Patent issued for anti gravity device

Moderators: DrVolin, 82_28, Elvis, Jeff

Patent issued for anti gravity device

Postby Rigorous Intuition » Sat Nov 12, 2005 2:08 am

<!--EZCODE LINK START--><a href="">From</a><!--EZCODE LINK END-->:<br><br>Dr Jack Sarfatti writes: He has something like my idea in my 3 books, but I doubt that what he has will actually work. But he is seeing part of what I am seeing.<br><br>[Eric Taber] Apparently the USPTO has violated its rules and guidelines, patenting a device that defies the known laws of physics.<br><br>Patent Number 6,960,975 was issued to Boris Volfson of Huntington, IN, wherein the device is described: quote: A cooled hollow superconductive shield is energized by an electromagnetic field resulting in the quantized vortices of lattice ions projecting a gravitomagnetic field that forms a spacetime curvature anomaly outside the space vehicle.<br><br><br>[Jack Sarfatti] That has to be shown in detail with the equations of GR. Is there such an effect? And how strong is it?<br><br>[Eric Taber] The spacetime curvature imbalance, the spacetime curvature being the same as gravity, provides for the space vehicle's propulsion.<br><br>[Jack Sarfatti] Badly said. They are groping for the idea of geodesic warp drive. That is, changing local curvature field at the ship in such a way as to shape the timelike geodesic, with small tidal geodesic deviation over the scale of the ship, as desired.<br><br>[Eric Taber] The space vehicle, surrounded by the spacetime anomaly, may move at a speed approaching the light-speed characteristic for the modified locale.<br><br>[Jack Sarfatti] Meaningless sentence.<br><br><br>[Eric Taber] Anti-gravity device patent<br><br>Wow! What do you think? /Eric<br><br>[Jack Sarfatti] Glimmer of correct idea, but wrong implementation. I am pretty sure it won't fly...<br><br>[Read all Sarfatti comments on the text of the patent in our Forum ...Vlad]<br>-------<br><br>UPI news: The journal Nature said patent 6,960,975 was granted Nov. 1 to Boris Volfson of Huntington, Ind., for a space vehicle propelled by a superconducting shield that alters the curvature of space-time outside the craft in a way that counteracts gravity.<br><br>One of the main theoretical arguments against anti-gravity is that it implies the availability of unlimited energy.<br><br>"If you design an anti-gravity machine, you've got a perpetual-motion machine," Robert Park of the American Physical Society told Nature.<br><br>Park said the action shows patent examiners are being duped by false science.<br><br>Copyright 2005 by United Press International<br>---------<br>Bill Alek writes:<br><br>"Abstract of US6960975<br><br>A space vehicle propelled by the pressure of inflationary vacuum state is provided comprising a hollow superconductive shield, an inner shield, a power source, a support structure, upper and lower means for generating an electromagnetic field, and a flux modulation controller. ..."<br><br>"... [0022] By creating a spacetime curvature anomaly associated with lowered pressure of inflationary vacuum state around a space vehicle, with the lowest vacuum pressure density located directly in front of the vehicle, a condition could be created where gravity associated with lowered vacuum pressure density pulls the vehicle forward in modified spacetime.<br><br>[0023] By creating a spacetime curvature anomaly associated with elevated pressure of inflationary vacuum state around the space vehicle, with the point of highest vacuum pressure density located directly behind the vehicle, a condition could be created where a repulsion force associated with elevated vacuum pressure density pushes the space vehicle forward in modified spacetime. From the above-mentioned cosmological constant equation, re-written as: [mathematical formula - see original document] it is clear that the increase in the vacuum pressure density could lead to a substantial increase in the light-speed. If the space vehicle is moving in the anomaly where the local light-speed is higher than the light-speed of the ambient vacuum, and if this vehicle approaches this local light-speed, the space vehicle would then possibly exceed the light-speed characteristic for the ambient area. ..."<br><br>This sounds like the Alcubierre Warp Drive from the mid '90s.<br><br>"... [0025] The levitating and rotating superconductor disk, which Podkletnov used to protect the object of experiment from the attraction produced by the energy of the vacuum, was externally energized by the externally-powered solenoid coils. Thus, Podkletnov's system is stationary by definition and not suitable for travel in air or space. Even if the superconductive disk is made part of the craft, and if it is energized by the energy available on the craft, the resulting anomaly is one-sided, not enveloping, and not providing the variable speed of light (VSL) environment for the craft. ..."<br><br>This patent reads more like a paper than a patent.<br><br>Bill<br><br>William S. Alek<br>FREE ENERGY, Antigravitational, and Time Travel Technologies<br><br>Garry Voss writes: See Paul Potters UFO Propulsion Drive Ilistrations by clicking on: UFO Physics. I think there is a connection here.<br>--------<br><br>Robert Neil Boyd writes: Dear Sirs,<br><br>"Vacuum pressure density" is a contradiction in terms.<br><br>In a supposed vacuum, there is nothing existing which can cause pressure, by definition of the term "vacuum". The pressure of nothing is zero. The density of nothing is zero. The term is pure BS.<br><br>There is a REAL substance making a REAL pressure and a REAL density, which factors result from the measurable activities of the consituent subquantum particles comprising the aether plenum.<br><br>What exactly is this so-called "Inflationary vaccum state"? Where is this term defined? And what causes it? And where is there any reproducable physical evidence for this fictional entity? Why do we need it in the first darn place?<br><br>And by what means does a supposed "inflationary vacuum state" create a supposed "lowered pressure" ? Lowered pressure of what?<br><br>The expression of "space-time curvature", since it is implied by the expression to be a localized space time curvature, is in direct contradiction to Einstein's Relativity Theory, where Einstein insisted for the last 30 years of his life that any curvature of space, could only occur at cosmological scales. Then, given the additional fact that the universe is infinite in volume, if there were indeed any curvature to space at the cosmological scale, such curvature would be perfectly immeasurable. Thus, this is an unprovable hypothesis, with no more validity than pink elephants.<br><br>This is all delusionary gobbledegook designed to confuse and mislead the readers regarding the actual facts of the situation.<br><br>There is no "vacuum", by definition of the term. There does exist a plenum filled with subquantum particles, which is inhabited by creatures of all velocities, from zero velocity to infinite velocity, and everything in between.<br><br>We can create density gradients in this media by various means, and generate propulsion, by various means. But the descriptions in this document are not at all accurate descriptions of any of any the correct means of attaining propulsion in interstellar space.<br><br>The document is purely misleading deception, in my opinion, based on elephants of various colors, rather than on reproducably observable and instrumentable facts.<br><br>That being said, there is some grain of truth in it, that can only be discovered when one knows the actual physics involved, which are in fact, aether physics. None of this "inflationary vacuum state pressure density" nonsense.<br><br>Get the idea of a plenum of subquantum particles, which can vary in local density and velocity, then look at the text again. Substitute the correct understandings and dispense with the misleading lables created in the text, and you might see something of what they are attemoting to describe.<br><br>One more thing. Their evaluation of Podkletnov's super conducting disk propulsion method is perfectly wrong. Such a method can be perfectly well applied and will function perfectly well.<br><br>The difficulty with this method is in the hazard resulting from any exposure to the back-acting beam, which results after some delay in time, after the initiating high power electrical impulse. Any organic Life which happens to be in physical contact with any inorganic object, at the time the back-acting beam passes through the vicinity, will find themselves inextricably welded to the inorganic object.<br><br>An inconvenience, to say the least. I have brought several suggestions to Podkletnov regarding various means to eliminate this hazard. But until the problem is solved, this means of propulsion will have severely limited applications. It appears to me that two of my suggestions will resolve the problem. The problem is that it requires a lot of money to implement either of them, something which Podkletov's team has a lack of. Give them more money, and I'll bet the problem will be solved shortly.<br><br>Neil <p></p><i></i>
Rigorous Intuition
Posts: 1744
Joined: Fri Apr 22, 2005 3:36 pm
Blog: View Blog (0)

