An Inquiry in to the Alien Reproduction Vehicle

[Ufopolitics]

So as construction begins on my version-1 (SV-1), modeled after Alexey's Version-2, certain questions float into ones mind...

So while there isn't perhaps a direct answer, here's some of those floating questions out loud:

1. Is this thing scalable? Can I scale it down and build a tiny version; can I scale it up? - (likely the answer is yes).
   
   
2. Is there a particular or optimal ratio of disc sizes? As I measured from the photos, Alexey's version-2 has ratio of approx 1 : 1.80 Magnetic disc to Centre disc. (If in doubt go with 1 : 1.618)
   
   
3. Is there an optimal size for the spinning disc and actual magnets? So if I have smaller size or power magnets does the disc size also need to be smaller? - Sort of a magnetic flux density (dielectric field) to plate size (HV DC) optimal ratio?
   
   
4. Motors-? Alexey uses some kind of largish diameter motor on the bottom of version-2 and by the looks of it, a different motor on the upper disc. The upper motor seems to be a regular brushless DC fan motor...? - This would suggest that the upper and lower spinning discs are not necessarily spinning at the same speed. (Coz they're different, even though wired together). It looks like the top disc might be spinning a little faster? - Is this important or not? (Think vortex or torsion)? In Alexey's version-3 the upper and lower motors appear to be the same?
   
   
5. Direction of magnetic disc? - Seems in the video of version-2 the lower disc is spinning counter clockwise? Does it even matter? Same effect if it spins clockwise instead?
   
   
6. If I reversed everything, spin, magnetic polarity, HV DC, would instead of lifting up, would there be an increased downward force?
   
   
7. As the material for the magnetic disc stated by Alexey is important (the hammered finish aluminum sheet) if using a brush (wire) connection on this material for the HV DC, the connection would not really be a nice constant connection, but because of the brush connection and the fact the material has all these lumps and bumps on it, the connection made would be very transient.. Is this important? But then again, there isn't a direct circuit, as its capacitor plates with applied DC. So no (large) currents, so maybe it doesn't matter so much. Looks like Alexey's version-3 may not have the hammered finish aluminum from the very brief views?

If anyone has any thoughts, suggestions or replies to any of those Q's, please let me know your answers..

Cheers,
Sputins

Hello Sputins,

Am very glad to see that you have started your build!!!

As for my answers to some of your questions...

1, 2 and three you have answered them related to scale and sizes.

About Motors...yes I noticed that lower is bigger and different type...as the top is a PC FAN motor...as of why...idk...maybe lower needed more weight and torque to spin the magnets against a changing polarity paramagnetic material?...due to magnetic friction?

But related to both spinning discs - motors speed...I believe they both are pretty well balanced...and the reason is based on observing the precise time when separation from ground takes place based on response from the whole body assy...

Here if you watch the indoor video of #2 prototype...it does makes some slight turns in both directions until it stabilizes, while gaining height.

About direction of rotation...go to Diagram Video...or your image (below)...rotation is there for each disc:



Both motors turn same direction ( notice same Input polarity) BUT when facing each other's they are COUNTER.

Hope it helps...and pls keep us posted.


Regards


Ufopolitics

[spacecase0]

one more thing,
when looking at all the hardware told about, the MAGVID is likely the most direct. Now I am pretty sure that the information as to why it works is likely not entirely what is actually going on, but still, it has the correct components with nothing extra.
as may be noted, it is nearly not possible to get accurate sensors near the thing adn get anything useful out of them, so it might not be the best for initial research.
edit:
forgot to say that the MAGVID PDF even says teals's method of generating this field, and says that this is an inefficient way to make it.

