"All the World's a Stage We Pass Through" R. Ayana

Showing posts with label space flight. Show all posts
Showing posts with label space flight. Show all posts

Saturday, 23 August 2014

Nasa Validates 'Impossible' Space Drive

NASA Validates 'Impossible' Space Drive








NASA is a major player in space science, so when a team from the agency this week presents evidence that "impossible" microwave thrusters seem to work, something strange is definitely going on. Either the results are completely wrong, or NASA has confirmed a major breakthrough in space propulsion.

British scientist Roger Shawyer has been trying to interest people in his EmDrive for some years through his company SPR Ltd. Shawyer claims the EmDrive converts electric power into thrust, without the need for any propellant by bouncing microwaves around in a closed container. He has built a number of demonstration systems, but critics reject his relativity-based theory and insist that, according to the law of conservation of momentum, it cannot work.

According to good scientific practice, an independent third party needed to replicate Shawyer's results. As Wired.co.uk reported, this happened last year when a Chinese team built its own EmDrive and confirmed that it produced 720 mN (about 72 grams) of thrust, enough for a practical satellite thruster. Such a thruster could be powered by solar electricity, eliminating the need for the supply of propellant that occupies up to half the launch mass of many satellites. The Chinese work attracted little attention; it seems that nobody in the West believed in it.

However, a US scientist, Guido Fetta, has built his own propellant-less microwave thruster, and managed to persuade NASA to test it out. The test results were presented on July 30 at the 50th Joint Propulsion Conference in Cleveland, Ohio. Astonishingly enough, they are positive.

The NASA team based at the Johnson Space Centre gave its paper the title "Anomalous Thrust Production from an RF [radio frequency] Test Device Measured on a Low-Thrust Torsion Pendulum". The five researchers spent six days setting up test equipment followed by two days of experiments with various configurations. These tests included using a "null drive" similar to the live version but modified so it would not work, and using a device which would produce the same load on the apparatus to establish whether the effect might be produced by some effect unrelated to the actual drive. They also turned the drive around the other way to check whether that had any effect.

Back in the 90s, NASA tested what was claimed to be an antigravity device based on spinning superconducting discs. That was reported to give good test results, until researchers realised that interference from the device was affecting their measuring instruments. They have probably learned a lot since then.

The torsion balance they used to test the thrust was sensitive enough to detect a thrust of less than ten micronewtons, but the drive actually produced 30 to 50 micronewtons -- less than a thousandth of the Chinese results, but emphatically a positive result, in spite of the law of conservation of momentum:

"Test results indicate that the RF resonant cavity thruster design, which is unique as an electric propulsion device, is producing a force that is not attributable to any classical electromagnetic phenomenon and therefore is potentially demonstrating an interaction with the quantum vacuum virtual plasma."

This last line implies that the drive may work by pushing against the ghostly cloud of particles and anti-particles that are constantly popping into being and disappearing again in empty space. But the NASA team has avoided trying to explain its results in favour of simply reporting what it found: "This paper will not address the physics of the quantum vacuum plasma thruster, but instead will describe the test integration, test operations, and the results obtained from the test campaign."

The drive's inventor, Guido Fetta calls it the "Cannae Drive", which he explains as a reference to the Battle of Cannae in which Hannibal decisively defeated a much stronger Roman army: you're at your best when you are in a tight corner. However, it's hard not to suspect that Star Trek's Engineer Scott -- "I cannae change the laws of physics" -- might also be an influence. (It was formerly known as the Q-Drive.)

Fetta also presented a paper at AIAA on his drive, "Numerical and Experimental Results for a Novel Propulsion Technology Requiring no On-Board Propellant". His underlying theory is very different to that of the EmDrive, but like Shawyer he has spent years trying to persuade sceptics simply to look at it. He seems to have succeeded at last.

Shawyer himself, who sent test examples of the EmDrive to the US in 2009, sees the similarity between the two.

"From what I understand of the Nasa and Cannae work -- their RF thruster actually operates along similar lines to EmDrive, except that the asymmetric force derives from a reduced reflection coefficient at one end plate," he says. He believes the design accounts for the Cannae Drive's comparatively low thrust: "Of course this degrades the Q and hence the specific thrust that can be obtained."

Fetta is working on a number of projects which he is not able to discuss at present, and Nasa's PR team was not able to get any comments from the research team. However, it's fair to assume that the results will be picked over very closely indeed, like CERN's anomalous faster-than-light neutrinos. The neutrino issue was cleared up fairly quickly, but given that this appears to be at least the third independent propellant-less thruster to work in tests, the anomalous thrust may prove much harder to explain away.

