On 12/02/2010 11:44 PM, Art Unwin wrote:
What happens after the magnetic field is saturated is excess energy
then goes to increase the electric field which is enclosed inside a
shield or Faraday cage for maximum density which produces two vectors
equal to the two vectors created by gravity and spin as shown with the
tipped vertical. These vectors arise fro a diamagnetic condition when
the electrical field achieves satuaration or maximum density with a
Farady shield.
The importance of these two vectors is that we have the displacement
vector which elevates particles or electrons at rest on the coil
wire,.
It is this vector which is equal and opposite to gravity that allows
for ":straight line trajectory" of the negatively charged particle
such that the other vector is free from constriction in all forms
which is synonomous to equilibrium.
Thus a solenoid can be seen as a radiator according to Maxwell where
the magnetic vector is canceled for maximum efficiency.
This also shows that the previous two element design where both
elements are resonant within a boundary which must be included as a
shield around the two element array for maximum efficiency.
I find it completely fascinating that the two vectors I propose as
Einstein's predicted version of the Standard Model turns up once again
in this solenoid version of a radiator within a Faraday cage to which
a horn is easily added.
So this thread now comes to closure
Regards
Art

Art,

Shirley, you can't be serious! (with apologies to the late, great Leslie
Nielsen). Sincerely, and 73s from N4GGO,
--
John Wood (Code 5520) e-mail:

Naval Research Laboratory
4555 Overlook Avenue, SW
Washington, DC 20375-5337

On Dec 3, 5:57*am, "J.B. Wood" wrote:
On 12/02/2010 11:44 PM, Art Unwin wrote:
* What happens after the magnetic field is saturated is excess energy



then goes to increase the electric field which is enclosed inside a
shield or Faraday cage for maximum density which produces two vectors
equal to the two vectors created by gravity and spin as shown with the
tipped vertical. These vectors arise fro a diamagnetic condition when
the electrical field achieves satuaration or maximum density with a
Farady shield.
The importance of these two vectors is that we have the displacement
vector which elevates particles or electrons at rest on the coil
wire,.
It is this vector which is equal and opposite to gravity that allows
for ":straight line trajectory" of the negatively charged particle
such that the other vector is free from constriction in all forms
which is synonomous to equilibrium.
Thus a solenoid can be seen as a radiator according to Maxwell where
the magnetic vector is canceled for maximum efficiency.
This also shows that the previous two element design where both
elements are resonant within a boundary which must be included as a
shield around the two element array for maximum efficiency.
I find it completely fascinating that the two vectors I propose as
Einstein's predicted version of the Standard Model turns up once again
in this solenoid version of a radiator within a Faraday cage to which
a horn is easily added.
So this thread now comes to closure
Regards
Art

Art,

Shirley, you can't be serious! (with apologies to the late, great Leslie
Nielsen). *Sincerely, and 73s from N4GGO,
--
John Wood (Code 5520) * * * *e-mail:

Naval Research Laboratory
4555 Overlook Avenue, SW
Washington, DC 20375-5337

Yes, I am very serious about my findings. I am very sorry that others
are unable to follow my same path to obtain the same joys of
discovery.
For some reason people cannot fathom the idea of equilibrium and that
displacement current provides the equal of the gravity vector.
There is no way a charge can travel in a straight line up to the
heavens and down again
without the neutralisation of gravity and without the auspices of
spin . The same goes with respect to light according to the Zeeman
effect
Regards
Art

On Dec 3, 2:46*pm, Art Unwin wrote:
On Dec 3, 5:57*am, "J.B. Wood" wrote:



On 12/02/2010 11:44 PM, Art Unwin wrote:
* What happens after the magnetic field is saturated is excess energy

then goes to increase the electric field which is enclosed inside a
shield or Faraday cage for maximum density which produces two vectors
equal to the two vectors created by gravity and spin as shown with the
tipped vertical. These vectors arise fro a diamagnetic condition when
the electrical field achieves satuaration or maximum density with a
Farady shield.
The importance of these two vectors is that we have the displacement
vector which elevates particles or electrons at rest on the coil
wire,.
It is this vector which is equal and opposite to gravity that allows
for ":straight line trajectory" of the negatively charged particle
such that the other vector is free from constriction in all forms
which is synonomous to equilibrium.
Thus a solenoid can be seen as a radiator according to Maxwell where
the magnetic vector is canceled for maximum efficiency.
This also shows that the previous two element design where both
elements are resonant within a boundary which must be included as a
shield around the two element array for maximum efficiency.
I find it completely fascinating that the two vectors I propose as
Einstein's predicted version of the Standard Model turns up once again
in this solenoid version of a radiator within a Faraday cage to which
a horn is easily added.
So this thread now comes to closure
Regards
Art

