• SUPPORT THE SHOW AND ENJOY A PREMIUM PARACAST EXPERIENCE! Welcome to The Paracast+, eight years young! For a low subscription fee, you can download the ad-free version of The Paracast and the exclusive, member-only, After The Paracast podcast, featuring color commentary, exclusive interviews, the continuation of interviews that began on the main episode of The Paracast. We also offer lifetime memberships! Flash! Use the coupon code ufo20 to receive a 20% discount on five-year or lifetime subscriptions. And PayPal now accepts cryptocurrencies, such as Bitcoin, in payment. We also offer a second payment method for major credit or debit cards (which also includes Apple Pay and Google Pay), so act now! It's easier than ever to susbcribe! You can sign up right here!

    Subscribe to The Paracast Newsletter!

The Physical Science of Ufology – Thomas R. Morrison interview supplemental



Thomas R Morrison

Paranormal Adept
We covered a lot of ground in my recent chat with Gene and Randall, and I want to provide my citations and references for any listeners who would like to dig into the various subjects that we talked about on the show. Here they are, ordered in the sequence that they appeared in the show:

Gravitational Field Propulsion

“Negative Matter Propulsion,” Robert L. Forward, Journal of Propulsion and Power, 1990.
http://ayuba.fr/pdf/forward1990.pdf

“Guidelines to Antigravity,” Robert L. Forward, American Journal of Physics, 1963.
http://u2.lege.net/culture.zapto.or...nt/antigravidity/guide%20to%20antigravity.pdf

“Swimming in Spacetime,” Jack Wisdom, Science, 2003.
http://web.mit.edu/wisdom/www/swimming.pdf


This paper explains why the Alcubierre “warp drive” is not a propulsion system after all:

“Introducing Physical Warp Drives,” Bobrick and Martire, Classical and Quantum Gravity, 2021.
https://arxiv.org/pdf/2102.06824.pdf

Paul Hill book – Unconventional Flying Objects: A Scientific Analysis
Unconventional Flying Objects: A Scientific Analysis: Paul R. Hill, Robert M. Wood: 9781571740274: Amazon.com: Books


The Age of Habitable Exosolar Planets

Dissertation estimating that the average age of other Earth-like worlds is over 3 billion years older than our Earth:

"The Age Distribution of Potential Intelligent Life in the Milky Way," D.Legassick, 2015
[1509.02832] The Age Distribution of Potential Intelligent Life in the Milky Way


Contemporary Science Creating Custom-Wavefunction Materials

“Classification of topological quantum matter with symmetries,” Chiu, Teo, Schnyder, and Ryu, Review of Modern Physics, 2016
https://arxiv.org/pdf/1505.03535.pdf


Prevalence of Earth-like Worlds in the Milky Way Galaxy alone is at least 300 million

“The Occurrence of Rocky Habitable Zone Planets Around Solar-Like Stars from Kepler Data,” Bryson et al., The Astronomical Journal, 2020.
https://arxiv.org/pdf/2010.14812.pdf

Prevalence of Earth-like Worlds in the Milky Way Galaxy alone could be as high as 30 billion

“Prevalence of Earth-size planets orbiting Sun-like stars,” Petigura, Howard, and Marcy, PNAS, 2013.
https://www.pnas.org/content/110/48/19273


The Fermi Paradox
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Fermi_paradox

Lockheed Martin developing a fusion reactor that could fit on a truck
https://www.lockheedmartin.com/en-us/products/compact-fusion.html

Special relativity and time dilation as a spacecraft approaches light speed
https://www.space.com/36273-theory-special-relativity.html

The cosmological horizon: most of the universe is receding away from us faster than the speed of light
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Cosmological_horizon

Dark energy is an antigravitational field acting between the galaxy clusters
https://ned.ipac.caltech.edu/level5/March01/Dark/Dark.html


Lockheed Martin Research Scientist Boyd Bushman

Boyd Bushman’s interview on The Paracast, Nov. 4, 2007

https://www.theparacast.com/podcast/november-4-2007-boyd-bushman/

Complete list of Boyd Bushman’s patents with Lockheed Corporation as the Assignee
https://patents.google.com/?inventor=boyd+Bushman&oq=boyd+Bushman

Boyd Bushman’s lawsuit against Lockheed for losing his special access program security clearance
https://casetext.com/case/bushman-v-lockheed-martin-corporation-ndtex-2001