A working microwave thruster would radically cut the cost of satellites and space stations and extend their working life, drive deep-space missions, and take astronauts to Mars in weeks rather than months. In hindsight, it may turn out to be another great British invention that someone else turned into a success.

 

EmDrive: China's radical new space drive

 



Shutterstock



Scientists in China have built and tested a radical new space drive. Although the thrust it produces may not be enough to lift your mobile phone, it looks like it could radically change the satellite industry. Satellites are just the start: with superconducting components, this technology could generate the thrust to drive everything from deep space probes to flying cars. And it all started with a British engineer whose invention was ignored and ridiculed in his home country.

The latest research comes from a team headed by Yang Juan, Professor of Propulsion Theory and Engineering of Aeronautics and Astronautics at the Northwestern Polytechnic University in Xi'an. Titled "Net thrust measurement of propellantless microwave thruster," it was published last year in the academic journal Acta Physica Sinica, now translated into English.

The technology is controversial because of that key word "propellantless". Space drives rely on Newton's laws of motion: all are based on the principle of firing propellant out the back at high speed, pushing the spacecraft forward. Even with endless power from solar cells, thrust is still limited by the supply of propellant, even with high-velocity ion drives. Numerous attempts have been made to overcome this, from the infamous Dean Drive of the 1950's to Nasa's experiments with antigravity from spinning superconductors in the 1990's. All have failed, and the efforts of pseudoscientific cranks and scammers have left the field thoroughly discredited.

British engineer Roger Shaywer stepped into this dangerous field in 2001, after twenty years with European satellite firm EADS Astrium. He set up his own company, Satellite Propulsion Research (SPR) Ltd, with the aid of a modest grant from the UK's Department of Trade and Industry.

Shawyer aimed to develop an EmDrive: a closed, conical container which, when filled with resonating microwaves, experiences a net thrust towards the wide end. It seems to violate of the law of conservation of momentum, implied by Newton, which says that no closed system can have a net thrust. However, Shawyer says net thrust occurs because the microwaves have a group velocity which is greater in one direction than the other and Einstein's relativity comes into play. Group velocity, the speed of a collection of electromagnetic waves, is a tricky business -- a pulse of light can even have a group velocity which is greater than the speed of light -- but can it really cause net thrust?

Shawyer built a demonstration thruster to test the theory in 2003. The thrust was tiny -- 16 mN, equal to the weight of a couple of peanuts -- but enough to validate the concept. However, sceptics were quick to attack. None of them actually inspected the apparatus, but Shawyer was assailed from all sides online and in the science press. Criticism was unsophisticated: Newton said it was impossible, therefore he must be a fraud. Even the most advanced theoretical critique, produced by John Costella, a PhD in relativistic electrodynamics, amounted to arguing about the direction of an arrow on one of Shawyer's diagrams.

Shawyer continued to produce and test more advanced demonstrators, working out elaborate ways of ensuring that the test results are valid and not the result of air currents, friction, ionization, interference or electromagnetic effects.

Such effects can easily ruin experiments where small forces are involved. The Nasa investigation into supposed antigravity eventually found that the apparatus was actually causing electronic interference within the measuring system and producing false readings rather than negating the Earth's pull.

Boeing's Phantom Works, which works on various classified projects and has been involved in space research, went as far as acquiring and testing the EmDrive, but say they are no longer working with Shawyer.

In 2007 the Russian Research Institute of Space Systems launched an experimental micro-satellite called Yubileiny (Jubilee) with a "non-traditional" engine which, according to Director Valery Mesnshikov, functions without ejecting reaction mass. However, it was later stated that "further developments" were needed and nothing further appears to be been published on Russian reactionless drives.

Meanwhile, the EmDrive was picked up by Yang at Xi'an, who has a background in space propulsion systems.

The Chinese team took a cautious approach. They started with a new analysis in terms of quantum theory in 2008 which indicated that the theoretical basis was sound and net thrust is possible. The next paper in 2010 quantified the amount of thrust that could be produced, and stated that the team was getting positive experimental results. The latest paper describes their latest thruster and gives the test results in details, showing that with a couple of kilowatts of power they can produce 720 mN (about 72 grams) of thrust.

It may not sound very much, less than three ounces, but in space a little thrust goes a long way. Boeing's advanced XIPS thruster, which fires out Xenon ions at high speed, generates less than a quarter as much thrust from twice as much power. It's used to maintain satellites in position, or move them to a slightly different orbit. Crucially, Xips weights about twenty kilos, more than an equivalent EmDrive, and the propellant for prolonged operation can weigh much more.

