ANTI GRAVITY RULES!!







American Antigravity

keep in mind that the lifters in the pics are on and 'floating'

cool video

That's not really antigravity. Those lifters just create an 'ion wind'.

hey, thanks for the link. I love this site, always learn somethig new

Sweet.. so they finally managed to do it without cables running arround?? Where is the power supply??

How can we be sure they are floating and
not hanging from wires or fish line?

I am sorry but it would be so easy to
fake images like this, so maybe you can
understand why I am skeptical.

Gazz

Unfortunately there are still cables running to it. Take a look at the PVC pipe in the picture. I believe that would house the transformer that produces the 30KV+ that is required to make it function. The top has a heavy wire coming out of it but about a foot from the top of the unit a thin wire is attached which carries the high voltage to the wire that is strung on the small poles you see on the lifter. Only a few amperes are used because it is just maintaining the high voltage in the wire around the top. The lower skirt of the lifter is grounded to create asymmetrical capacitance which produces the lift. A minimum of 17.5KV is required to make them float but increases in voltage correlates with increases in thrust capability.

Ok if it creates a wind why is the one
image of the 'floating thingy' taken
outside over ground dirt which seems to
be dusty not kicking up a dust cloud?

hmmmmm

again it would be so easy to fake something
like this and then write up a bunch of
BS to explain it.

I would have to see this one with my own
eyes before I could even think about believing
it

Gazz

As I said, asymmetrical capacitance produces the lift. It is not just airflow, which there is some of due to the ionizing of the air in between the HV wire and grounded skirt. The main “thrust” comes from the static HV field directly above the grounded skirt. It is the capacitance effect that generates a field which lifts it.

It is not a fake.. duh... Beffield Brown effect is a well known phenomena, ... but unfortunately it is also not antigravity. You need power.. a hell lot of power to keep that thing on air.

make it yourself if you think it doesn't work.

looks pretty easy to make...

excuse me isnt this effect due to airpressure,the stripped electrons creating a type of wall less,thin layer constant vacuum edge, thus air pressure pushing the device upwards,similar to how an aeroplane wing works when moving through the air.

No it is based on the same principle as helicopters, the third newton's law. The device created downward wind, and as a reaction it created an upward force on itself.

doesnt the top surface of rotar blades when in motion remove a thin layer of atoms,thus the surrounding air pressure acting on the rest of the vehicle keep it pushed up into the created vacuum

yeah.. you can think of it that way too.

gazz, it is real

check the site yourself, americanantigravity.com

they have lots of cool vids, and even explain how to make your own!

i don't think that'll be the future in aviation for a long time.

I think this might come in first

future flight

it was only a matter of time, but i expected more than just some sort of triangle

A bit out of topic but I find it funny and pathetic that they named the website AmericanAntigravity (with a beautiful lil's American flag logo) !!! Like if American needed to take credit for everything even if they weren't the first to make it (it's like a pattern, just remember Edison/Marconi inventions which were pretty much ripoffs Tesla !).
And it gets even funnier because what they call gravity is in fact ion-wind, a well known effect but badly understood which apparently has nothing to do with anti-gravity. Anyway for the real thing check http://members.aol.com/jnaudin509/ for the original lifters from a French guy called Jean-Louis Naudin.
By the way, for the folks interested, the generator can be embedded on the aircraft (I found a Russian website where they guy figured out some maths to improve the thrust with minimal weight increase but I don't remember right now).

In fact 30Kv is not such a big power supply compared to what would be needed for MHD flight. But now when thinking about UFOs I don't see ion-wind aircraft cutting it, just because the heat dissipation is not controlled on the airflow edges. MHD seems to be the way to go for supersonic speeds (probably sounds unundertsandable to people without knowledge in this area and probably sounds obvious to people with knowledge in this area Kind of funny to think that this information is either obvious or completely obscure depending on one's knowledge !).

Anyway, I think it's about time that people work together rather than take pride in their flag, internet should be all about that. People talking with other countries people and make science progress no matter what bullshit our governements serve us. That's the ideal, the dream, the perfect world theory. But in the end, internet just seems like a pub for single for so many users and you can forget about your dreams of a better society for now at least.

