From: J. Maynard Gelinas <j.maynard.gelinas.nul> Date: Tue, 14 May 2013 19:29:57 +0800 Archived: Wed, 15 May 2013 07:58:59 -0400 Subject: Dr. York Dobyns' 'Advanced Propulsion' Lecture >From: J. Maynard Gelinas <j.maynard.gelinas.nul> >To: UFO UpDates - Toronto <post.nul> >Date: Thu, 9 May 2013 12:40:09 +0800 >Subject: Re: Regarding The Citizen Hearing On Disclosure <snip> >Valone's statements pointing to Haisch, A. Rueda, and H. E. >Puthoff's speculative paper, "Inertia as a Zero-Point Field >Lorentz Force" as if this proved anything about anti-gravity or >zero point 'free energy' was downright shocking. That paper is a >way forward for developing some experimental approaches to >testing those ideas. It is NOT a proof. It may well be the case >the Puthoff and other physicists think this could - potentially >- be possible. And even a very slim minority, like Brian >O'Leary, who are convinced that it is. But where is the >experimental proof? Pointing to spooks threatening scientists >away from research doesn't help here. I was seriously >disappointed. York Dobyns, of the Princeton Engineering Anomalies Research Project, has a rather amazing video presentation I found off of the SSE website that I felt I just had to point to here, because he uses exactly the same Haisch, A. Rueda, and H. E. Puthoff paper to posit several approaches to violating Newton's 3rd law. The video is about 40 minutes long. http://tinyurl.com/arzotqp The whole thing is worth watching, as his set up is important to understanding the argument, but from about 10 minutes on he begins with an approach that would use a spinning wheel where one small portion would be placed between two plates to generate a Casimir effect that would unbalance centrifugal inertia, creating a net positive force. He then goes on to look at other approaches, including one by Professor James Woodward, which Dobyns appears to convincingly refute. http://physics.fullerton.edu/~jimw/ But there's another he suggests, which would attempt to decouple intertial force from gravitational force by taking two equal masses connected by a strut and adding significant pressure to one but not the other, causing an gravitational but not inertial imbalance. See slides from 23m30s - 24m. Then, from about 22 minutes in through to 27 minutes, Dobyns argues that given his two proposed approaches, if one doesn't work the other will, suggesting that a Newton 3rd law violation is not just possible but seemingly mandatory. See slide at 26m31s! Huh!?!? I don't doubt I've inadequately explained this. I'm a lay person to the field and the Dr. Dobyns is much better at giving a cogent explanation. Watch the video! Of course, there are caveats, like the propulsive force calculated would be so minuscule as to be barely useful given current materials science. But, he suggests, it could be tested as a demonstration proof of concept. This is so nonintuitive I find it just astonishing to believe. But... there it is. A real headturner. Since he cites the paper I so harshly ridiculed previously, I felt it was only fair to the list to note that I found a speculative talk by a highly qualified theoretical physicist that undermines my critique of Dr. Valone. I'll dig some more and see who else is citing this paper. Perhaps it's really causing a storm of interest after all. -M Listen to 'Strange Days... Indeed' - The PodCast At: http://www.virtuallystrange.net/ufo/sdi/program/ These contents above are copyright of the author and UFO UpDates - Toronto. They may not be reproduced without the express permission of both parties and are intended for educational use only.
[ Next Message | Previous Message | This Day's Messages ]
This Month's Index |
UFO UpDates - Toronto - Operated by Errol Bruce-Knapp