realize) I am inquiring of other researcher's experience with V. Grebennikov's work. :cool:

daktaklakpak
12-21-01, 04:18 PM
Originally posted by techstuf
I am inquiring of other researcher's experience with V. Grebennikov's work.
Have you ever wonder why no peer review of Grebennikov's work on the Internet?

Boris2
12-21-01, 06:46 PM
<b>If</b> magnetic fields tend to flatten space, they <b>might</b> reduce the amplitude of gravitational radiation, which is an undulation in spacetime. That effect <b>might</b> be seen in future gravitational wave observatories, though it is probably too small to be picked up with the first generation of detection technology. The work also <b>suggests</b> that theoretical models of neutron stars and other compact objects <b>may</b> need to include magnetocurvature, since they often involve both large magnetic fields and heavily curved spacetime.

From your link Seeker of Truth


That is not exactly true Boris2.

Not exactly untrue either.

Boris2
12-21-01, 06:50 PM
Techstuf, I'll keep my maxim unchanged as I see how apt it is for poster like you.

techstuf
12-21-01, 09:22 PM
If you have nothing to add that is pertinent to the thread then I suggest you spend your "energies" else where. and as for your maxim.......it is pitifully inadequate considering that most major innovations in the history of the world were from men who chose to continue their work in spite of being wrong countless times rather than sit in dumb ignorance and "not know something" which seems to be the status quo these days.

I highly suggest you find a thread more suitable for your tastes.
That is unless your tastes are particular to finding forums that put up with inane wanderings that have nothing to do with the particular discussion. It is obvious you know very little about the researcher in question. I started the thread with a question....a question you obviously took to mean: come on over and display your ignorance of the subject at hand!

Now unless you have any information particular to the type of insects that V. Grebennikov was working on........I bid you good day, alvederzhein, Gesundheidt, fare well.


TechStuf

Chagur
12-21-01, 09:51 PM
Since, for all practical purposes, you have the same access to information that
any of us has (via the Internet) why don't you research it?

Take care. ;)

techstuf
12-22-01, 12:06 AM
What about my initial question was so esoteric as to require your inane responses? Do you actually think the internet is a god? Is it YOUR god? It is a tool......tools fail all the time. Contrary to certain limited opinions......not every bit of information in the world is on the internet! And much of what makes up the internet is dis-information anyway. Not replying to my initial question was one way to go. Another would be to register a simple, but unrequired: No, I don't have the information. Now, for the sake of good science and Sci-forums in general, please go back to the chat room or corner of the internet from whence you have come. Unlike some whose purpose for Sci-forums is a playground, Others have real work to do!

Chagur
12-22-01, 12:33 PM
Like promulgating pseudoscience found on the Internet in an improper forum?

Please! :rolleyes:

Take care. :o

techstuf
12-22-01, 03:03 PM
Oh Ye of little minds.........I fear I have spoken to no avail regarding you. It was "proper" science that gave you the A-bomb......the H-bomb.......and Bio-warfare........ad nauseum.

Your disdain for "pseudo-science" changes nothing. It was this "pseudo-science" that brought has brought the world the bulk of it's technological understanding. Such ungrateful words from one who claims to be a seeker.........your words are nothing more than futile missiles.......with no guidance system. Heat-seeker would be a better term. One who seeks only the hot outgassing eminating from one's self. Of course, this is only a "pseudo-scientific" assessment. An "improper" opinion to the forum, perhaps.

So long and may the "proper" science be yours.

TechStuf

Boris2
12-22-01, 04:57 PM
It was this "pseudo-science" that brought has brought the world the bulk of it's technological understanding.

For instance?

I understand some maverick science has changed mainstream science, for instance plate techtonics, but you claim the bulk. Some examples would be appreciated. Shouldn't be hard to find a whole swag of them if your claim is true.