Propellant can account for as much as half the launch weight of a geostationary satellite. This means that, in principle, fitting one with an EmDrive rather than a conventional drive, could halve launch costs. Shawyer notes that EmDrives no more powerful than the Chinese one could keep the International Space Station in position without the need for costly refueling.

Meanwhile, Shawyer is moving on to bigger plans. The amount of thrust produced by an EmDrive is determined by the Q value of the cavity, which measures how well it resonates. A tuning fork has a high Q value in air; put it in treacle and it is damped and does not resonate so well. By using superconducting apparatus, Shawyer says that the Q value, and hence thrust, can be boosted by a factor of several thousand -- producing perhaps a tonne of thrust per kilowatt of power. Suddenly it's not about giving a satellite a slight nudge, it's about launching spacecraft. 

Shawyer estimates that the prototype superconducting thruster could be ready in 2016. Even the most hardened sceptic would find it hard to ignore a thruster capable of levitating itself in the air. However, the EmDrive cannot violate the law of conservation of energy. It can exert force, but accelerating a vehicle over a distance still requires a huge amount of power, and ultimately it still needs a big power supply. Personal EmDrive jetpacks are unlikely, but Shawyer has plans for a deep space propulsion unit, an EmDrive-assisted spaceplane capable of taking off from a runway and travelling to Australia in three hours -- and a personal air vehicle the size of a car.

However, aerospace companies are not in a hurry to do business with Shawyer, and he will not be able to build the superconducting thruster without funding.

Yang's experimental work is continuing; she says she is not able to discuss her work until more results are published this year. There is also the tantalising prospect of a demonstration at an aerospace conference. This might make the EmDrive hard to ignore and force a showdown with skeptics. So far the reaction in the west to Yang's work has been muted -- perhaps polite disbelief would be the best description. 2013 may change all that.


From Wired @ http://www.wired.co.uk/news/archive/2014-07/31/nasa-validates-impossible-space-drive and http://www.wired.co.uk/news/archive/2013-02/06/emdrive-and-cold-fusion


For more information about antigravity see http://nexusilluminati.blogspot.com/search/label/antigravity
- Scroll down through ‘Older Posts’ at the end of each section


Hope you like this not for profit site -
It takes hours of work every day to maintain, write, edit, research, illustrate and publish this website from a tiny cabin in a remote forest
Like what we do? Please give enough for a meal or drink if you can -  
Donate any amount and receive at least one New Illuminati eBook!
Please click below -




For further enlightening information enter a word or phrase into the random synchronistic search box @ http://nexusilluminati.blogspot.com


And see




 New Illuminati on Facebook - https://www.facebook.com/the.new.illuminati

New Illuminati Youtube Channel - http://www.youtube.com/user/newilluminati/feed


New Illuminati on Twitter @ www.twitter.com/new_illuminati


New Illuminations –Art(icles) by R. Ayana @ http://newilluminations.blogspot.com

The Her(m)etic Hermit - http://hermetic.blog.com


The Prince of Centraxis - http://centraxis.blogspot.com (Be Aware! This link leads to implicate & xplicit concepts & images!)



DISGRUNTLED SITE ADMINS PLEASE NOTE –
We provide a live link to your original material on your site (and links via social networking services) - which raises your ranking on search engines and helps spread your info further! This site is published under Creative Commons Fair Use Copyright (unless an individual article or other item is declared otherwise by the copyright holder) – reproduction for non-profit use is permitted & encouraged, if you give attribution to the work & author - and please include a (preferably active) link to the original (along with this or a similar notice).

Feel free to make non-commercial hard (printed) or software copies or mirror sites - you never know how long something will stay glued to the web – but remember attribution! If you like what you see, please send a donation (no amount is too small or too large) or leave a comment – and thanks for reading this far…

Live long and prosper! Together we can create the best of all possible worlds…


From the New Illuminati – http://nexusilluminati.blogspot.com

Saturday, 25 September 2010

Space Zen: Will Humans' Brains Change During Travel in Outer Space?