Apparatus and method for amplifying a magnetic beam
https://patents.google.com/patent/US5929732A/

Boyd Bushman discusses his experiment demonstrating a change in gravitational acceleration using magnetic repulsion in David Sereda’s amateur documentary From Here to Andromeda

Boyd Bushman’s “Deathbed Confession” video

A commentator using the handle UncleBoydWasFun inadvertently verifies Boyd Bushman’s claims regarding three mysterious crystalline spheres and his thermally energized electrical power source invention

UncleBoydWasFun
October 31, 2014 at 11:19 AM

“I knew ‘Uncle Boyd’ well, and worked with him off and on for years. He was actually a really nice old guy, very friendly, always coming up with the wildest ideas, and quite truthfully, innocently fraudulent. He was the weirdest mix of 1 part science, 5 parts eccentricity and 4 parts gentleman I have ever and will ever know. He was so convinced that Egyptians built the pyramids under alien supervision and “altered gravity” devices to lighten the mass and reduce the inertia and momentum of the huge stone blocks the pyramids are built from, that he started teaching himself the “ancient” Egyptian language to learn more. He carried crystals around in his coat pockets that, when he handed one to you, he claimed were limitless self-heating sources of energy, and that they somehow knew to “amazingly” adjust their heat output to match human body temperature so we wouldn’t be hurt by them. He was convinced he had measured changes in gravity’s pull over a range of only 40 feet, or about four stories, which happened to match the height of the building he made this claim in. He claimed that bullets radiated microwave energy, charging surfaces with high-voltage DC made them invisible to radar, that stacks of rubber mats impregnated with stainless steel needles caused an imbalance in the forces in zero-point energy and made them over-unity energy sources. He studied works by Searle and Hutchinson with a passion, as well as papers by Biefield and Brown on electro-gravitic propulsion, and claimed to have used the Biefield-Brown principle to float heavy objects around. He was basically Nikola Tesla on a lifelong LSD trip. But still, I’m proud to have known this gentle and creative crackpot.” (this website has since gone down)

“Thermally energized electrical power source” patent
https://patents.google.com/patent/US5637946A/

FBI security documents at The Black Vault that reveal how Boyd Bushman lost his security clearance to work on USAF special access programs after his interview with Nick Cook for the film Billion Dollar Secret, which effectively ended his career as a Skunk Works research scientist
https://documents.theblackvault.com/documents/fbifiles/paranormal/BoydBushman-1306337-0b.pdf

General Relativity – engineering an enclosure which is larger on the inside than on the outside

“A `warp drive' with more reasonable total energy requirements,” Chris Van Den Broeck, Classical and Quantum Gravity, 1999.
https://arxiv.org/pdf/gr-qc/9905084.pdf

Proposal to create a gravitational field in the lab today

“How Current Loops and Solenoids Curve Space-time,” Andre Fuzfa, Physical Review D, 2016.
https://arxiv.org/pdf/1504.00333.pdf

The electromagnetic stress-energy tensor: quantifying the gravitational field produced by electromagnetism
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Electromagnetic_stress-energy_tensor

In retrospect I realized that Randall was talking about Eugene Podkletnov’s experiments with gravity shielding using a spinning superconductor, conducted at Tampere University of Technology in Finland. Experimental efforts have been made in an attempt to verify his claims, and to my knowledge all of them have failed, such as this one"

“Gravity modification experiment using a rotating superconducting disk and radio frequency fields," Hathaway, Clevand and Bao, Physica C: Superconductivity, 2003.


Entropic gravity – a promising model of gravitation that may lead to unification with quantum field theory

“On the Origin of Gravity and the Laws of Newton," Erik Verlinde, Institute for Theoretical Physics, University of Amsterdam, 2011
https://arxiv.org/pdf/1001.0785.pdf

“Testing Verlinde's emergent gravity in early-type galaxies,” C. Tortora. L. V. E. Koopmans. N. R. Napolitano. E. A. Valentijn.2017 https://arxiv.org/pdf/1702.08865.pdf


Dark Energy Survey – looking for anomalies in the dark energy field
https://www.darkenergysurvey.org/

Jacques Vallee describes an anomalous sample which exhibits three isotopes of one element distributed in thirds:


Engineering the stress-energy tensor in metamaterials

“Electromagnetic stress at the boundary: photon pressure or tension?” Shubo Wang, Jack Ng, Meng Xiao, and C. T. Chan, 2015

“Electromagnetic stress tensor for amorphous metamaterial medium,” Neng Wang, Shubo Wang, Jack Ng, 2018


After the Paracast


Daniel Fry, an alleged alien contactee, predicts the existence of dark energy in 1956


“We can explain the observed actions of the present universe by postulating that an attraction exists between the individual bodies within a galaxy, because their total mass and distance is such that they are within the positive portion of the gravitation curve with respect to each other. In the vast spaces between the galaxies however, the curve dips below the zero line, with the result that a repulsion exists between the galaxies themselves.” [emphasis added]

Steps to the Stars, Daniel Fry, 1956
https://danielfry.com/daniels-writings/steps-to-the-stars/
 

Randall

J. Randall Murphy
We covered a lot of ground in my recent chat with Gene and Randall ...
Yes we did, and welcome back :cool: .

My Idea For An Antigravity Experiment

Further to our chat about the Meissner Effect ( notably similar in coolness to the Randy Meisner effect ), the original idea was to take the experiment and set it up on a suspersensitive scale to see if there was any anti-G effect. That was about 25 years ago. I posted it on some early BB boards and somewhere along the way someone either picked it up or hit on the same idea and did the experiment. Others have since done the same and found that the effect required spinning the magnet. The experiment has had mixed results. Below is a link to one of them.


So my next bright idea ( about 5 years later ) was to suggest that rather than physically rotating the magnet, that they rotate the magnetic field instead. I envisioned that being done electronically with windings arranged in a manner such that the electronics would activate the magnetic field in rapid sequence around a toroidal core. With modern processors, in theory, this could produce an ultra-high speed rotating field with no moving parts.

Coincidentally this same approach has since been used to create contactless high-efficiency electric motors ( why do I not patent these ideas for practical purposes :rolleyes: ).

Anyway. Hypothetically, a person could build a working model in a lab and test it for fairly little expense. It's just more play money than I have at my disposal. If anyone else wants to do it and take the glory. Be my guest. Maybe someone even has by now. I don't know. What's interesting about the idea ( however whimsical it might be ), is that it meets the criteria for a low-powered silent antigravity generator. It even has the magnetic field properties ( and possibly radiation ) associated with close proximity to UFOs ( not to mention the shape ).

A downside might be that the physics behind spinning the magnet ( rather than the field ), is that rotating a mass increases its mass; and maybe that has something to do with the effect they're getting in the experiment above. My response would be: But aren't the variables interchangeable? And we don't really want added mass anyway. We want an antigravitational effect without increasing mass. So who knows? The only way to find out is to try it. Perhaps I should give it an official name ( so I or we – whoever else that might be – can be immortalized by either it's failure or success ).

I hereby christen it the "X-Murphy" effect, where "X" is the last name of the person who actually does the experiment. To add again, this experiment, if done under appreciable power, could conceivably cause radiation, so some sort of shielding might be advisable. Need Bigelow to put me in a lab with a bunch of eggheads and engineers with inside-the-box training to help work-out the details. I remain convinced that it's something along these lines of investigation that will ultimately be successful.

There's probably some other variables to consider too. It seems too simple to work straight out of the box. It could involve a combination of materials and design that work together to regulate or moderate the field in a way that causes the right kind of "resonance". This might have the sort of effect described on the show.
 
Last edited:

Thomas R Morrison

Paranormal Adept
Yes we did, and welcome back :cool: .
Thanks Randall - I really enjoyed our chat on the show, and I've been hearing some great responses to it; I'm delighted that we could cover a lot of ground that very rarely if ever gets talked about regarding this fascinating subject.

My Idea For An Antigravity Experiment

Further to our chat about the Meissner Effect ( notably similar in coolness to the Randy Meisner effect ), the original idea was to take the experiment and set it up on a suspersensitive scale to see if there was any anti-G effect. That was about 25 years ago. I posted it on some early BB boards and somewhere along the way someone either picked it up or hit on the same idea and did the experiment. Others have since done the same and found that the effect required spinning the magnet. The experiment has had mixed results. Below is a link to one of them.

Okay so I followed that story very closely - it was an audacious claim which, if verified, would've opened up the door to some very exciting new gravitational physics beyond general relativity.