[f]
12-22-01, 06:32 PM
these links seem to have information on your requested interest.


http://groups.google.com/groups?q=%22V.S.+Grebennikova+%22&hl=en&rnum=2&selm=39C59DAD.46EA8997%40yoda.legnica.tpsa.pl
http://groups.google.com/groups?q=%22V.S.+Grebennikova+%22&hl=en&rnum=3&selm=39E6974D.86631F5F%40yoda.legnica.tpsa.pl
http://groups.google.com/groups?q=%22V.S.+Grebennikova+%22&hl=en&rnum=1&selm=39C59DC7.446DE3E%40yoda.legnica.tpsa.pl
http://groups.google.com/groups?q=%22V.S.+Grebennikov+%22&hl=en&rnum=3&selm=370D3D96.1326%40amorphous.spin.edu
http://groups.google.com/groups?q=%22V.S.+Grebennikov+%22&hl=en&rnum=1&selm=39C59DC7.446DE3E%40yoda.legnica.tpsa.pl
http://antigravitypower.tripod.com/Grebennikov/index.html


now the first three are in another language....i assume Russian, but they all mention your requested "inventor".

btw, calling names does nothing to furthur your cause here.

techstuf
12-22-01, 08:55 PM
My "cause" was a simple question......with a simple answer. I have since obtained the correct answer which helps me immensely. It was obtained by a source other than a quick internet scan. But thanks for the attempts at "helping" my "cause".


TechStuf


Knowledge without wisdom is like a burden of books being carried on the back of an ass.


Thanks again for the "help" attempts. I will "get off your backs" now.

[f]
12-23-01, 02:45 PM
i'm glad you found out.....what type of insect was it?

techstuf
01-02-02, 03:52 PM
Certainly, truth is stranger than fiction.....

ismu
01-28-02, 03:43 AM
Someone think that the insect you search is MAY BE 'Halictus Quadricinctus', according to Greb -- which says it was only live in Siberia. Check it out at: http://www.keelynet.com/greb/greb.htm (but i don't know nothing about bugs)

Even, personally -as mech. engineer- i doubt with Greb's claims with his flypad. But i'm really open mind, and interested in subject alternative energy. I also already read aboout TT Brown's capacitor effect to create such thrust against gravity, JL Naudin's test with high voltage lifter, Viktor Schauberger's theory of implosion and his flying saucer, etc. Those last things more acceptable to my limited mind. But the flying pad... IF it does fly, i got very BIG question about how come that so simple structured pad protect it's rider[???] (i think Greb too old to do such manuver as he said). Why such gravity distortion (if the pad based on that) not ruin his body[???]

Btw, IF you finally suceed to reveal the secret to make Greb's pad replica, i hope you make another one for me ;-).

Intrigued
01-05-03, 11:18 PM
Techstuf, I was wondering if you did find out which insect Dr. Grebbenikov was reffering to? It isnt a matter of linking the insect to the platform, In my mind I believe it is the theory behind the insect. Any help is appreciated! Thanks

Inguma
04-08-03, 07:54 AM
- Hhhmmm fringe scientists who have made serious progress. How about einstein? He was a clark and could barely cope with simple matrix algebra, and from what I can tell detested the stuffy environment of classical science. Fringe enough? Contrary to your assertation, Boris, I cannot think of ANY new discovery or theory that was NOT rediculed and shouted down by the establishment when it first appeared. From galileo to quantum physics. The person who invented the wheel was probably laughed at by his neighbor ("Og from the cave next door") - why would anyone need to have one of those?? Lol

- Because the gravity produced is in a beam form, the air infront of the vehicle would also be accelerated, hence there would be no discernable air resistance and certainly no sonic boom

- I am at a loss as to why such a gravity beam would have a detrimental effect on the health of the operator, who would be accelerated at the same rate as everything around him.

- The most confusing thing in all this is why you should not be able to transport anything else with you in the craft. Surely the effect on it would be the same as on him, in the same way as the effect on him was the same as the effect on his scooter board type thing??

Another ignorant fool ------> Rob :) :D

ps to the person who wanted to see a photo, try searching for one first before making blind assumptions :bugeye:

Felipe
09-12-04, 09:20 AM
Hi, well, techstuf: I would really, really apreciate if you tell me something of what you have found. Im' really interested in this, and I know that sometimes is better to dicovered things ourself, but is good to soometimes have a little help, so I if you can tell some information or send me an e-mail (lifeallsurfer@hotmail.com) it would be great.

cato
09-15-04, 09:11 PM
There is a potential to make billions/trillions off anti-grav, if there was a viable way to do it right now I am pretty sure it would be developed quickly.