Art,

Shirley, you can't be serious! (with apologies to the late, great Leslie
Nielsen). *Sincerely, and 73s from N4GGO,
--
John Wood (Code 5520) * * * *e-mail:

Naval Research Laboratory
4555 Overlook Avenue, SW
Washington, DC 20375-5337

Yes, I am very serious about my findings. I am very sorry that others
are unable to follow my same path to obtain the same joys of
discovery.
For some reason people cannot fathom the idea of equilibrium and that
displacement current provides the equal of the gravity vector.
There is no way a charge can travel in a straight line up to the
heavens and down again
without the neutralisation of gravity and without the auspices of
spin . The same goes with respect to light *according to the Zeeman
effect
Regards
Art

keep dreaming art... neither air nor aether can saturate or we would
have many other weird phenomena than your antennas.

On Dec 3, 4:22*pm, K1TTT wrote:
On Dec 3, 2:46*pm, Art Unwin wrote:



On Dec 3, 5:57*am, "J.B. Wood" wrote:

On 12/02/2010 11:44 PM, Art Unwin wrote:
* What happens after the magnetic field is saturated is excess energy

then goes to increase the electric field which is enclosed inside a
shield or Faraday cage for maximum density which produces two vectors
equal to the two vectors created by gravity and spin as shown with the
tipped vertical. These vectors arise fro a diamagnetic condition when
the electrical field achieves satuaration or maximum density with a
Farady shield.
The importance of these two vectors is that we have the displacement
vector which elevates particles or electrons at rest on the coil
wire,.
It is this vector which is equal and opposite to gravity that allows
for ":straight line trajectory" of the negatively charged particle
such that the other vector is free from constriction in all forms
which is synonomous to equilibrium.
Thus a solenoid can be seen as a radiator according to Maxwell where
the magnetic vector is canceled for maximum efficiency.
This also shows that the previous two element design where both
elements are resonant within a boundary which must be included as a
shield around the two element array for maximum efficiency.
I find it completely fascinating that the two vectors I propose as
Einstein's predicted version of the Standard Model turns up once again
in this solenoid version of a radiator within a Faraday cage to which
a horn is easily added.
So this thread now comes to closure
Regards
Art

Art,

Shirley, you can't be serious! (with apologies to the late, great Leslie
Nielsen). *Sincerely, and 73s from N4GGO,
--
John Wood (Code 5520) * * * *e-mail:

Naval Research Laboratory
4555 Overlook Avenue, SW
Washington, DC 20375-5337

Yes, I am very serious about my findings. I am very sorry that others
are unable to follow my same path to obtain the same joys of
discovery.
For some reason people cannot fathom the idea of equilibrium and that
displacement current provides the equal of the gravity vector.
There is no way a charge can travel in a straight line up to the
heavens and down again
without the neutralisation of gravity and without the auspices of
spin . The same goes with respect to light *according to the Zeeman
effect
Regards
Art

keep dreaming art... neither air nor aether can saturate or we would
have many other weird phenomena than your antennas.

I am not dreaming! The magnetic field increases density until it
reaches a maximum.
The curve of B vs H clearly shows this in a similar curve to Hooke's
Law for strength of materials. At the point of saturation the value of
B comes to a halt and where H takes off and increases rapidly. I would
imagine that if you searched the web under saturation magnetic fields
or some other similar key words you will eventually find verification
of what I have described. You might want to search under diamagnetic
because you eventually come to the point where diamagnetic field
predominates which puts you in the same position of superconductor
where skin resistance is removed. I am extremely surprised that as a
electrical engineer you never covered magnetics in depth. If you find
verification on the absence of saturation in magnetic fields I will be
more than happy to apologize for my lax memory of my early days. Up to
now tho, you have never produced evidence or any reasoning to back up
your comments or status as an electrical engineer, scientist or what
have you!. Was it ever explained to you that levitation
by fields is exactly equal in direction and value
to gravity? How do you explain to amateurs how "straight line
trajectory" is attained when explaining skip or are you going to deny
that also? I look forward to reading your back up
research statements that support your positions.
Regards
Art

On Fri, 3 Dec 2010 14:22:53 -0800 (PST), some gomer wrote:

There is no way a charge can travel in a straight line up to the
heavens and down again
without the neutralisation of gravity and without the auspices of
spin .

How does one neutralize gravity? The anti-gravity of comic books?

Let's see, the energy of an electromagnetic interaction is
10000000000000000000000000000000000000000 times greater than gravity.

So, when an electron pushes a charge against gravity, it has 400dB
more effect than gravity pulling back. In comic book terms, that is a
Thousand, Billion, Billion, Billion times stronger than gravity.