[spacecase0]

glad everyone likes my summery

Gambeir, I am sorry to report that Ken's writings are the version that I have the hardest time with, and I get that it would likely be the one that Tesla would get the most...

but Tesla may not have personally used any fancy words at all. When asked what the most important discovery humans had ever made, he replied that it was the rotational magnetic field, and then went on to clarify that he was not talking about the electric motor.
I now get he was talking about making a gravity field (even if he had not figured out the link to gravity yet)
and he also had figured out how to get energy from the field, remember that patent he had with putting up large metal plates into the sky and getting electricity between them and the earth ? US685957 he had built conversions each direction, so it sure looks like he had figured out what gravity was. It is the the induced electric field made by a rotating magnetic field. And you can collect power from that field as he shows in the patent. I am sure someone reading this will point out that the voltage collectable that way changes on earth depending on other factors (distance from the great pyramid being one of them). Now this is true, and the reason is that an electrostatic field (not the same as the induced electric field at all, ( one can be shielded and one can not)) is either adding to it or subtracting from it (at least appearing to change it by changing how much energy we can collect from it by that method).

so getting back to question 7 by Sputins,
Tesla told some of his explorations of this new field/energy/whatever when he first found it. He noted that nothing can shield from it (so this tells us it is the same as we are trying to play with), but it can be reflected by shiny surfaces, did not matter if it was pained cardboard, shiny plastic, polished copper... ( he did not say what the minimum angle was required to make this work, but my guess is that the angle of what was at one point the polished stone of the great pyramid, and that would be the lowest angle to work )
so anyone going at this entire project from reading Tesla's work might think it is critical to use that shiny surface for some reason.
not to say that you will need that shiny surface to make it work, just that this might be a reason why it is there in some versions.

question 6,
from everything I have read, seems quite likely it is possible to reverse the output.
reversing everything might change the output polarity, but it might not change it at all.
seems more likely that reversing one component would be more likely to change output polarity.

as to the other questions, I would like to know as well.

[Sputins]

Sv-1



So as construction begins on my version-1 (SV-1), modeled after Alexey's Version-2, certain questions float into ones mind...

So while there isn't perhaps a direct answer, here's some of those floating questions out loud:

1. Is this thing scalable? Can I scale it down and build a tiny version; can I scale it up? - (likely the answer is yes).
   
   
2. Is there a particular or optimal ratio of disc sizes? As I measured from the photos, Alexey's version-2 has ratio of approx 1 : 1.80 Magnetic disc to Centre disc. (If in doubt go with 1 : 1.618)
   
   
3. Is there an optimal size for the spinning disc and actual magnets? So if I have smaller size or power magnets does the disc size also need to be smaller? - Sort of a magnetic flux density (dielectric field) to plate size (HV DC) optimal ratio?
   
   
4. Motors-? Alexey uses some kind of largish diameter motor on the bottom of version-2 and by the looks of it, a different motor on the upper disc. The upper motor seems to be a regular brushless DC fan motor...? - This would suggest that the upper and lower spinning discs are not necessarily spinning at the same speed. (Coz they're different, even though wired together). It looks like the top disc might be spinning a little faster? - Is this important or not? (Think vortex or torsion)? In Alexey's version-3 the upper and lower motors appear to be the same?
   
   
5. Direction of magnetic disc? - Seems in the video of version-2 the lower disc is spinning counter clockwise? Does it even matter? Same effect if it spins clockwise instead?
   
   
6. If I reversed everything, spin, magnetic polarity, HV DC, would instead of lifting up, would there be an increased downward force?
   
   
7. As the material for the magnetic disc stated by Alexey is important (the hammered finish aluminum sheet) if using a brush (wire) connection on this material for the HV DC, the connection would not really be a nice constant connection, but because of the brush connection and the fact the material has all these lumps and bumps on it, the connection made would be very transient.. Is this important? But then again, there isn't a direct circuit, as its capacitor plates with applied DC. So no (large) currents, so maybe it doesn't matter so much. Looks like Alexey's version-3 may not have the hammered finish aluminum from the very brief views?

If anyone has any thoughts, suggestions or replies to any of those Q's, please let me know your answers..