Boris2
09-16-04, 11:11 PM
>>>>Contrary to your assertation, Boris, I cannot think of ANY new discovery or theory that was NOT rediculed and shouted down by the establishment when it first appeared.

show me a reference where QED was ridiculed extensively....or relativity for that matter.

andrewsmith1986
09-20-04, 03:38 PM
earths revolution around the sun was pseudo-science at one point as was electricity

pursuer
10-28-05, 09:20 PM
Certainly, truth is stranger than fiction.....
I have to agree with this. I have been studing this for a while now and would like to compare notes, if you could.

SearcherOfTruth
11-17-05, 04:36 PM
Techstuf,
I too would be interested in learning what you discover, and/or corresponging with you on the subject, comparing notes so to speak.

I'm no scientist or entomologist, but I believe the phenomenon that V. Grebennikov wrote about, is quite possibly true, and not going to be restricted to just a certain species found only in Siberia. Take for example your average garden variety bumblebee. Due to its size/weight vs wing size/structure, it theorectically should not be able to fly(according to scientists), yet it does.

If you like, let's talk about some of the clues he left. Feel free to contact me via this forum, or email.

SearcherOfTruth

Boris2
11-17-05, 04:55 PM
>>>> Due to its size/weight vs wing size/structure, it theorectically should not be able to fly(according to scientists), yet it does.

rubbish

http://www.sciencenews.org/articles/20040911/mathtrek.asp

Tristan
11-17-05, 08:49 PM
that little 90-year old looking dude, zipping around on a little wooden platform with a pogo stick pigeoned through it makes me want to laugh so hard.

So, you honestly believe this old fart stepped on a wooden plank and went more than 700 mph and was able to hold on? Lets stick you ontop of a 747 and see how long you can hold on for.... LOL

This is so about to be cesspooled

SearcherOfTruth
11-18-05, 02:01 PM
Boris2,
You obviously did not get the point, which comes as no big surprise. Closed minds rarely have the ability to see beyond that which they perceive to be tangible.

Boris2 & Tristan,
Not long ago, a mere wink of an eye in the existance of man, people thought the Earth was flat and the Sun revolved around it....Imagine that.

It's true, as well as understandable, that when people don't comprehend how or why something works, they want logical and scientific proof, but that proof never comes from those who simply say it's impossible and dismiss it. It comes from those who maybe think "outside the box" a little, and spend the time and effort to find out why.

Boris2
11-18-05, 05:08 PM
>>>>You obviously did not get the point

do not underestimate what i get and do not get. i know exactly where you are coming from. if you and your kind wish to believe this rubbish that is ok, real scientists will go on doing real science, regardless.

Tristan
11-18-05, 08:47 PM
I dont think you understand. I have a completely open mind. Matter of fact, im more open minded than most people I know. But come on... give me a break. This is a joke... There is no possible concievable way a human being could travel at mach 1 on a wooden plank... (EVEN if the antigravity thing was real...HE WOULD STILL BE BLOWN RIGHT OFF THE PLANK. PERIOD.)

Im not calling BS on the antigravity stuff. Im calling BS on a little old dude traveling 700mph on a wooden plank.

CANGAS
11-18-05, 10:45 PM
I question the lack of a safety margin. No apparent redundancy in the mechanism of the flying shovel. Would I get myself more than a yard off the ground moving more than 1 MPH if I had an IQ over 56.7 with only ONE "power circuit"? Hail, no! I would have three or four racks off antigravity-stuff INDEPENDENTLY manipulated.

I am not claiming anything about any antigravity research, but I am claiming that this particular account sounds very suspicious to me. :bugeye:

SearcherOfTruth
11-21-05, 02:17 PM
Ok guys, we all have our own opinions.

If anyone has heard from Techstuf, or anyone else who might be researching this subject, concerning their findings, I would be very interested in corresponding with them. Thanks.