Space Zen: Will Humans' Brains Change During Travel in Outer Space?
Exploring the Overview Effect

903220_big_2
In February, 1971, Apollo 14 astronaut Edgar Mitchell experienced the little understood phenomenon sometimes called the “Overview Effect”. He describes being completely engulfed by a profound sense of universal connectedness. Without warning, he says, a feeing of bliss, timelessness, and connectedness began to overwhelm him. He describes becoming instantly and profoundly aware that each of his constituent atoms were connected to the fragile planet he saw in the window and to every other atom in the Universe.
He described experiencing an intense awareness that Earth, with its humans, other animal species, and systems were all one synergistic whole. He says the feeling that rushed over him was a sense of interconnected euphoria. He was not the first — nor the last — to experience this strange “cosmic connection”.
Rusty Schweikart experienced it on March 6th 1969 during a spacewalk outside his Apollo 9 vehicle: “When you go around the Earth in an hour and a half, you begin to recognize that your identity is with that whole thing. That makes a change… it comes through to you so powerfully that you’re the sensing element for Man.” Schweikart, similar to what Mitchell experienced, describes intuitively sensing that everything is profoundly connected.
Their experiences, along with dozens of other similar experiences described by other astronauts, intrigue scientists who study the brain. This “Overview Effect”, or acute awareness of all matter as synergistically connected, sounds somewhat similar to certain religious experiences described by Buddhist monks, for example. Where does it come from and why?
Andy Newberg, a neuroscientist/physician with a background in space medicine, is learning how to identify the markers of someone who has experienced space travel. He says there is a palpable difference in someone who has been in space, and he wants to know why. Newberg
specializes in finding the neurological markers of brains in states of altered consciousness: Praying nuns, transcendental meditators, and others in focused or "transcendent" states.

Newberg can actually pinpoint regions in subjects' gray matter that correlate to these circumstances, and now he plans to use his expertise to find how and why the Overview Effect occurs. He is setting up advanced neurological scanning instruments that can head into space to study – live -- the brain functions of space travelers. If this Overview Effect is a real, physiological phenomenon he wants to watch it unfold.

Newberg's first test subject will not be an astronaut, but rather a civilian. Reda Andersen will be leaving the planet with Rocketplane Kistler. She says that as one of the world's first civilian space adventurers, she is more than happy to let Andy scan her brain if it can help unlock the mystery. Why do astronauts all seem to experience a profound alteration of their perceptions when entering space, and will it happen for Rita and the other civilian explorers as well?

After decades of study and contemplation about his experience, Ed Mitchell believes that the feeling of “oneness” with the Universe that he and others have experienced is a consequence of little understood quantum physics.
In a recent interview with writer Diana deRegnier of American Chronicle, Mitchell explains how the event changed his life and his entire perspective on the world and how each of us fits into the grand scale of the cosmos.
“Four hundred years ago the philosopher Rene Descartes came to the conclusion that physicality, spirituality, mind and body belonged to different realms of reality that didn't interact. Now, that served the purpose to get the Inquisition off the backs of the intellectuals so they could disagree on material things with the church and without the fear of being burned at the stake. So that ended that, but it did cause, for four hundred years, science to consider consciousness and mind a subject for philosophy and religion and not a subject for science.
“Now, one of the things that happened, in the 1940s, was the mathematician, physicist, Norbert Wiener (MIT, Massachusetts Institute of Technology) for the first time really defined information as the negative of entropy, and entropy as the idea of the universe is running down and wastes energy. But, Wiener defined information as the negative of entropy, and that's wonderful but it didn't go far enough.”
Mitchell says that in an attempt to fill in some of the missing gap, the 2008 revised edition of his book The Way of the Explorer explores the largely ignored science of human consciousness. Using what he calls the “dyadic model” he outlines the “two faces” of energy. “Instead of being two separate things, it's the energy as the basis of our existence in matter. And it’s the basis of our knowing and information,” Mitchell explains.
“We had not had, in science, a definition of consciousness. The only definition of consciousness from the dictionary is that at its basic level it is awareness. Consciousness means to be aware, and then we have different levels of consciousness depending upon how complex the substance is. It has been demonstrated many times over in laboratories that basic awareness is demonstrable at the level of plants, at simple bacteria, at simple life forms.
“This is done with Faraday cages. It's shown that this information at this deep level, at the quantum level, can transcend electromagnetic theory. And now we're getting into quantum physics and we don´t want to go there at this point. But it's a very fundamental notion that awareness is at the very basis of things.”
Mitchell believes that perhaps both the theologians and scientists have missed the mark.
“All I can suggest to the mystic and the theologian is that our gods have been too small; they fill the universe. And to the scientist all I can say is that the gods do exist; they are the eternal, connected and aware Self experienced by all intelligent beings.”
In response to DeRegnier questioning whether or not Mitchell believes in the idea of God, he responds that while he does not believe in the traditional “grandfather figure” version of God, “we do have great mystery about what is the origin of the universe, how it came to be. There's a great deal of question as to whether the big bang is the correct answer to the way the universe arose, and under what auspices and conditions. I don't think we have the full answers to that yet. Hopefully in due course we'll be able to find a much better way to describe all this.”
But while Mitchell does not claim to know how to perfectly interpret his experience, he is certain that it was a glimpse into a largely ignored reality: People, places and things are all more closely connected than they sometimes appear. He also mentions the need for better stewardship of our precious planet.
“The great thinker Buckminster Fuller, philosopher, now deceased… pointed out at the beginning of our space exploration that we are the crew of ‘space ship earth’. But we're a crew of mutiny and how can you run a space ship with a mutinous crew?”
Posted by Rebecca Sato @  http://www.dailygalaxy.com/my_weblog/2009/05/will-our-brains.html
 http://yowusa.com/radio/cttc/2008/cttc-0208-84/cttc-0208-84.jpg
Full Interview with Dr Mitchell:
The interview began: With me today is Dr. Edgar Mitchell, former astronaut and the sixth man to walk on the moon. As an introduction, I would like to read what Warwick Associates publicity consultants say about Dr. Mitchell;