TheLight

Can this apply to high voltage transmitting line? Or the ion propulsion is too small to compare to the weight of the transmitting line, so the wire is curved down?

What's the theory at the back of this phenomena, ion propusion or not? Can you provide any links?

Chances are the images arent faked because, well, its not that hard to build one of these things! I found a site that gives instructions on how to build them... I want to do it at school because I dont have some of the equipment that's necessary and I dont feel like going around to find it.

Although dynamic charge transfer and the resultant ionic breeze is a plausible explanation, and even seems evident when initially testing such apparatus, I have recently come to the conclusion that this may only be a secondary effect.

Yesterday I ran a test with a triangular lifter measuring 2 feet on each side. In this preliminary experiment, I took a 3/8 inch thick piece of plexiglass that was nearly 2 feet wide and 1 foot long and inserted it between the ballistic electrodes. If the principle thrust was indeed produced by the positive ions being repelled by the positive annular electrode, and then said ions are subjected to an opposite acceleration force due to the electrostatic attraction of the negative electrode, in which the transference of momentum from the positive nitrogen and oxygen ions to their neutral counterparts occur, one major aspect of this process would be modeled as follows:

When there is no obstruction in the flow of a dielectric medium(air), a nominal amount of reactionary thrust is produced as a result. However, if a body was purposefully placed which severely interrupted or stopped this flow, then Newtons Third Law stating that for every action there is an opposite but equal reaction when applied to this situation would predict a very large to complete disintegration of the former thrust vector. In other words, the craft would become unstable or grounded.

The result was different however, and very interestingly the thrust was not diminished in the slightest, and in fact was enhanced by several percent. I believe the enhancement is due to a more direct electrokinetic conversion which leads to less entropy.

I don't pretend to have the full grasp of the situation yet, but I am making progress and believe the solution is inherent. Comments? Criticism?

Does this help explain "Coral Castle"?

I think the coral castle was suppose to have been done with sound waves.

I'm amazed it was able to lift the plexiglass. I plan on building one of these in a few months (I am teaching myself electronics with the Evil Genius series of books), and I didn't see how it could possibly have the strength to lift more than a few ounces, most of which would be made up of itself.

In all cases, I'm wondering if the increased thrust could have actually been mechanical in origin. Plexiglass has a certain static property concerning electrons, so, having been placed in an environment where ions were being moved in a specific direction, could it not have served as a channel, or more accurately, a focusing tube, for the flow? For instance, when one makes an ion rocket (the science fair kind, tied to a little string like a pendulum), one uses a clear plastic pen case to hold the pointed metal rod acting as the ion generator. Presumably, the plastic case, with its static electron property, acts as a sort of lubricated tube to increase the flow of ion from the tip to the tail. I would imaging a much thinner piece on the triangular lifter would also have the same effect, and not add as much weight.

Again, though, I have only just started my electronic education, and it will be a few months before I can make my ion lifter.

I am afraid Coral Castle doesn't need explanation. There is nothing within it that requires any forces that Ed Leed-whatsit didn't have available, mainly leverage and tools.

aquatus1,


Would you mind explaining how Ed used leverage and tools to construct this 9-ton gate? I'm sure the worlds leading construction companies would like to know as well. Heres more info on the Castle:

http://www.crystalinks.com/coralcastle.html

Nah, the world's leading construction companies, and a great majority of the shoestring ones, are already fully aware of how it was done. How much detail do you want? What exactly do you want explained (Be advised, I can write pretty lengthy posts.)

And do we want to hijack this thread, or should we use another one of the Coral Castle threads?

If you'd pm me explaining how he lifted a 9 ton coral block, I'd appreciate it.