This experiment didn't actually have anything to do with magnetism - Dr. Tajmar was experimenting with spinning a superconductor inside of a cryostat. He wanted to see if this would produce an effect known as frame-dragging (which is also called gravitomagnetism, but that term can be misleading; gravitomagnetism is analogous to magnetism, but it doesn't actually involve magnetism).

Long story short, in the end it all turned out to be experimental error, which is why Tajmar dropped the whole thing about a decade ago and hasn't looked back. Here it is in his own words:

"Our latest setup enabled us to perform high acceleration and high angular rotation of a niobium superconductor, liquid and superfluid helium together with a military-grade fiber-optic gyroscope mounted outside the cryostat and isolated from vibration. No anomalous signals were found up to within 3 times the noise level of our gyroscope (± 5 × 10^−8 rad/s) which puts new bounds on any coupling or frame-dragging-like effect from superconductors, superfluids or low temperature matter. In addition, our accelerometers (mounted in tangential, radial and vertical direction) did not record any anomalous result within a noise band of ±10 µg."

"Evaluation of Enhanced Frame-Dragging in the Vicinity of a Rotating Niobium Superconductor, Liquid Helium and a Helium Superfluid," Tajmar
, Superconductor Science and Technology, 2011.

So my next bright idea ( about 5 years later ) was to suggest that rather than physically rotating the magnet, that they rotate the magnetic field instead. I envisioned that being done electronically with windings arranged in a manner such that the electronics would activate the magnetic field in rapid sequence around a toroidal core. With modern processors, in theory, this could produce an ultra-high speed rotating field with no moving parts.

Coincidentally this same approach has since been used to create contactless high-efficiency electric motors ( why do I not patent these ideas for practical purposes :rolleyes: ).
Yeah that's a great idea. Tesla beat you to the patent about 130 years ago:


Anyway. Hypothetically, a person could build a working model in a lab and test it for fairly little expense. It's just more play money than I have at my disposal. If anyone else wants to do it and take the glory. Be my guest. Maybe someone even has by now. I don't know. What's interesting about the idea ( however whimsical it might be ), is that it meets the criteria for a low-powered silent antigravity generator. It even has the magnetic field properties ( and possibly radiation ) associated with close proximity to UFOs ( not to mention the shape ).

A downside might be that the physics behind spinning the magnet ( rather than the field ), is that rotating a mass increases its mass; and maybe that has something to do with the effect they're getting in the experiment above. My response would be: But aren't the variables interchangeable? And we don't really want added mass anyway. We want an antigravitational effect without increasing mass. So who knows? The only way to find out is to try it. Perhaps I should give it an official name ( so I or we – whoever else that might be – can be immortalized by either it's failure or success ).

I hereby christen it the "X-Murphy" effect, where "X" is the last name of the person who actually does the experiment. To add again, this experiment, if done under appreciable power, could conceivably cause radiation, so some sort of shielding might be advisable. Need Bigelow to put me in a lab with a bunch of eggheads and engineers with inside-the-box training to help work-out the details. I remain convinced that it's something along these lines of investigation that will ultimately be successful.

There's probably some other variables to consider too. It seems too simple to work straight out of the box. It could involve a combination of materials and design that work together to regulate or moderate the field in a way that causes the right kind of "resonance". This might have the sort of effect described on the show.
I'm not seeing the connection to antigravity here. And variables aren't generally interchangeable. Frankly I'm kind of unclear regarding what you're talking about - are you talking about spinning a superconductor, or spinning a magnet? And why do you think that could be related to antigravity? In Tajmar's experiment spinning a nonmagnetic superconductor, he thought he was detecting a frame-dragging effect inducing an acceleration parallel to the spinning gyroscope that held the superconductive ring....that's not antigravity in any sense, that's just frame-dragging i.e. gravitomagnetism aka the Lense-Thirring effect. But as you can see in his subsequent 2011 paper, the results he reported in 2006 were just experimental error.

Experimental physics is typically arduously difficult, time-consuming, and expensive...and even physics PhD's like Tajmar can miss a key factor (like a little stray gas circulating within the apparatus) that skews the entire data set. Consider all of the experimental controversy over Roger Shawyer's goofy "EmDrive" idea, for example - it's taken 20 years, several experimental teams around the globe, and millions of dollars...and despite Tajmar's recent null experimental findings on the EmDrive there are legions of people who still think it's a viable idea. Because whenever you're dealing with things like spin, vibration, extremely small forces, and extremely hot or cold temperatures, it's nearly impossible to sift the signal from the noise so the controversy can go on for decades.