‘In February, 1971, as Apollo 14 astronaut Edgar Mitchell hurtled earthward through space, he was engulfed by a profound sense of universal connectedness. He intuitively sensed that his presence and that of the planet in the window were all part of a deliberate, universal process and that the glittering cosmos itself was in some way conscious. The experience was so overwhelming Mitchell knew his life would never be the same.

In [Dr. Mitchell's book of 1996, revised 2008], Mitchell, founder of [the Institute of Noetic Sciences, traces two remarkable journeys — one through space and one through the mind. Together they fundamentally alter how we understand the miracle and mystery of being, and ultimately reveal mankind's destiny.'

deRegnier: Thank you for being with me, Dr. Mitchell.

Mitchell: It's a pleasure being with you. Thank you very much.

deRegnier: You're welcome. As I said in my email to you earlier this week, I found your life story to be most illuminating, especially your childhood. I could see how your family's influence and principles presented a thread that continued throughout the book. Would you like to tell us about your childhood?

Mitchell: Sure. My family was in the agricultural and cattle business, and as farmers. As pioneers they went west after the Civil War when it was still very open territory in the 1870s. And so, a great deal of self-reliance and personal integrity and making things work on your own was required. That's the life I grew up with, and I think it has served me well, because it engendered self-responsibility.

deRegnier: One of your neighbors when you were growing up and moved to Roswell, New Mexico was Robert Goddard.

Mitchell: Oh yes, that was quite interesting that Dr. Goddard was our neighbor. We didn't know him personally, but we did know that he lived there. And, though I never met him, I did meet Mrs. Goddard years later after he'd passed on and after my space flight. We became acquainted at that time.

deRegnier: Was that inspiration for your interest in space?

Mitchell: Not particularly. Actually, my interest in space only came much, much later when Sputnik went up. It was only when we actually started to investigate space physically with the rockets and the Soviets. I was, at that point, a Navy pilot in the Korean War and coming back to test pilot duty in the United States when Sputnik went up. Then I realized that here was a new frontier where humans could be right behind robot space craft in due course. And I thought that would be a good thing to do. So I changed my career path at that point to follow that.

deRegnier: Very interesting. That your family made sacrifices for your education and that your family and teachers recognized that you had special qualities that needed to be fostered in that way intrigued me.

Mitchell: My family was very supportive and they did believe in education. And they made sure that I had the opportunities to get a good education. So I did go off to an eastern technical school, now called Carnegie Mellon, but it was called Carnegie Institute of Technology back in those days, to get an engineering education.

deRegnier: You knew that you that you wanted to be an engineer and an educator at a very early age. I didn't know what an engineer was at an early age.

Mitchell: I had a very fine physics teacher in high school who was quite an influence on me. Also, my father was a very bright man although he was not college educated because of the depression and tough times at that point. But my father and mother both insisted that I get a good education and made it possible to do that.

deRegnier: Great. I'm going to skip now to the focal point of your book, which is the dyadic model. I'm going to switch to that because it seems that it is a very important element of what you want to communicate with the book. Can you explain it to us in lay-person terms for the scientifically challenged?