mrgalleria
11-06-07, 01:08 AM
Aloha,
I think Grebennikov is a very credible individual with his discovery of cavity structure effect. I think he accomplished what he said. Why would a credable scientist fabricate a story that could devastate a career that took a lifetime to aquire?
I have twice seen a beetle here in Hawaii disappear and reappear in another place in a manner otherwise I cannot explain. This is a black beetle very common here that is seen usually at night, around lights. It has a single pointed horn on it's forehead and get's about 3/4" long. You may have this in your area. Upon study of the wing chitin understructure under a microscope, I found a pattern identical to the pattern of the single photo of the underside of the Grebennikov platform.
Also, I think Milkovich clearly proved that gravity is ELECTRICITY. That having been said, anti-gravity is mearly a product of understanding the nature of electro-gravity and countering it's affect. That will definitly be some interesting research!
Bill

mrgalleria
11-06-07, 01:29 AM
Aloha,
I will tell you about the first time the beetle disappeared and reappeared. It was at night, and a beetle came flying in the open window into a room where I was working. As I had read of Grebennikov, I decided to observe this insect, forcing myself to not even blink in the event something happened. Because it was quiet, the sound of the beetles flight was comparable to several bees in volume. The beetle buzzed around the room in a very haphazzard fashion, flying very slowly according to it's ability. Then it bumped into the post supporting the floodlight in the room. It disappeared. Then I saw it on the ground a distance of 7' from where it disappeared. If I had not known about Grebennikov, I would have rationalized it away in my mind. But without a sound, it moved 7' at a speed it was not capable of traveling. I am convinced.
Bill

mrgalleria
11-06-07, 12:10 PM
Aloha,
It is said the platform had a small battery and switch. I have an idea what this is for. Upon the study of the wing chitin mentioned before, I observed two "veins" on the inside. One was red, and ran around the perimeter of the wing. It was very squiggly, in an irregular pattern. If you were to compare it to a wire, then it may be double to triple the length of the perimeter of the wing, because of the zig-zag of the vein. Running along the length of the wing were orange veins which were straight and ran along every second groove in the wing. The grooves or sections had the simple pattern found on the bottom of Grebennikov's platform. I think these veins contain a conductive material which is activated by a slight current from a nerve. Someone else mentioned the conductivity of the fluid in the wing. This arraingment makes some sort of coil, I believe.
Bill

draqon
11-06-07, 01:30 PM
Grebbenikov is bias, his work is bias, and all of it is just a focus.

mrgalleria
11-07-07, 02:27 AM
Aloha,
bias- a prejudice in a general or specific sense.
focus- the ability to concentrate on a subject or issue.
dragon- a mythical creature.
Sure hope this helps.
Bill

Read-Only
11-07-07, 02:51 AM
Aloha,
I think Grebennikov is a very credible individual with his discovery of cavity structure effect. I think he accomplished what he said. Why would a credable scientist fabricate a story that could devastate a career that took a lifetime to aquire?
I have twice seen a beetle here in Hawaii disappear and reappear in another place in a manner otherwise I cannot explain. This is a black beetle very common here that is seen usually at night, around lights. It has a single pointed horn on it's forehead and get's about 3/4" long. You may have this in your area. Upon study of the wing chitin understructure under a microscope, I found a pattern identical to the pattern of the single photo of the underside of the Grebennikov platform.
Also, I think Milkovich clearly proved that gravity is ELECTRICITY. That having been said, anti-gravity is mearly a product of understanding the nature of electro-gravity and countering it's affect. That will definitly be some interesting research!
Bill

You have entered a realm where proof is required when statements are made.

While it is strongly expected that eventually all the basic forces will be found and proven to be related by the much-awaited GUT (Grand Unification Theory) there has been nothing to date that links gravity to ANY of them - let alone electricity! Please provide substantiation that Milkovitch - or anyone else - for that matter, has done such.

mrgalleria
11-08-07, 12:49 AM
Aloha,
Thank you for your request.
I have to admit, I had to watch the Milkovich video 10-20 times before I got it. You may notice near the end where a certificate is presented which recognizes Milkovich for his simple and elegant device which demonstrates alternating current.
When the pendulum reaches the end of it's swing, regardless of the weight of the pendulum, it momentarily seems to become weightless. It is not weightless, as we know, so what happens to the gravity-weight effect? It is transferred to another point. That is an electrical action-reaction.
Normally, we experience gravity in the form of direct current.
You could say that this momentary weightlessness is the result of enertia and mass, and this is true. But the base effect is electrical. And the fact that the mass-enertia-gravity energy is transferred to another point also can only be explained by an electrical effect. It is not a mechanical effect.
Another example is a swing. While swinging, you experience a brief weightless sensation at the end of travel, and simultaniously a leg of the swing set may even lift off of the ground. If you are weightless, how does the leg of the swing (held in it's realitive position by substancial weight) lift?
Momentarily, while you seem weightless, the electrical effect of gravity on your body has been electrically transferred to another point, and then returns.
Simple enough a child can understand, yet probably a true challenge for someone highly educated in cross-understanding.
Bill