That's why I like Boyd Bushman's idea. It's very simple, involves no spin or vibration or extreme temperatures, and he claimed that people could see the effect with the naked eye - so it should be readily demonstrable with a fairly simple apparatus. I don't expect it to work, but it's a workable concept to definitively test without teams of experts and bleeding-edge physics research facilities.

On the other hand it took Tajmar five years, academic laboratory facilities, a liquid helium cryostat, and a fully staffed Australian LIGO facility, to finally and conclusively demonstrate that he was chasing his own tail the whole time.

Experimental endeavors of that magnitude entail a level of commitment and sacrifice that dwarfs most marriages.
 

Randall

J. Randall Murphy
Thanks Randall - I really enjoyed our chat on the show, and I've been hearing some great responses to it ...
Definitely.
On the other hand it took Tajmar five years, academic laboratory facilities, a liquid helium cryostat, and a fully staffed Australian LIGO facility, to finally and conclusively demonstrate that he was chasing his own tail the whole time.
Hey, thanks for the update on the EMIA ( Electromagnetically Induced Antigravity ) experiment. At least somebody tried something substantially similar. Maybe there's still some missing ingredient they didn't try. Or maybe the whole thing is pointless. I won't know one way or another until I study their setup closer. And that isn't likely to happen for a while. It certainly doesn't bode well for the Morrison-Murphy effect :p .

But like you said, it looks like somebody ( or something ) else has it figured out. So there's got to be a way.
 
Last edited:

Thomas R Morrison

Paranormal Adept
But like you said, it looks like somebody ( or something ) else has it figured out. So there's got to be a way.
Of this I have no doubt - these reported anomalous craft are clearly physical, and exploiting physical laws to propel themselves. And some clever primate will figure it out, and it will make perfect sense. That last part is the key, in my opinion: rather than just trying out everything that we haven't tried yet (which is a huge frontier), I think we should study the fundamental characteristics of known theoretical physics until we fully comprehend their operation so we can find an idea that we have a solid logical reason to believe will actually work. And then we should test that idea to verify it.

In the meantime ..

Yeah I've seen a lot of videos like that. But they're grossly unscientific - we need to -quantify- those kinds of tests and analyse hundreds of trials to produce a solid statistical result that is empirically undeniable. And I intend to do exactly that using a precision automated deployment and timing system, so we can determine with absolute certainty whether or not Boyd's experiment holds up to rigorous scientific scrutiny. A single hand-actuated drop-test is subject to too many forms of possible error to qualify as a scientific result, because the slightest variation in release synchrony will yield a sizable variation in their distance when the objects hit the target below. A fully automated system, with an equal number of drop tests releasing each test mass from the two drop mechanisms, will give us the kind of certainly required to know if this concept works. I'll post my results here when I have a chance to run this experiment a few hundred times, and crunch the numbers to arrive at an unambiguous result.
 

Randall

J. Randall Murphy
- we need to -quantify- those kinds of tests and analyse hundreds of trials to produce a solid statistical result that is empirically undeniable. And I intend to do exactly that using a precision automated deployment and timing system, so we can determine with absolute certainty whether or not Boyd's experiment holds up to rigorous scientific scrutiny. A single hand-actuated drop-test is subject to too many forms of possible error to qualify as a scientific result, because the slightest variation in release synchrony will yield a sizable variation in their distance when the objects hit the target below. A fully automated system, with an equal number of drop tests releasing each test mass from the two drop mechanisms, will give us the kind of certainly required to know if this concept works. I'll post my results here when I have a chance to run this experiment a few hundred times, and crunch the numbers to arrive at an unambiguous result.
Nullify some variables: If the whole point is to determine if interfering magnetic fields have an effect on gravity, then the experiment can be redesigned using scales and electromagnets where there are no moving parts, the fields can be controlled electronically, and very accurate readings can be gathered.

In the end, that ends-up being pretty-much the same concept as mine, except that I never imagined two independent fields interfering with each other as a factor. I was dealing with a single rotating field in a superconducting environment. Maybe getting a second field into the mix is part of the key.