Mitchell: Yes, in a very simple statement: Four hundred years ago. the philosopher Rene Descartes came to the conclusion that physicality, spirituality, mind and body belonged to different realms of reality that didn't interact. Now, that served the purpose to get the Inquisition off the backs of the intellectuals so they could disagree on material things with the church and without the fear of being burned at the stake. So that ended that, but it did cause, for four hundred years, science to consider consciousness and mind a subject for philosophy and religion and not a subject for science.

Now, one of the things that happened, in the 1940s, was the mathematician/physicist Norbert Wiener (MIT, Massachusetts Institute of Technology) for the first time really defined information as the negative of entropy, and entropy as the idea of the universe is running down and wastes energy. But Wiener defined information as the negative of entropy, and that's wonderful but it didn't go far enough.

So what my dyadic model does, [relates to] Einstein's energy is the basis of matter. We know that if we take matter apart and explode matter, we find energy. And that energy is the basis of matter. But if we go a step further, we live in a universe where intelligence and knowing is important, and how do we know anything; well, information. And, information at its most basic definition is just patterns in energy.

So the dyadic model says that energy has two faces. Instead of being two separate things, it's the energy as the basis of our existence in matter. And it’s the basis of our knowing and information. And that's the simplest way to explain it.
https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEgjlWK7Q5097rU27FdboGU6vo028IFmsUIbFJpXwzGWdP0M18myEft3zp6N7OH4-Lknx98d_FDUPynXkxT3dO_VDRqBsD1-i2Ef0eUMrHVR5hVkAubjLKK5OSnOJmS0e4-PZYZW_t3vsnI/s400/spacewalk.jpg
deRegnier: And how does that affect our consciousness, or how does the consciousness affect that model?

Mitchell: First of all, it gives a consistent way of looking at this and we needed that. But we had not had, in science, a definition of consciousness. The only definition of consciousness from the dictionary is that at its basic level it is awareness. Consciousness means to be aware, and then we have different levels of consciousness depending upon how complex the substance is. It has been demonstrated many times over in laboratories that basic awareness is demonstrable at the level of plants, at simple bacteria, at simple life forms.

This is done with Faraday cages. It's shown that this information at this deep level, at the quantum level, can transcend electromagnetic theory. And now we're getting into quantum physics and we don’t want to go there at this point. But it's a very fundamental notion that awareness is at the very basis of things.

And we have a consciousness that is not only aware, but we can think about our thinking and that is a much higher level of consciousness than we find at the level of plants and animals.

deRegnier: Has our level of consciousness changed as we've evolved?

Mitchell: I would think so. I tend to agree with the classic notions that come right out of biology that we have evolved from a more primitive state, and that from those lower animal states from which we came, that we have progressively evolved in our ability to utilize consciousness, to utilize thought and intelligence as we have learned more about our universe. Both on Earth and as in the 19th and 20th centuries, and now the 21st century, we’ve been able to look out into the heavens with very powerful instruments and to find our place in the universe in totally new ways.
deRegnier: Would you say that with the dawning of ritual and religion, was that when there came a change in consciousness?

Mitchell: No, I would say there was a whole host of developments associated with that. The inventing of writing is one. Spoken language is another. And then the development of all this helps the brain to evolve and to utilize and to start to take on different characteristics.

I don't consider myself enough of an evolutionary biologist to speak coherently about all of this, but it's very clear that in the evolutionary process that's taken place in the last several thousand years as we have evolved language, and written language in particular, and from the Greeks forward learned to think in more logical terms.

deRegnier: What do you see as our responsibility with this consciousness? For example, do we have a responsibility to morality?

Mitchell: Of course, what comes along with living is learning to develop everything that goes with our consciousness. We have to think about morality. We have to think about rightness. We have certainly learned to accept the notion that we're all created out of the same thing. And that's one of the things quantum physics has shown us.

Particularly, what the space experience has shown me was that when we understand that the matter in our bodies and in everything (all matter is created in the star systems, the heavy matter created in the furnace of stars) we start to realize that that is the basis of our very existence. And when we start to realize we are interconnected in this way it helps you see things in a different way.

deRegnier: It certainly does. In your writings, in the epilogue of the revised edition of the book and in other writings I've seen, you talk about sustainability. What can you tell us about that?

Mitchell: Well, if we looked at our modern period, for the modern period I consider from the mid part of the nineteenth century on, about the 1850s, 1860s on, we have had an enormous increase in the use of our science and our technology such that every measure of human activity is found to be growing exponentially. It's very clear, that exponential growth - which means that the rate of change is increasing as well as change itself. That exponential growth cannot continue indefinitely in a finite space. And our little Earth here is a finite space.