The "Lifter" project is quite real, but is attributable to the ion-wind effect. NASA did vacuum tests with no lifting effect.
http://www.wired.com/wired/archive/11.08/p...gravity_pr.html

The plexiglass sheet was not directly attached to the lifter, just inserted between the electrodes when it was flying tethered to the lift-off area. I used the plexiglass because it has a dielectric constant of 2.8 at 0 Hz and a breakdown voltage of 990 volts per mil(mil as in 1/1000th of an inch), it was also the only suitable material lying around. Today I did it with some paper and cardboard and the effect was exactly the same. I'll try it with materials that are more appropriate as I locate them and will record the results. However, I must say that the ion wind flow, which is the postulated conventional physics propulsion theory, was interrupted by all of the materials that were put between the electrodes yet no instability resulted in the apparatus. I'm not saying conventional physics is wrong and that we should throw it out the window, but some concepts may have to be expanded. Here is a mostly coherent website giving an explanation of the hypothesized electrogravitic effect:

http://www.geocities.com/electrogravitics/

Lastly, could you explain further what you mean by:

"could it not have served as a channel, or more accurately, a focusing tube"

I used a flat plate for the experiment that provided for the greatest interruption of the ion wind acting as the propulsive force.

The extended influence of a high electrical charge is not negated by the presence, or covering, of a neutral dielectric. That only subdues the actual transfer of electrons. Thus, the electrical force remains the same and has influence beyond the dielectric boundary.
In other words, a neutral dielectric "shielding" will not inhibit the ion-wind effect.

So are you saying that because of the high E-field gradient, the resulting polarization that occurs in the dielectric material ionizes the air surrounding it to the same extent as before it was there? I believe that I read on a site that the dielectric makes the electric lines of force bend around the insulator thus causing the gradient to be shaped even more asymmetrically and therefore increasing the thrust. Here is an example of aforementioned principle:

http://jnaudin.free.fr/html/elghatv1.htm

Could you help clear this up?

Thanks

Exactly. An E-Field transversing through a neutral dielectric has approx. the same force exiting as it did entering(minus the polarization-effect which would cause a backward momentum moment and charge-reduction)
Being aligned through polarization, the E-Field is expressed outside of the neutral dielectric because it has to; the dielectric is charge-neutral.

While this stuff is really awesome i'm skeptical to believe it with how easy it is to fake this kind of video and picture like so many of you have suggested.
It's definatly worth looking into!

And, do keep this in mind: the "bending" of an E-Field requires forces which oppose that very bending.

The "lifter" phenomenon is not "fake" by any means. The contention is the physics behind it.

See ya soon, have to go for now.

..

I was introduced through Ion Lifters through a friend, who gave me a simple lifter and instructions for a power supply. I have yet to build the power supply, which I will achieve by dismantling an old computer monitor. I am a chemistry and physics student, though. Here's my take on the issue.

At the end I do some math, and have a proposal for those of you with lifters:

Has anybody seen videos of a lifter operating in the dark? The light given off from between the top wire and the bottom foil piece is evidence about how it works. Somehow, the lifter is making a circuit, as any electrical system must. Obviously, the electrons are flowing from the top wire, through the air, and to the foil grounding piece. Imagine a static shock, but sustained and on the length of the wire. This flow of electrons or excited air molecules creates a fluorescent glow, like a fluorescent or neon light. You should be able to increase the effect by giving the lifter more power.

One of the details of ion lifting that one does not get from watching videos is a distinct ozone smell. Ozone is formed by oxygen (O2) molecules breaking apart and forming the less stable, higher energy O3 molecule. The common terrestrial source of ozone is electric currents passing through oxygen, such as in electric sparks. (In the upper atmosphere, UV radiation is absorbed by O2, forming ozone) This is simply more evidence of the electrical current through the air.

Now, how can electricity passing through the air create "lift"? Technically, lift is formed by a wing passing through the air. By the Bernoulli Effect, this creates low pressure above and high pressure below, with a net upwards force. If you want to know about the Bernouli Effect, I'll make an issue of that later, or you can look it up in a reliable textbook. Anyway, this makes me want to call the ion lifter's "lift" by an other name, such as "upwards force."