Cheers,
Sputins

[Ufopolitics]

Bravo!!!Welcome Spacase0!!

Finally someone on this entire Forum puts together all the basic and essential roots to Unify the whole thing!!!

And this is NOT ONLY about Gravity...but about a FULL PACKAGE...which comes all together...want it or not.

The Magnetic Field have that essence to produce that "shaped" electric field, however, and as you have written, it is NOT of enough capacity to do the "magic"...just by PLAIN INDUCTION, as we all know based on Faraday's principles.

Magnetic Field have ANOTHER ATTRIBUTE which is less expensive and still, without Induction it is capable to shape the Electric Field the way we all want to.

That "attribute" is that it can BEND/DEFLECT INTO A SHAPE the Electric Fields OR ANY PARTICLES which compose it...and which we originally generate.

Alexey's Hardware is a basic example...as I see it, the magnetic field spinning, shapes that E-Field to achieve a distortion off the mass carrying it PLUS the FIELD around it...off course adding frequencies + vibrations in resonance altogether.

In the case of Alexey...the magnetic field is NOT INDUCING NADA, but just a SPIN.
The Electric Field is generated by a couple of external sources.

Alexey uses a basic DC FIELD, plus a second source (the Tesla Coil) , an AC FIELD to serve as the "accelerator", the Catalyst which also based on HF does the shaping we want.

Resuming, it's all like you have summed up...it could be in many different ways but the basic is always there as a common factor.

Like I have mentioned before...we just gather all those particles concentrated in one space, in one FIELD, and could even be as a Beam...then have a magnetic field to purely shape them in the required form...and vuala!!...all comes down by itself.

This is the pure essence to all...without much complications, nor sophisticated wordings.


Congratulations Spacecase!


Ufopolitics

[Gambeir]

The cool thing about this is that by having a working theory, and which is borne out by a working model, we can now look at things like the Caret Drones of California and begin to take those apart as well as all the others.

We still have a lot to figure out but just getting this down is a major accomplishment in my mind. Also I think we now can reasonably conclude that the models of Alexey are authentic working models.

[Gambeir]

I read the replies to this post...

think there is something going on that could be not everyone is seeing.
there seems to be some sort of frame of reference issue, or point of view issue, or whatever you want to call that.
we have uncovered many theoretical works that all point to building the same physical hardware.
they just go about saying things and clearly found the topic from vastly different points of few.
look at wilbert smith's book, he says that is the alien's point of view,
file:///home/violet/Documents/archive/www.rexresearch.com/smith/newsci.htm

look at hooper's work, it is best understood by mainstream physics
William J. Hooper: The Motional Electric Field

this one is the same thing, but yet another point of view and way of telling the story.

https://www.electrogravity.com/AVCForce/AtomicVectoredCentrifugalForce.pdf

and what was the one that used spinning ions behind the craft to be propelled ?

not sure about ken wheeler because he has not shared his hardware yet...

some just started building hardware and got results
examples:

https://web.archive.org/web/20040217234757/http://www.pmicro.kz:80/Misc/UFL/Almanach/AxionA.htm

the same with the space warp people from Florida

I read the patent from the quote above:
this "lorentz force drive" is telling of the same thing.

there are more of them, I just can't seem to remember them all at the moment.

and what gets me about all this is that I did build the correct field format for a device a few years before this thread started.
my error was to not put enough power into it to get measurable results. Will have to check the state of the hardware in storage.

there are several formats that are going to work, just like standard engines, 4 stroke, 2 stroke, ram jet, turbine, sterling...
this disconnect seems to be the same thing

seems to me that the words that will best tell everyone how to do it in a way that there will not be any frame of reference issues is that the goal is to create an induced electric field, likely a shaped one.
So, a spinning magnetic field will induce that electric field. This is likely the most direct way, but the output may be small, and this is why we are having issues.
You can make it with an electric field that induces a magnetic field that in turn induces an electric field. You can make it with moving ions, you can make it lots of ways. Some methods get the electrons of a crystal to make it for you, and this one might have the best output for how much it costs to build.
see the idea ?
you can frame the issue in whatever words/ideas/language you want.
but it all comes down to describing ideas in reality that inherently "just are"
if you read enough of the methods of telling how it works, and can flip your mind around to others reference points to see what they are talking about, it all ends up being pretty clear.