And we see that from the beginning of the middle of the nineteenth century, every measure of human activity has increased exponentially. For example, at the end of the nineteenth century there weren't even 3 billion people on earth, but now, at the end of the twentieth century going into the twenty-first century, we have over 6 billion on earth. We have a rate of increase of population that has increased markedly.

Our invention and creativity with new technologies has exponentially increased too. What this is telling us is that we simply cannot continue this. That the population increase, the consumption patterns, what we're doing to our environment is not sustainable.

The great thinker Buckminster Fuller, philosopher, now deceased… pointed out at the beginning of our space exploration that we are the crew of space ship earth. But we 're a crew of mutiny and how can you run a space ship with a mutinous crew? We're spending so much time killing each other, destroying our environment, over-populating. We're well aware that the edible fish of the sea are destined to be gone by the middle part of the twenty-first century unless we learn to curb our lifestyle, and to change our behaviors and patterns to a more sustainable green – let's call it a green and sustainable pattern of living.

deRegnier: Excellent. In the last chapter before the Epilogue you speak to theologians and scientists on the issue of God. Are you willing to give away the ending?

Mitchell: Well if you want to read it that's fine. It's just the universe is so utterly magnificent as we're starting to understand it. I think that our older notions of a deity and the causality and the origins of the universe are probably wrong, and that we have to rethink all of this. But it's still a magnificent universe that we live in and it's our task to understand it. But mostly our notions of understanding have to be revised, and in many cases what we've been saying is totally wrong.

deRegnier: I will read what you said: 'All I can suggest to the mystic and the theologian is that our gods have been too small; they fill the universe. And to the scientist all I can say is that the gods do exist; they are the eternal, connected and aware Self experienced by all intelligent beings.'

So you do believe in the idea of God?

Mitchell: Well, it depends on how you want to define that. We all have different beliefs in how the universe began and what are the basic causal factors. In so-called Abrahamic religions, it gives us to a grandfather figure God, and that isn't an analogy I can support. I don't believe that is correct. But we do have great mystery about what is the origin of the universe, how it came to be. There's a great deal of question as to whether the big bang is the correct answer to the way the universe arose, and under what auspices and conditions. I don't think we have the full answers to that yet. Hopefully in due course we'll be able to find a much better way to describe all this.

deRegnier: You are a scientist and you believe in God. You don't find …

Mitchell: Let's not misinterpret what I say.

deRegnier: Oh, okay. Excuse me.

Mitchell: The old notion, the notion coming out of Abrahamic religions of the grandfather figure God, the beingness - I don't support that notion.

deRegnier: [I didn't mean to imply that Dr. Mitchell supported the traditional definition of God.] But you support a notion of something?

Mitchell: Well, we have to ask a question of how did we get here? What's this universe all about? What's our relationship to it? And humans have been asking that question forever. We still don't have a final answer to what is this nature of the universe we live in and how did it come to be. And part of that involves the question of a deity. I think the answer is still to be found.

deRegnier: So you think it's an important question that has not been answered and that should be continued to be asked. Okay, thank you.

There is so much more in the book that we could talk about. As you can tell by my questions it was difficult to narrow them down to this time limit. I thank you so very much and I just want to ask is there any parting comment you’d like to make?

Mitchell: Thanks very much for inviting me and I'm pleased to have been with you this morning.


From http://www.americanchronicle.com/articles/6224

 http://www.selfhelprecovery.com/hallsofthemind.jpg
New  Illuminati comments:
Even military minds are radically transformed when they leave the planet and move beyond the larval consciousness that's prevalent in a gravity well. When you're beyond the Earth's field - way past the Van Allen Belts, beyond the orbit of space stations and shuttles, your upper energy centres are released from the thralldom of the biosphere.
Try it sometime; you can experience it here on Earth with a little practice, with or without psychedelics. See Timothy Leary's take on this topic @ http://newilluminati.blog-city.com/infopsychology_by_timothy_leary.htm

Xtra Images: http://yowusa.com/radio/cttc/2008/cttc-0208-84/cttc-0208-84.jpg
https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEgjlWK7Q5097rU27FdboGU6vo028IFmsUIbFJpXwzGWdP0M18myEft3zp6N7OH4-Lknx98d_FDUPynXkxT3dO_VDRqBsD1-i2Ef0eUMrHVR5hVkAubjLKK5OSnOJmS0e4-PZYZW_t3vsnI/s400/spacewalk.jpg
http://www.selfhelprecovery.com/hallsofthemind.jpg