So, how do we achieve this upwards force? This is where my theory starts, and the numbers start crunching. As electrons pass downward through the air, and into the foil, some become attatched to the various molecules in the air. Electrons have a very small mass (5.49 x 10^-4 amu) and a very high speed (close enough to the speed of light: 3.00 X 10^8 m/s). As the electons are shed from the wire and travel to the foil piece, the are bound to hit molecules in the air. Because the air is roughly 70% Nitrogen molecules (N2, mass=28.02 amu), lets see what happens when an electron hits it:

When the electron collides with the Nitrogen, it could become attatched and give the N2 all of its momentum. First I will calculate the momentum of the electron. Then, I will divide the electron's momentum by the mass of the N2 molecule to determine the N2's velocity. The electron's mass is insignificant in the end result.
Momentum of electron=Mass*Velocity
=5.49 x 10^-4 amu*3.00 X 10^8 m/s
=1.647 x 10^5 amu*m/s
Change in N2's momentum=Momentum of electron/N2's mass
=(1.647 x 10^5 amu*m/s)/28.02 amu
=5.878 x 10^3 m/s

You may not understand the math, but what matters is the end result, which amazed even me! If all of the electron's momentum is transferred to the N2, the N2 is pushed downwards at 5.9 km/s. I am certain I overestimated, and there are several resistant forces that I know of, but even if a small fraction of the momentum is released into the air, this provides for a large amount of thrust.

Now, I'm not sure how many electrons pass between the wire and foil per second, but I know it's an inconcievably large number.

Still a little iffy on my theory? Well, I'm not done explaining. As mentioned above, the faint glow one sees when watching lifters in the dark is a kind of fluorescence. Particles in the air are being ionized (in this case, electrons added) and pushed and attracted to the foil piece, causing an airflow in the downward direction. Yes, everybody says things about airflow, but they make it sound like some bizzarre energy field effect. The airflow is simply caused by the downward flow of electrons dragging the air with it. The force on the air pushed downwards is the same as the force on the lifter. (see Newton's Laws) There is not enough energy moving around to assume that magnetic fields play a significant role in the upward force.

How can we determine how much upwards force is actually being produced?

Well, if one determines his lifter's mass, he can then attatch a force meter to the strings holding the lifter down, and measure the amount of upward pull (i recommend all of the strings attatched to one meter, eliminating some math and alllowing a more accurate reading). Measure the mass in grams, it will make the math much easier: "weight" (pounds) is actually the measure of earth's pull on the mass of the object, while grams is the mass. All of my math is in SI units. So, you now have the NET upward force. One must remember that the measured force is being reduced by the lifter's weight, thus must be added to the percieved, or measured, force. In SI, weight is measured in Newtons, the SI unit for force.

Force = mass * acceleration
weight= force from gravity = mass of object (in kg, or 1000*g)* 9.8 m/s/s = kg*m/s/s = kg*m/(s^2) = Newtons
Gross upwards force = measured force + force from gravity

Try determining this force at home, or at a local school with a physics program. I'm sure the instructors would love a variation from the norm!

Finally, a maker of a PDA is replacing its fans with small diodes, which eliminate moving parts and create airflow for cooling by ionizing the air. I havn't checked, but I assume that these diodes work like mini lifters.

Also, could these lifters not simply work like ion engines? Check into that!

This stuff works...I have tried it... There is a website where it tells you exactly what to do, all you need are some household items, like tin foil, balsa wood, copper wire, and a computer monitor, t.v., or other high voltage power source...It's not that hard to build either... http://www.americanantigravity.com/lifterplans.html

Too lazy to find the video.............

Hi.
I just joined. Nice to find people with similar interests.
Anyway, thanks for the link Venomshocker. It's an interesting read, and surely no one could argue with NASA if they say that lifters will not operate in a vacuum environment??

Hold on though - Read that article again:-

If the writer of the article - Clive Thompson - has relayed an accurate report of what NASA told him then I have an observation to share:-

In the report he explains that NASA, having tested a 'lifter' in an intense vacuum, concluded that there was no movement of their model within the chamber. Ok, that seems acceptable. However, read this quote from the article :-

"Says Andy Finchum, Campbell's assistant, pointing to a set of plastic guards he set up after nearly frying himself. "You could start hearing the hiss at those voltages, and that's when you don't want to get close!"

My observation is this:-

If the lifter was inside a vacuum how did Andy Finchum manage to hear it 'hiss' at high voltage??
Sound does not travel in a vacuum.

Any ideas??