Patent issued

Postby rapt » Sat Nov 12, 2005 2:47 am

The USPTO hires college grads, who aspire to become patent lawyers, at a low wage relative to what most of them could otherwise make. They are assigned to patent examiners in various divisions in the PTO, and are given responsibility for examining a patent application from beginning to end.<br><br>Yes these newbies have the advice of their bosses but everybody is overloaded. Mistakes are made. I had a newbie take my case years ago; I had never filed for a patent and he had never examined one, so we battled one another for about two years, and finally came to an agreement that, had a decent lawyer contested, would have been tossed out. It still stands because nobody ever contested it.<br><br>The patent as issued is good until it is contested. At that point its legal shortcomings, if any, are pointed out and the patent may be compromised; that is an alleged infringement may be declared OK by the court. Long and expensive process.<br><br>I suspect that in this anti-gravity device case, the inexperienced examiner didn't know all the precedent, the rules or the applicable science. In other words the examiner was grossly incompetent and should never have issued the patent. Supervisor was too busy to catch it. Pressure is always on, the pay is low. Now if anyone has a stake he can take it to court, hire the experts, have it declared invalid. Otherwise as I understand patent law, it stands until challenged.<br><br>Maybe in this case the PTO will recall their decision to issue, but I doubt it.<br> <p></p><i></i>
Posts: 132
Joined: Sun Aug 07, 2005 2:31 pm
Blog: View Blog (0)

Return to Energy Issues

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 1 guest