Menu
Forums
New posts
Search forums
What's new
New posts
New profile posts
Latest activity
Vault
Time Travel Schematics
T.E.C. Time Archive
The Why Files
Have You Seen...?
Chronovisor
TimeTravelForum.tk
TimeTravelForum.net
ParanormalNetwork.net
Paranormalis.com
ConspiracyCafe.net
Streams
Live streams
Featured streams
Multi-Viewer
Members
Current visitors
New profile posts
Search profile posts
Log in
Register
What's new
Search
Search
Search titles only
By:
New posts
Search forums
Menu
Log in
Register
Navigation
Install the app
Install
More options
Contact us
Close Menu
Forums
Time Travel Forum
Time Machines & Experiments
Antigravity Experiments?
JavaScript is disabled. For a better experience, please enable JavaScript in your browser before proceeding.
You are using an out of date browser. It may not display this or other websites correctly.
You should upgrade or use an
alternative browser
.
Reply to thread
Message
<blockquote data-quote="start at edge" data-source="post: 197332" data-attributes="member: 11971"><p>You’re perfectly right. Though, the model cited is a reference, it is used as an example so to say and it is raw. The donut (torrus) containment model is indeed linked to time related aspects, which makes this particular model very raw, very crude and hard to extract benefits from the whole system, as they are much lower than most people would expect. 89% seems a lot at first sight and in some cases it is enough when and if it fits into the expectations and into the purpose, but the physical applications where it can be used and have some benefits from it, are very few. Hg (mercury) is used in this example because it is indeed very heavy, but any other liquid would do, only needing a higher spin, which depends on the torrus diameters (median diameter and cross section diameter). There is a device (machine) design that has any time related aspect completely eliminated, but it can be used only as a propulsion system and it interacts with any gravitational pull (force) only vectorial (vector components resultant), having capabilities to shift the resultant (gravitational pull of the closest object) to - (minus) F, where F can go up to more than 300% of the gravitational pull between the system (device) and the object, depending on the materials used – but it is NOT “anti-gravity” as some people use to call it, it is something completely different.</p><p>“mono-pole” is indeed the best term for this, as it has indeed one single direction for the drive (for the whole system actually), which is the vector resultant. One of the inconveniences is that whenever a change of direction is needed, the whole system has to be stopped, as the initial setting can not be modified while the device is functioning.</p></blockquote><p></p>
[QUOTE="start at edge, post: 197332, member: 11971"] You’re perfectly right. Though, the model cited is a reference, it is used as an example so to say and it is raw. The donut (torrus) containment model is indeed linked to time related aspects, which makes this particular model very raw, very crude and hard to extract benefits from the whole system, as they are much lower than most people would expect. 89% seems a lot at first sight and in some cases it is enough when and if it fits into the expectations and into the purpose, but the physical applications where it can be used and have some benefits from it, are very few. Hg (mercury) is used in this example because it is indeed very heavy, but any other liquid would do, only needing a higher spin, which depends on the torrus diameters (median diameter and cross section diameter). There is a device (machine) design that has any time related aspect completely eliminated, but it can be used only as a propulsion system and it interacts with any gravitational pull (force) only vectorial (vector components resultant), having capabilities to shift the resultant (gravitational pull of the closest object) to - (minus) F, where F can go up to more than 300% of the gravitational pull between the system (device) and the object, depending on the materials used – but it is NOT “anti-gravity” as some people use to call it, it is something completely different. “mono-pole” is indeed the best term for this, as it has indeed one single direction for the drive (for the whole system actually), which is the vector resultant. One of the inconveniences is that whenever a change of direction is needed, the whole system has to be stopped, as the initial setting can not be modified while the device is functioning. [/QUOTE]
Insert quotes…
Verification
Post reply
Forums
Time Travel Forum
Time Machines & Experiments
Antigravity Experiments?
This site uses cookies to help personalise content, tailor your experience and to keep you logged in if you register.
By continuing to use this site, you are consenting to our use of cookies.
Accept
Learn more…
Top