You can imagine how that could be done very simply by configuring the windings so as to be able to precisely vary the degree and strength of the interference around dual toroidal cores. I also use the extra ingredient of superconductivity, but in your theory, that may or may not be an ingredient that makes any difference, except in the efficiency of the electromagnets. That and who knows what else for sure. Superconductivity has produced surprising and unexpected results in the past. Maybe throwing it into the mix might make an unexpected difference.

Again, we need Bigelow to hire some egghead engineers while we ( as mad scientists ) instruct them to do our bidding. This whole thing is sounding more and more "out there" the more we dig into it. It's fun, but the skeptics will no doubt be rolling their eyes all the way to the backs of their heads.
 
Last edited:

Thomas R Morrison

Paranormal Adept
Nullify some variables: If the whole point is to determine if interfering magnetic fields have an effect on gravity, then the experiment can be redesigned using scales and electromagnets where there are no moving parts, the fields can be controlled electronically, and very accurate readings can be gathered.
"Small moves, Ellie, small moves." First we need to find out if Boyd Bushman's experiment works. Then, if we find that it does work, we can focus on the theory of operation and new methods to amplify the effect.

If it does work, it's a beguiling problem. Bushman's two test masses, the one with opposing magnetic fields and the one with ordinary matter, weighed the same on a precision scale. So why would one fall faster than the other? We don't know the answer to this question. But the question itself is premature - first we need to find out if it's a true claim ;

New Warp Drive Possibilities

I hate to be like this, but this video is kinda typical pop science trash.

Why do I say this? Well first, they fail to mention that Bobrick and Martire confirmed Harold White's earlier finding (about a decade ago) that the Alcubierre warp drive is not a propulsion solution after all. There was a critical error in the math; the Alcubierre warp field metric doesn't produce any motion at all - it has to be accelerated by some other means in order to gain velocity. However, nobody ever mentions Robert L. Forward's "negative matter propulsion" paper, which offers a very simple and genuine self-acceleration solution. Apparently this is because everyone assumes that negative gravitation don't exist in nature...except it does - the intergalactic acceleration attributed to dark energy is an antigravitational acceleration field. This is not disputable. The only remaining pertinent question is "can this field effect be concentrated in a localized region?" And until we have a clear understanding of what dark energy is and how it works, that question remains unanswered. In other words, the door is open at present.

And here's the other thing - this argument that "it seems to be impossible to accelerate a frame of reference from subluminal to superluminal speeds" is stupid. Because nature is doing exactly this, right now. At this very moment, untold numbers of galaxy clusters in our universe that have been accelerating away from the Milky Way galaxy at increasing but subluminal speeds, are now crossing the cosmological horizon and receding away from us faster than the speed of light.

The sad and somewhat embarrassing thing is that we don't actually understand how this is happening. What is dark energy? We don't know. How does it work? We have some ideas, but we're really just guessing.

In reality this may be much simpler than we suppose: once we understand how galaxy clusters are receding away from us - first at increasing subluminal speeds and eventually at superluminal speeds - then perhaps all we need to do is to set up equivalent conditions between a spacecraft and the Earth which replicate the conditions between the Earth and distant galaxy clusters, so our spacecraft can fall away from the Earth and accelerate to superluminal speeds relative to the Earth.

If the universe is doing it all the time, then it's physically possible. So the question isn't "can objects accelerate from subluminal speeds to superluminal speeds relative to the Earth?" - because that's happening right now. The real question is "how do objects accelerate from subluminal speeds to superluminal speeds relative to the Earth?" - and once we have that answer, I'm confident that we will learn how to replicate the requisite conditions. And in my opinion, many civilizations in the universe have already learned the answer to that question, and are exploiting that understanding of physics to visit our planet on a fairly frequent basis.
 

Randall

J. Randall Murphy
"Small moves, Ellie, small moves." First we need to find out if Boyd Bushman's experiment works ...
That's the reason I suggested simplifying by removing variables. Having to deal with the simultaneous gravitational acceleration of two objects in an atmosphere is more complex, not less complex. A simpler experiment should in theory prove whether or not there is any effect of interfering magnetic fields on gravitation. Winding some wire around a couple of metal cores is easy in comparison. Plus you get the bonus of controlling field strength and orientation.