Brilliant actually~
So now, thanks to that post, this is much clearer to me. I grock what you've said and now I think I finally understand.
See how this sits with you Spacecase0.

So Spacecase you're saying that by creating a shaped electrical field we are also inducing a magnetic field, and it is through the formed magnetic field created by the electrical field which is then re~orientationed by the spinning magnetic field, and which in the end produces a change vector for the dielectric field: Thereby changing the force of the immediate dielectric field from down to up for example: If that dielectric inertial field is strong enough we have then antigravity or the re~orientation of the dielectric inertial.

This is what I'm reading and that makes complete sense to me. Does everyone see that? This explains the need for a High Voltage Energy Field. So in this specific case it seems the key here is in understanding how the magnets act upon the nearby HV charged field, and thereby creating a re~orientation of the dielectric inertial plane by moving or re~orienting the electrical fields magnetic plane. Is that about right Spacecase0?

What Ken Wheeler said is that by applying a magnetic field perpendicular to the direction of gravity it would alter it's direction of motion; gravity being in reality a plane of dielectric energies. That is the same thing, it is the same effect as modeling a new dielectric inertial plane by creating another magnetic field using electrical energies and which are then molded to re~vector the dielectric inertial plane so as to change the direction of action from down to up, and so here Wheeler stated the same thing but in a more simple way. Ken also says that this requires two magnets in his video on gravity to complete this re~vectoring and so there is an affirmation. To understand that you have to first understand that the magnet is a magnet because it is interacting with the dielectric plane; that is, it's field is the dielectric field and that we only see this field through the magnets ability to interact with the inertial superluminal flow of an incoherent dielectric field of energy.

So by using a rotating physical magnet of sufficient power, and then combined with an electrical field of High Voltage, and through those means (Using the Right Hand Rule *Wheeler) we can now plot the reorientation of the dielectric inertial plane. Or at least some of you can. Not sure about myself, but I know some of you can do this like it was an old hat, anyways someone can hold my hand: Thus completely invalidating the theory of gravity. Seems simple enough all things considered.

Like a kid building a match head rocket with tin foil, or the Saturn V moon rocket, a rocket is still a rocket any way you slice it.
The basics are the same. I see what you're saying now Spacecase0.

[spacecase0]

Hi folks have'nt posted in a while, been watching though. Just some thoughts on this, dont think this is antigravity per se, just a lorentz force drive. Check this patent ,(US20090085411A1) same process except he's using static mangets which have to get to the right speed to generate the correct freq fluctuations in the mag field. Also visualize that only the radial portion of the flux lines coming from the disc magnets.

I read the replies to this post...

think there is something going on that could be not everyone is seeing.
there seems to be some sort of frame of reference issue, or point of view issue, or whatever you want to call that.
we have uncovered many theoretical works that all point to building the same physical hardware.
they just go about saying things and clearly found the topic from vastly different points of few.
look at wilbert smith's book, he says that is the alien's point of view,
file:///home/violet/Documents/archive/www.rexresearch.com/smith/newsci.htm

look at hooper's work, it is best understood by mainstream physics
William J. Hooper: The Motional Electric Field

this one is the same thing, but yet another point of view and way of telling the story.

https://www.electrogravity.com/AVCForce/AtomicVectoredCentrifugalForce.pdf

and what was the one that used spinning ions behind the craft to be propelled ?

not sure about ken wheeler because he has not shared his hardware yet...