Read-Only
11-08-07, 01:20 AM
Aloha,
Thank you for your request.
I have to admit, I had to watch the Milkovich video 10-20 times before I got it. You may notice near the end where a certificate is presented which recognizes Milkovich for his simple and elegant device which demonstrates alternating current.
When the pendulum reaches the end of it's swing, regardless of the weight of the pendulum, it momentarily seems to become weightless. It is not weightless, as we know, so what happens to the gravity-weight effect? It is transferred to another point. That is an electrical action-reaction.
Normally, we experience gravity in the form of direct current.
You could say that this momentary weightlessness is the result of enertia and mass, and this is true. But the base effect is electrical. And the fact that the mass-enertia-gravity energy is transferred to another point also can only be explained by an electrical effect. It is not a mechanical effect.
Another example is a swing. While swinging, you experience a brief weightless sensation at the end of travel, and simultaniously a leg of the swing set may even lift off of the ground. If you are weightless, how does the leg of the swing (held in it's realitive position by substancial weight) lift?
Momentarily, while you seem weightless, the electrical effect of gravity on your body has been electrically transferred to another point, and then returns.
Simple enough a child can understand, yet probably a true challenge for someone highly educated in cross-understanding.
Bill

Thank you for the reply but honestly, it's nothing but pseudo-scientific techno-babble. In other words, there's no real science at all in any of it .

And pardon me, but your prose certainly in no way serves as any kind of proof. Kindly supply links to to some respected scientific sources that agree with what you are saying. Presenting it in the fashion you just did is nothing more than hearsay at best.

phlogistician
11-08-07, 03:49 AM
Also, I think Milkovich clearly proved that gravity is ELECTRICITY.

Do you mean Milkovic?

And he clearly didn't prove gravity was electricity, because if it was, all we'd have to do to create anti-gravity would be to prevent the particle exchange involved, ie, sit on something non-conductive and we'd float away. Well, I don't see blocks of non-conducting concrete floating freely around.

mrgalleria
11-08-07, 11:59 AM
Aloha,
"anti-gravity is mearly a product of understanding the nature of electro-gravity and countering it's affect."

Sorry if you don't understand. Do you also deny that light is electrical? I did not think I would need to explain the fact that there are many types of electricity, some barely understood (like cold electricity), others realitively unknown. Your own testimony confirms that.
This is a science forum, isn't it?
(Yes- Milkovic, thank you.)
Bill

Read-Only
11-08-07, 02:08 PM
Aloha,
"anti-gravity is mearly a product of understanding the nature of electro-gravity and countering it's affect."

Sorry if you don't understand. Do you also deny that light is electrical? I did not think I would need to explain the fact that there are many types of electricity, some barely understood (like cold electricity), others realitively unknown. Your own testimony confirms that.
This is a science forum, isn't it?
(Yes- Milkovic, thank you.)
Bill

Just more pure nonsense - and still NO sources of proof. Quite frankly, you aren't going to be able to find any plausible ones.

phlogistician
11-09-07, 04:19 AM
Aloha,
"anti-gravity is mearly a product of understanding the nature of electro-gravity and countering it's affect."

Er, well, no.


Sorry if you don't understand.

Bub, I studied Physics at University. While that is merely entering the world of real science, no real scientist I have ever met (and I worked with some PhD's doing cutting edge research) agrees that gravity is 'electro gravity'.


Do you also deny that light is electrical?

Yes I do deny that. Light is an electro-magnetic wave. It is not made of electrons.


I did not think I would need to explain the fact that there are many types of electricity,

There is electrical current (moving electrons) and static electricity (stationary electrons). That's hardly many.


some barely understood (like cold electricity),

cut out the pseudo science please.


others realitively unknown. Your own testimony confirms that.

Say what?


This is a science forum, isn't it?

Yes, but you should have posted this in the Pseudoscience section.


(Yes- Milkovic, thank you.)
Bill

Science is about attention to detail. You get the detail wrong, well, the rest just falls apart.

mrgalleria
11-10-07, 01:09 AM
Aloha,

Thanks for your attention to my reply phlogistician. It was good of you to respond item by item. But you are also guilty of leaving out scientific validation to your reply.