An ant weighs 0.003 grams, and the Earth weighs 5.9 x 10^27 g, so you
would need 10000000000 planet Earths to replicate the neutralization
between the energy of gravity and the energy of electromagnetic
interaction (assuming the ant was an electron of ant-like proportions,
energy-wise).

Such is the sandtrap of neutralization across units of measure. It is
much like the folks of 100 years ago claiming a car couldn't drive up
a hill without a warp drive engine with a dilithium crystal controlled
gravimetric field displacement manifold.

As we all know (or almost all), Gene Roddenberry is the authority to
turn to on the basis of this last claim being fulfilled some 50 years
from now by Zefram Cochrane developing the first warp-capable
starship. How we currently get to the top of hills in a car is
considered as an example of superstitious mass hysteria.

We can all rest assured that this meets the criteria of not coming
from any text book because it hasn't happened yet. *Whew* Hence, it
cannot be disproven. Don't rush to the patent office however, this is
considered Post-Art.

73's
Richard Clark, KB7QHC

On Dec 3, 7:46*pm, Richard Clark wrote:
On Fri, 3 Dec 2010 14:22:53 -0800 (PST), some gomer wrote:
There is no way a charge can travel in a straight line up to the
heavens and down again
without the neutralisation of gravity and without the auspices of
spin .

How does one neutralize gravity? *The anti-gravity of comic books?

Let's see, the energy of an electromagnetic interaction is
10000000000000000000000000000000000000000 times greater than gravity.

So, when an electron pushes a charge against gravity, it has 400dB
more effect than gravity pulling back. *In comic book terms, that is a
Thousand, Billion, Billion, Billion times stronger than gravity.

An ant weighs 0.003 grams, and the Earth weighs 5.9 x 10^27 g, so you
would need 10000000000 planet Earths to replicate the neutralization
between the energy of gravity and the energy of electromagnetic
interaction (assuming the ant was an electron of ant-like proportions,
energy-wise).

Such is the sandtrap of neutralization across units of measure. *It is
much like the folks of 100 years ago claiming a car couldn't drive up
a hill without a warp drive engine with a dilithium crystal controlled
gravimetric field displacement manifold.

As we all know (or almost all), Gene Roddenberry is the authority to
turn to on the basis of this last claim being fulfilled some 50 years
from now by Zefram Cochrane developing the first warp-capable
starship. *How we currently get to the top of hills in a car is
considered as an example of superstitious mass hysteria.

We can all rest assured that this meets the criteria of not coming
from any text book because it hasn't happened yet. **Whew* *Hence, it
cannot be disproven. *Don't rush to the patent office however, this is
considered Post-Art.

73's
Richard Clark, KB7QHC
Just rubbish
You are just being foolish. Have you never elevated anything using
magnets? If you haven't then buy a kit to see it for yourself.
The same is used in many places in science
and Industry where transport is raised to avoid friction. I warrant
that you probably can see same on video on the net or a frog suspended
in air .
If you cannot neutralize gravity then you cannot have straight line
trajectory. Period. When a particle is raised from a surface then you
do not have to account for friction when propelling
or accelerating it. Thus all energy applied is used solely to achieve
radiation without the burden of friction created by skin depth which
is not accounted for in Maxwells equations as it reduces efficiency.
As I said at the beginning you are just acting silly or being a
fool.Or, have no understanding of the term equilibrium or Newtons laws
for that matter. Now a question, Why did Maxwell use the term
"displacement current" and what was he suggesting what was being
displaced from the control of gravity? Now get going, collect a lot of
random words. Put them in a container and shake it and pull out a word
at a time as you normally do with any written response.

On Dec 4, 1:02*am, Art Unwin wrote:
On Dec 3, 4:22*pm, K1TTT wrote:



On Dec 3, 2:46*pm, Art Unwin wrote:

On Dec 3, 5:57*am, "J.B. Wood" wrote:

On 12/02/2010 11:44 PM, Art Unwin wrote:
* What happens after the magnetic field is saturated is excess energy

then goes to increase the electric field which is enclosed inside a
shield or Faraday cage for maximum density which produces two vectors
equal to the two vectors created by gravity and spin as shown with the
tipped vertical. These vectors arise fro a diamagnetic condition when
the electrical field achieves satuaration or maximum density with a
Farady shield.
The importance of these two vectors is that we have the displacement
vector which elevates particles or electrons at rest on the coil
wire,.
It is this vector which is equal and opposite to gravity that allows
for ":straight line trajectory" of the negatively charged particle
such that the other vector is free from constriction in all forms
which is synonomous to equilibrium.
Thus a solenoid can be seen as a radiator according to Maxwell where
the magnetic vector is canceled for maximum efficiency.
This also shows that the previous two element design where both
elements are resonant within a boundary which must be included as a
shield around the two element array for maximum efficiency.
I find it completely fascinating that the two vectors I propose as
Einstein's predicted version of the Standard Model turns up once again
in this solenoid version of a radiator within a Faraday cage to which
a horn is easily added.
So this thread now comes to closure
Regards
Art