some just started building hardware and got results
examples:

https://web.archive.org/web/20040217234757/http://www.pmicro.kz:80/Misc/UFL/Almanach/AxionA.htm

the same with the space warp people from Florida

I read the patent from the quote above:
this "lorentz force drive" is telling of the same thing.

there are more of them, I just can't seem to remember them all at the moment.

and what gets me about all this is that I did build the correct field format for a device a few years before this thread started.
my error was to not put enough power into it to get measurable results. Will have to check the state of the hardware in storage.

there are several formats that are going to work, just like standard engines, 4 stroke, 2 stroke, ram jet, turbine, sterling...
this disconnect seems to be the same thing

seems to me that the words that will best tell everyone how to do it in a way that there will not be any frame of reference issues is that the goal is to create an induced electric field, likely a shaped one.
So, a spinning magnetic field will induce that electric field. This is likely the most direct way, but the output may be small, and this is why we are having issues.
You can make it with an electric field that induces a magnetic field that in turn induces an electric field. You can make it with moving ions, you can make it lots of ways. Some methods get the electrons of a crystal to make it for you, and this one might have the best output for how much it costs to build.
see the idea ?
you can frame the issue in whatever words/ideas/language you want.
but it all comes down to describing ideas in reality that inherently "just are"
if you read enough of the methods of telling how it works, and can flip your mind around to others reference points to see what they are talking about, it all ends up being pretty clear.

[phoneboy]

@Gambier, well said. Ufo, correct me if im wrong but you've dedicated countless hours to a concept that was developed in the early 1900's. I'll take your quote and change the wording for you 'Hey guys let's stop fooling around here...if Figueroa could give us a generator...why mess with this BS?

I wonder what else Figueroa could do ...established since the 1900's but still have not seen this application yet...well, let's keep waiting...'

[Gambeir]

Conjectures about the power and use of Lorentz force have been considered. John Iwaszko and his brother Adam both considered this idea; so the idea that a lorentz force could explain this sort of levitation has been given a good go round. Alone I don't think it can explain it. I think if it could we have flying cars by now.

Now to me it seems clear there's something else happening. I seriously doubt that enough attention has been given to the dielectric field, and certainly if one considers that the magnet is acting to impede the flow of an otherwise un~recognized energy field which then results in the creation of a magnetic field, then that says we are all missing a very large part of the true make up of Universe. Again, the evidence I've gathered which seems to cross correlate that idea comes out of Astrophysics, which is that there is a superfluidity to surrounding space, which is superluminal, and which fits with the ideas of Ken Wheeler and the manifestation of magnetism. So I can no longer consider space in the same context which has been sold by the establishment. That description is a fantansy science fiction story.

A galactic jet entails two counter rotating accretion disks, which suck in super cold space and eject plasma gas and other energies. Heat from cold is the reality of this action. Stevens explains that the super cold vastness of space is the repository of energy which sucks up and absorbs any energy which ventures in to it. There it remains cycling in a super cooled circuit. Space then is a superconductive energy field.

The study of the ARV revealed the importance of crystals in the propulsion/levitation system but didn't reveal their cross correlation to the dielectric field, which is what Ufopolitics and Ken Wheeler have done. A natural magnet cannot be rationally explained without an external energy field. That field must come from either a man made injection of energy to create an artificial magnet, and once created it can only be sustained by an exterior field of previously unknown energies.