You believe cold electricity is "psuedo-science"? I think that the people who have experienced it would not be surprised by your opinion. But is your opinion fact- that is the important question? Can you prove electrical energies like cold electricity do not exist? Or is it easier to sit there and say "my teachers at the University know everything, and they taught me everything too"?

Electricity in light is another type of electricity that science has not been able to measure. But there is substancial physical evidence that it is present, aside of electrical conversion with photo cells. You may want to research how plants have been grown normally in total darkness using a very simple method of using the electricity in light, another type of electricity not net understood.

You said "sit on something non-conductive and we'd float away" in reference to gravity being a form of electricity. If, you happened to be sitting with a group of intellectuals, say 2000 years ago, and they were discussing the nature of water, and you stated that water was a combination of two gases- hydrogen and oxygen, well you can be certain that not only them but just about everyone on the planet would be convinced that you were mad.
Now if I told you that it is electricity that binds the hydrogen and oxygen in water, are you going to run out and throw an electric motor in, expecting it to run? Or will you be afraid to go in the water, for fear of electrocution? You can use electricity to separate hydrogen and oxygen, and electricity to reform it. The point should be obvious, even though there is massive amounts of electricity in water (and most other things), it is of a different nature.

It looks like you all believe that little understood natures like gravity will never be understood by the masses, the peasants. You seem to be convinced that only a handfull of the most supremely intelligent intellectuals will be capable of mentally grasping the true nature of things. Then they can attempt to tell us the way things are, according to their interpretation of how much they think we can understand.
I have engineered a simple and effiecient device that makes hydrogen and nitrogen gases for boosting internal combustion engines using nickel and copper alloy, urine, and engine heat. See oupower.com, mrgalleria's project pages. I also am involved in other energy research which is privately funded. As a result, I cannot base my research on people's opinion or what some professor or book may think is true at the moment.
Bill

Avatar
11-10-07, 09:55 AM
You made the claim, now you provide the proof.
That's how science works. Everything else is just pseudoscientific garbage and mouthwash, just like the post above.

Present no proof and your posts will quickly be moved to the pseudosci subforum,
which is what I'm suggesting for the mod of this subforum to do.

kmguru
11-10-07, 07:41 PM
Perhaps antigravity is much simpler than pre-supposed.......perhaps you only have to have the right material subjected to the right electromagnetic frequency....

Just like one can produce magnetic force using electrons, perhaps one can negate gravity field using hypercharge. There is a research being conducted by a team of scientists under contract from the Navy...the result looks promising but not there yet.

Before the discovery of electricity, people thought that the mass of earth also produces magnetism i.e. more magnetic materials, more magnetic strength. Perhaps all primary forces are interchangeable. Time will tell.

Avatar
11-11-07, 03:06 AM
What's a primary force?

Read-Only
11-11-07, 03:25 AM
Just like one can produce magnetic force using electrons, perhaps one can negate gravity field using hypercharge. There is a research being conducted by a team of scientists under contract from the Navy...the result looks promising but not there yet.

Before the discovery of electricity, people thought that the mass of earth also produces magnetism i.e. more magnetic materials, more magnetic strength. Perhaps all primary forces are interchangeable. Time will tell.

"Interchangeable" is not the correct word - "interrelated" is.

kmguru
11-11-07, 07:34 AM
What's a primary force?
Gravity
Magnetism
Strong nuclear force
Weak nuclear force

Avatar
11-11-07, 07:41 AM
Ah, you meant fundamental forces!
p.s. I believe the second one is electromagnetism.

kmguru
11-11-07, 08:06 AM
Ah, you meant fundamental forces!
p.s. I believe the second one is electromagnetism.

Oops...and yes - the combined effect of electrical and magnetic forces. Why the two are combined to make it one and yet called fundamental force, I do not know! Can magnetism exist without electrical properties?

Avatar
11-11-07, 08:09 AM
Because they are one force as proven by Maxwell in the 19th century. :) Direct human perception is far from perfect.

kmguru
11-11-07, 09:00 AM
Exactly...so the word magnetism should suffice without a prefix...nah!

Avatar
11-11-07, 09:04 AM
No, because magnetism is a property of the fundamental force electromagnetism.

phlogistician
11-12-07, 05:09 AM
You believe cold electricity is "psuedo-science"? I think that the people who have experienced it would not be surprised by your opinion. But is your opinion fact- that is the important question?