For further enlightenment see –

The Her(m)etic Hermit - http://hermetic.blog.com
 
 
 


This material is published under Creative Commons Copyright – reproduction for non-profit use is permitted & encouraged, if you give attribution to the work & author - and please include a (preferably active) link to the original along with this notice. Feel free to make non-commercial hard (printed) or software copies or mirror sites - you never know how long something will stay glued to the web – but remember attribution! If you like what you see, please send a tiny donation or leave a comment – and thanks for reading this far…

From the New Illuminati – http://nexusilluminati.blogspot.com
 

Wednesday, 10 May 2006

Anti-Gravity Machine: Wheels Within Wheels

Anti-Gravity Machine
Wheels Within Wheels

 One of Sandy Kidd's devices
   
“Scientists will simply have to accept that I am right and physics is wrong,” according to Scots engineer Sandy Kidd. “Only then can we open up the universe and take man to mars in just a few hours longer than the present flying time between Sydney and London.” 

          These outlandish – even unearthly – claims would normally be dismissed out of hand; but not when they come from Sandy Kidd. His invention, the Kidd Machine, shouldn’t work – but it does, repeatedly. 

          Sandy Kidd set out to create an anti-gravity machine in 1980, a device which could one day power flying saucers with energy derived from high-speed gyroscopes. While working as a planning engineer with a North Sea oil company for four years, he spent nearly every spare minute in a makeshift workshop in his garden shed in Dundee, Scotland. Then, at Christmas in 1984, his machine generated its first vertical thrust. “Not much, but it was there and I was over the moon,” he recalls. A few weeks later the device was demonstrated at Imperial College, London, for Professor Eric Laithwaite, a pioneering expert on gyroscopes. 

            After watching the three kilogram, 45-centimetre unit with a gyroscope at each end of a crossarm rise from the test-bench against a counter-weight, he described Kidd as ‘ingenious’. 

          “What we have here is a potential space drive,” Laithwaite said. “Properly developed, this would take you to the outer universe on a spoonful of uranium.” 

          Two years later, research physicist Dr Bill Ferrier of Dundee university examined the device on campus. “Its potential is mind-boggling,” Ferrier announced. After Sandy Kidd moved to Australia a second prototype was tested in Melbourne for three days under the supervision of specialist engineers. Placed in a sealed wooden box, it was suspended from a cord attached to an overhead beam fitted with sensitive measuring instruments. Powered by a model aircraft engine, the entire device lost weight as the vertical thrust overcame the ‘force’ of gravity. 

          “It created enough thrust to float a small orange through the middle of a room,” said Kidd. “People in the laboratory were clearly shaken.” 

          The Kidd Machine produces lift without reacting on air, water or a solid surface and therefore appears to be defying Newton’s Third Law of Motion that states that every action must have an equal and opposite reaction. 

          “What Kidd has achieved will certainly shake the scientific world to the core when they realize the implications of the results,” announced prematurely optimistic astrophysicist Dr Harold Aspden of Southampton University in the 1980s. “It should now be possible to build a machine big enough to lift itself off the ground with a full payload.” 

          Mr Kidd was working under contract to BWN, an Australian-based company. BWN refused to divulge laboratory details despite wide mainstream media disclosure, including demonstrations on a number of TV programs. “Full public disclosure would simply encourage others to build similar devices and perhaps overtake us,” said Noel Carrol of BWN. “Industrial espionage is another risk we face.” Work to increase lift and design a commercial prototype “may take several years but we’ll get there,” said Kidd in 1988…

 Sandy Kidd's Book
Picture of Dr Bill Ferrier

 See http://www.gyroscopes.org/propulsion.asp  and  http://nexusilluminati.blogspot.com/search/label/free%20energy for far more
  
-        R. Ayana
-         Images - http://www.gyroscopes.org/propulsion.asp




For further enlightenment enter a word or phrase into the search box @  New Illuminati:

@  http://nexusilluminati.blogspot.com (or click on any tag at the bottom of the page)

And see

The Her(m)etic Hermit - http://hermetic.blog.com





This material is published under Creative Commons Copyright (unless an individual item is declared otherwise by copyright holder) – reproduction for non-profit use is permitted & encouraged, if you give attribution to the work & author - and please include a (preferably active) link to the original along with this notice. Feel free to make non-commercial hard (printed) or software copies or mirror sites - you never know how long something will stay glued to the web – but remember attribution! If you like what you see, please send a tiny donation or leave a comment – and thanks for reading this far…

From the New Illuminati – http://nexusilluminati.blogspot.com