This idea of pumping energy in to a crystal, which then inflates, which then levitates, appears to be a re~telling of what takes place in creating a magnet: The greater the impulse of energies, the more powerful the magnet, but there it doesn't stop. No, here we need to understand why it does and what seems to be taking place is there is a correlation between the power and way that this all takes place and subsequent formation of the crystalline formations. Here then we have this story of inflating crystals and pulp magazines touting Tetrahedrons from space and these are appearing in the 1920's and 1930's and so there is an understanding which is taking place and which is being told. Along with this is the focus on creating more and more powerful magnets, super cooling with liquid helium, there is an understanding that the power pumped in to a certain type of material causes a reaction and this reaction can then result in ever greater fields of magnetic power. This then says that it isn't just a simple question of pumping power in to the right material but that the formations, the crystalline patterns themselves are conductive of energies, and that those energies are dielectric energies, and which because of all this there is also a validation that the space around us is filled with a superluminal field of reverberations, a field of a dielectric energy. In this understanding of the dielectric field connection to magnetism is also an understanding that what we have been calling gravity is instead a reverberating and incoherent energy which is reactive in a propulsive sense to matter, and because it is dielectric it passes through most mater with little notice but is reactive nevertheless, as each bit of matter is magnetic due to the interaction and which has given us the illusion of gravity. To reveal this understanding would of course blow up a good deal of academia.

The only hypothesis which makes any sense at all is the one demonstrated by Wheeler as being a dielectric field, and in this there too is the explanation, just as Ken has said it was, that the dielectric field is an incoherent resonating field. It is one bouncing, reflecting, vibrating all around and throughout all Universe; it is the true source for gravity if we must use gravity as word to give meaning to the reflective reflex of matter encountering an incoherent but still superluminal flow of energies.

The Author of this device has paid great detail to the study of the ideas of Viktor Stepanovich Grebennikov and has rationally concluded that there is a resonating field of energies which are key to what we perceive as gravity.

[Gambeir]

I am going to offer a prize for the first replication. Which must include hovering and include the details should they be any different from those we already know.
Whoever first successfully replicates this device will receive an authentic blueprint of the ARV. The exception of course being Spacecase0, who already has one as he well knows.

Otherwise no one else is blacklisted from this once in a life time opportunity.
Again, only Spacecase is blacklisted...so far... could change...probably not though.
Seriously, I do mean this; the blueprint part anyways..

The blueprint prize isn't a joke.

[Gambeir]

Not Cancelling Gravity?...but Lorent Force?...Hey guys let's stop fooling around here...if Lorentz could give us a craft that takes off vertically...why mess with this BS?

I wonder what else Lorentz could do...established since the 1900's but still have not seen this application yet...well, let's keep waiting...

Magnets have NORTH ON TOP, then B FIELD is UP and VERY VERTICAL...not radial.

Geez...Another Dwane...


Ufopolitics

Well I agree, but the idea is one which is common enough, and here I think it shows our own need to fall back on what we think we know. I don't think we are going to get a solution this way. Hasn't worked for anyone in the last 50 years and so I think we have to dismiss our ideas that conventional knowledge will give us the rights ideas to provide a logical explanation that will set us free. BTW Ufopolitics, I love reading the Russian translations in the comments. So rude and so funny. Russians don't hold back what they think. LOl....snort~

He's gotten a lot of accusations , calling him a scoundrel, a rascal, and someone else said he was an idiot that he didn't need this or that part. So really he has a lot of detractors tying to make it look like this is all a fraud. So just about what I'd expect from the majority of mind controlled and the PTB shills. It makes me think all the more this is real.

[Gambeir]

To begin with I want to thank to Sputin's for spotting this. I also agree with Ufopolitics; I don't see anything here suggestive of a fraud.

Now, there's a lot of material being injected. A lot of it is beyond my competency. Posts are not ignored, they just can't always be addressed is all, but there are people whom appreciate your own individual posts and thoughts. You have to realize that what you're doing does matter.

In the case of a mystery you want to have many minds working a single problem. You don't have to be brilliant to prove decisive either. All you have to do is find the solution. Keep in mind that as long as this site survives your posts also serve as reference point. Nothing is ignored ~ No thoughts dismissed: Just want you all to realize this and to not feel you're neglected.

this guy may have some insight as to what is going on
William J. Hooper: New Horizons In Electric, Magnetic And Gravitational Field Theory
have read it before, but it did not click for me till I saw that russian guy's setup.