Is my opinion fact, .... hmmm, is

I^2r

The formula for resistive heating that everyone determines in various conductors in school science lessons?

How to get power delivered, without seeing this phenomenon, well superconductors are a bit pricey, so the preferred option is to use high voltage, trading current for voltage, so the power output remains the same, but the current, and loss of power due to resistive heating is lowered. If there were a way to run 'cold' electricity distribution companies would be all over that technology.


Electricity in light is another type of electricity that science has not been able to measure.

Oh please, go read some James Clark Maxwell, the formulae for the propagation of electromagnetic waves is complete. There is no wiggle room for your pseudoscience!


You said "sit on something non-conductive and we'd float away" in reference to gravity being a form of electricity.

Yes I did, and you replied with nonsense. Forces act via particle exchange. The particle responsible for electricity is the electron. If you could block the particle exchange, the force would not act. We have materials capable of blocking electrons, they are called 'insulators'. If Gravity were enacted through the exchange of electrons, insulators would allow us to be free from Gravity. But they don't, so your theory fails. Also, that mean that Gravity only applied to charged particles. That too is incorrect. Go read some physics.


It looks like you all believe that little understood natures like gravity will never be understood by the masses, the peasants. You seem to be convinced that only a handfull of the most supremely intelligent intellectuals will be capable of mentally grasping the true nature of things.

When people like you post pseudoscientific rot like this thread, I become more convinced of it.



I have engineered a simple and effiecient device that makes hydrogen and nitrogen gases for boosting internal combustion engines using nickel and copper alloy, urine, and engine heat.

Your device is full of piss? Why doesn't that surprise me!

mrgalleria
11-14-07, 02:36 AM
Aloha,
All truth passes through three stages:
first; it is ridiculed,
second; it is violently opposed,
third; it is accepted as self evident. Arthur Schopenhauer.

You Tube- search "cold electricity",
intalek.com- cold electricity.

Electricity and gravity- Milkovic proved LRB.
ttbrowndotcom/defying_gravity/21_gravity
timedotcom/time/magazine/article/0,9171,787584,00
theworlddotcom/~sweetser/quaternions/gravity/unified/unified
thunderboltsdotinfo/tpod/2005/arch05/050523halleyborrelly
Bill

phlogistician
11-14-07, 03:49 AM
Mr Galleria, you, and Milkovic, are living in a cheesy SciFi world;

http://www.veljkomilkovic.com/Images/Knjiga5a.jpg

phlogistician
11-15-07, 04:01 AM
Eh Mr Galleria, no reply? You see such sights as the above whizzing around overhead all the time in your neighbourhood eh? Because Milkovic makes these gizmos and they really fly?!

Must be a hell of a thrill looking at the size of her pudenda.

mrgalleria
11-28-07, 08:59 PM
Aloha,
You ridiculed me and demanded verification. I supplied the same with the above links. Now you have the opportunity to dispute the evidence in reference. Other than that, sorry, I am not going to act like a baby too.
Bill

maxg
11-28-07, 09:41 PM
Aloha,
You ridiculed me and demanded verification. I supplied the same with the above links. Now you have the opportunity to dispute the evidence in reference. Other than that, sorry, I am not going to act like a baby too.
Bill

Assuming dot is replaced by dot, none of those links work. And sometimes when something is ridiculed it's because it's ridiculous.

Read-Only
11-29-07, 01:33 AM
Assuming dot is replaced by dot, none of those links work. And sometimes when something is ridiculed it's because it's ridiculous.

Heh! Well put! :D

No matter how it's dressed up, nonsense is still nonsense. ;)

phlogistician
11-29-07, 04:07 AM
Aloha,
You ridiculed me and demanded verification. I supplied the same with the above links.

Links are not verification, and you should not believe everything you read on the Internet.

Verification would be a proven working model based on Milkovic's or Grebennikov's theories. You haven't shown that. I've seen some footage of machines based on Milkovic's theories, which are just things spinning. Woo.


Now you have the opportunity to dispute the evidence in reference. Other than that, sorry, I am not going to act like a baby too.
Bill

It appears to be you throwing your toys out of the pram! Show some decent evidence and your position may gain some respect.