However if you have your mind set on the idea of dropping objects from heights and measuring acceleration, you can still simplify it substantially. You don't need to drop two objects at the same time. Just drop a single ball from a precisely measured height and time it. To do that, you just need to setup a start and finish timer.

The timer might be a bit tricky, but I'm imagining it could be done with some readily available inexpensive parts like laser triggers that detect when the object breaks the beam at the top and bottom of the object's path. They can feed that data to a digital readout where the results can be compared against the baseline figure.

To get the baseline figure, the math for calculating gravitational acceleration is well known and proven. So you can work out mathematically exactly how long it should take for an object to fall a given distance at your location. You'll still want to run some control experiments with the "control weight" just to verify and adjust for any variations peculiar to your location.

Once you have your baseline set, then you can drop the ball with the magnets and see if there's any difference between the baseline time and the time it takes the magnet-ball to fall the same distance.

Notes:
  1. Apart from wind resistance, it doesn't matter if one ball weighs the same as the other either. One ball could have a feather inside and the other a solid ball of steel, and they'd both fall at the same rate. Free Fall and Air Resistance

  2. The other thing is that you'll need to monitor your variables closely. So three lasers will be needed. One at the top. One at the bottom. And another pointing straight down to measure distance variations. Simple effects like heat expansion could vary the height of the structure you're dropping from. So best practice would be to drop the MB ( Magnet Ball ) as soon as practically possible after establishing the baseline.
I hate to be like this, but this video is kinda typical pop science trash.
Just posted for the sake of exactly this kind of discussion.
Why do I say this? Well first, they fail to mention that Bobrick and Martire confirmed Harold White's earlier finding (about a decade ago) that the Alcubierre warp drive is not a propulsion solution after all. There was a critical error in the math; the Alcubierre warp field metric doesn't produce any motion at all - it has to be accelerated by some other means in order to gain velocity.
It's nice to have these updates, because otherwise we all assume the original story is still valid. Everyone likes to hear that someone figured out warp drive. Far fewer want to hear that it needs to go back to the drawing board.
However, nobody ever mentions Robert L. Forward's "negative matter propulsion" paper, which offers a very simple and genuine self-acceleration solution. Apparently this is because everyone assumes that negative gravitation don't exist in nature...except it does - the intergalactic acceleration attributed to dark energy is an antigravitational acceleration field. This is not disputable. The only remaining pertinent question is "can this field effect be concentrated in a localized region?" And until we have a clear understanding of what dark energy is and how it works, that question remains unanswered. In other words, the door is open at present.

And here's the other thing - this argument that "it seems to be impossible to accelerate a frame of reference from subluminal to superluminal speeds" is stupid. Because nature is doing exactly this, right now. At this very moment, untold numbers of galaxy clusters in our universe that have been accelerating away from the Milky Way galaxy at increasing but subluminal speeds, are now crossing the cosmological horizon and receding away from us faster than the speed of light.

The sad and somewhat embarrassing thing is that we don't actually understand how this is happening. What is dark energy? We don't know. How does it work? We have some ideas, but we're really just guessing.

In reality this may be much simpler than we suppose: once we understand how galaxy clusters are receding away from us - first at increasing subluminal speeds and eventually at superluminal speeds - then perhaps all we need to do is to set up equivalent conditions between a spacecraft and the Earth which replicate the conditions between the Earth and distant galaxy clusters, so our spacecraft can fall away from the Earth and accelerate to superluminal speeds relative to the Earth.

If the universe is doing it all the time, then it's physically possible. So the question isn't "can objects accelerate from subluminal speeds to superluminal speeds relative to the Earth?" - because that's happening right now. The real question is "how do objects accelerate from subluminal speeds to superluminal speeds relative to the Earth?" - and once we have that answer, I'm confident that we will learn how to replicate the requisite conditions. And in my opinion, many civilizations in the universe have already learned the answer to that question, and are exploiting that understanding of physics to visit our planet on a fairly frequent basis.
My analysis of that situation is that assumptions are being made without us knowing enough about the phenomenon. For example, there's the dark energy and dark matter theories that are related to ( but not identical to ) the theories about antimatter causing antigravity, as well as the theory that there is another shadow universe we cannot detect ( except by this phenomenon ) affecting the behavior of ours. I don't know the answer, but it's possible it's none of the above.