Hey guys.... searching for antigravity tech , I found a video about ionocraft lifters ,nothing new or special ,many guys have done this....instead ,in comments below the video, a guy named Russel Anderson made interesting coments and he has posted some interesting links...this guy worked closely with John Searl and now he is in proces to reveal the technology to the world ...he have an you tube chanel where he posting his conferences about antigravity technology ...one conference posted in 2013 about searl tech https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=yDXP...ature=youtu.be , some papers regarding ioncraft lifters experiments made by us army :https://arxiv.org/vc/physics/papers/0211/0211001v1.pdf ...one of Russel coments : Russell Anderson
Russell Anderson

Glad I could help. This tech us FUNDAMENTAL, and they still to this day do not teach it even in graduate programs. We just got the patent for the SPINTRONIC GENERATOR to Protect the inventor, Professor John RR Searl's rights US Pat No. 9,871,431, issued Jan. 16, 2018. The tech in this video is great and very simple warp technology from TT Brown, ELECTROKINETIC APPARATUS, US Pat. No 2,949,550, issued Aug. 16, 1960. Energy and mass are equivalent. BOTH warp spacetime. You can warp space with a dense local aggregation of MASS, like the San GABRIEL MOUNTAINS (WHICH DEFLECT GRAVITOMETERS and the Plumb-line as see thru a theodolite. Warping of spacetime gets noticable when Voltage gets high, about several THOUSAND Volts or so, in a symmetrical or asymmetrical parallel plate capacitor configuration, or a TOROIDAL coil, with a square-cross section Swedish-steel (soft-iron) core. This is ETHER TECHNOLOGY (Google it). TESLA technology. maybe would be a good ideea to invite mister Russel here at this topic on energeticforum .....

Hi folks have'nt posted in a while, been watching though. Just some thoughts on this, dont think this is antigravity per se, just a lorentz force drive. Check this patent ,(US20090085411A1) same process except he's using static mangets which have to get to the right speed to generate the correct freq fluctuations in the mag field. Also visualize that only the radial portion of the flux lines coming from the disc magnets.

Hi again...now few years ago , I found a blog about some experiment that was made by an young malaysian physicist... he made research in anti gravity technology ...few years he tried to understand and replicate somehow grebennikov bug chitin anti gravity plate ..after that because the lack of succes he decided to research about how to obtain antigravity effect by magnetohydrodinamicaly (MHD) principles ....so he succeed to do it on a small scale ... he made some videos with explanations about his MHD thruster and how to make rodin coils needed for that ... his videos are no more on you tube but I saved 2 of them (most important part ) when they still was online ,and I uploaded them on my channel ...

So here is his blog ( that was not updated from 2014 ) https://deackenz.wordpress.com/categ...ravity-theory/ ....in the comments he give more details about his system....

Now his videos :
theory https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=nGAX...Tw8jVu&index=2

coil winding : https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=74Fz...L6bRez_pTw8jVu

might also be time to remind everyone of this PDF again

http://www.electrogravity.com/AVCForce/AtomicVectoredCentrifugalForce.pdf

it seems to very likely apply here.

[Ufopolitics]

anyone have any idea what his tesla coil frequency is ?
is it the same as the ultrasonic ?
Reason I ask is that I already have a 6KV AC, 10KHz power supply that I made for a voltage multiplier set.
I wonder if it would be a good idea just to use that, or do I need something that will run in the 40KHz range like an ultrasonic system likely runs ?

Hi Space,

Don't think we have the Tesla Coil Frequency...I know he uses between 20 to 30 kV...

But I don't think it will hurt anything by testing whatever you have in hand, realize that all HV Contacts are gapped to no spark, not closed either..I would just put together a smaller prototype that weight much less than the one he shows, smaller discs...shorter gaps...it should require less power to uplift...

Anyways, just my opinion.


Regards



Ufopolitics

[phoneboy]

Maybee spacecase will have a look at it, he's got a clue.