For example, the assumption in standard physics is that the variables for physics are the same everywhere. What if they're not? Scientists really hate that idea because it means they have to change their perspective radically. However, if this universe is some sort of construct run within some larger system, there's no reason that such as system cannot control the variables so that we get the exact effect we're observing.

As you know, some scientists and philosophers do take the idea that our universe could be some sort of construct ( simulation – for lack of a better term ) seriously. Here's where we'd revisit the 2016 Issac Asimov Memorial Debate.
 
Last edited:
They already here ! and watch next six months. Professor Michio Kaku good to see and time Professor Cox step out and joined in the debate with no ridicule. Not interested in the tin foil brigade science with open mind..
 

Randall

J. Randall Murphy
They already here ! and watch next six months. Professor Michio Kaku good to see and time Professor Cox step out and joined in the debate with no ridicule. Not interested in the tin foil brigade science with open mind..
But what if the "tin foil brigade science" figures it out? I haven't seen Kaku come up with any new and bright antigravity ideas lately. A lot of breakthroughs in science happen by accident when people experiment with things. In fact, I hope the tin foil brigade does figure it out before the rest ?
 
Tounge and cheek post . Scientists like Dr. Bruce Mc Cabbee excellent work and his wife alleged encounter very similar . Cloaked unknown object (triangle object above) and captured image of cloaked grey object with features of creature not Grey as such rather humanoid. Small 4.3 but not skiny long arms. Similar to Roswell Brazel Crashes and Nick's view point would make folks think " Japanesse " at that period in history in some cases, mind you it was after WW2 . Rather, Korean looking as stated in the Memo. As said there was more than one type as here on Earth regarding creatures when it comes to wildlife. Archive showed plenty of similar photo evidence including 1940s color to modern day. On Dr Kaku it's a domino effect of releasing the cloak of the ridicule. In the so called abduction cases and in our encounter no sighting of creatures or craft instead the massive white glow above electrical effects to car and weather manipulation -bubble clear film on the inside with a rainbow effects looking through from outside the car in the whole area( 4 foot ball staduim size area ). As stated other eyewitnesses at the time who appeared out of blue in a car and two decades before flying saucers sighting by credible eyewitness and cattle events on paddocks in the area farmers reported.
 

andrewgarrett

Paranormal Novice
It is at least somewhat accurate to say that there are about 300 million worlds like Earth in the Milky Way Galaxy. According to the Allies of Humanity Briefings there are only one in five or six thousand worlds as biodiverse as the Earth. As for the antigravity theories, they may be bogus and likely are because of the misinformation and deception that pervades anything E.T. or UAP/UFO related. Many, many people either deny or are not aware of this currently. These otherworldly craft as some ex military personnel have called them are able to keep flying without observable propulsion. Whether we should attempt to duplicate this ourselves is a question we must consider deeply as technology has costs.
 
Last edited:

David B

Paranormal Novice
Definitely.

Hey, thanks for the update on the EMIA ( Electromagnetically Induced Antigravity ) experiment. At least somebody tried something substantially similar. Maybe there's still some missing ingredient they didn't try. Or maybe the whole thing is pointless. I won't know one way or another until I study their setup closer. And that isn't likely to happen for a while. It certainly doesn't bode well for the Morrison-Murphy effect :p .

But like you said, it looks like somebody ( or something ) else has it figured out. So there's got to be a way.
I'm not 100 percent about it, but think about this: An electric motor swings an arm around with a strong electromagnet close to the end of it. The magnet slides toward the end, then at one point it engages pulling the craft to it. Will it work?
 

David B

Paranormal Novice
It is at least somewhat accurate to say that there are about 300 million worlds like Earth in the Milky Way Galaxy. According to the Allies of Humanity Briefings there are only one in five or six thousand worlds as biodiverse as the Earth. As for the antigravity theories, they may be bogus and likely are because of the misinformation and deception that pervades anything E.T. or UAP/UFO related. Many, many people either deny or are not aware of this currently. These otherworldly craft as some ex military personnel have called them are able to keep flying without observable propulsion. Whether we should attempt to duplicate this ourselves is a question we must consider deeply as technology has costs.
I agreed, we should consider deeply what certain technology will cost. I've thought about it and I'm not too sure. Do the benefits out weigh the risk if most people can escape the Earth before it's totally destroyed? Will mankind have any kindness after a decade of being away from the Earth? Hope so :>)
 
Top