Art,

Shirley, you can't be serious! (with apologies to the late, great Leslie
Nielsen). *Sincerely, and 73s from N4GGO,
--
John Wood (Code 5520) * * * *e-mail:

Naval Research Laboratory
4555 Overlook Avenue, SW
Washington, DC 20375-5337

Yes, I am very serious about my findings. I am very sorry that others
are unable to follow my same path to obtain the same joys of
discovery.
For some reason people cannot fathom the idea of equilibrium and that
displacement current provides the equal of the gravity vector.
There is no way a charge can travel in a straight line up to the
heavens and down again
without the neutralisation of gravity and without the auspices of
spin . The same goes with respect to light *according to the Zeeman
effect
Regards
Art

keep dreaming art... neither air nor aether can saturate or we would
have many other weird phenomena than your antennas.

I am not dreaming! The magnetic field increases density until it
reaches a maximum.
The curve of B vs H clearly shows this in a similar curve to Hooke's
Law for strength of materials. At the point of saturation the value of
B comes to a halt and where H takes off and increases rapidly. I would
imagine that if you searched the web under saturation magnetic fields
or some other similar key words you will eventually find verification
of what I have described. You might want to search under diamagnetic
because you eventually come to the point where diamagnetic field
predominates which puts you in the same position of superconductor
where skin resistance is removed. I am extremely surprised that as a
electrical engineer you never covered magnetics in depth. If you find
verification on the absence of saturation in magnetic fields I will be
more than happy to apologize for my lax memory of my early days. Up to
now tho, you have never produced evidence or any reasoning to back up
your comments or status as an electrical engineer, scientist or what
have you!. Was it ever explained to you that levitation
by fields is exactly equal in direction and value
to gravity? How do you explain to amateurs how "straight line
trajectory" is attained when explaining skip or are you going to deny
that also? I look forward to reading your back up
research statements that support your positions.
Regards
Art

you are looking at curves for ferromagnetic materials that do have a
saturation level... the point where all the magnetic dipoles in the
material are lined up. for your quick browsing enjoyment:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Saturation_%28magnetic%29
http://www.allaboutcircuits.com/vol_1/chpt_14/4.html
http://www.coilgun.info/theorymath/saturation.htm
at least one of those specifically states that air core magnets do not
saturate.

On Dec 4, 2:50*am, Art Unwin wrote:
On Dec 3, 7:46*pm, Richard Clark wrote:

On Fri, 3 Dec 2010 14:22:53 -0800 (PST), some gomer wrote:
There is no way a charge can travel in a straight line up to the
heavens and down again
without the neutralisation of gravity and without the auspices of
spin .

How does one neutralize gravity? *The anti-gravity of comic books?

Let's see, the energy of an electromagnetic interaction is
10000000000000000000000000000000000000000 times greater than gravity.

So, when an electron pushes a charge against gravity, it has 400dB
more effect than gravity pulling back. *In comic book terms, that is a
Thousand, Billion, Billion, Billion times stronger than gravity.

An ant weighs 0.003 grams, and the Earth weighs 5.9 x 10^27 g, so you
would need 10000000000 planet Earths to replicate the neutralization
between the energy of gravity and the energy of electromagnetic
interaction (assuming the ant was an electron of ant-like proportions,
energy-wise).

Such is the sandtrap of neutralization across units of measure. *It is
much like the folks of 100 years ago claiming a car couldn't drive up
a hill without a warp drive engine with a dilithium crystal controlled
gravimetric field displacement manifold.

As we all know (or almost all), Gene Roddenberry is the authority to
turn to on the basis of this last claim being fulfilled some 50 years
from now by Zefram Cochrane developing the first warp-capable
starship. *How we currently get to the top of hills in a car is
considered as an example of superstitious mass hysteria.

We can all rest assured that this meets the criteria of not coming
from any text book because it hasn't happened yet. **Whew* *Hence, it
cannot be disproven. *Don't rush to the patent office however, this is
considered Post-Art.

73's
Richard Clark, KB7QHC

Just rubbish
You are just being foolish. Have you never elevated anything using
magnets? If you haven't then buy a kit to see it for yourself.
The same is used in many places in science
and Industry where transport is raised to avoid friction. I warrant
that you probably can see same on video on the net or a frog suspended
in air .
If you cannot neutralize gravity then you cannot have straight line
trajectory. Period. When a particle is raised from a surface then you
do not have to account for friction when propelling
or accelerating it. Thus all energy applied is used solely to achieve
radiation without the burden of friction created by skin depth which
is not accounted for in Maxwells equations as it reduces efficiency.
As I said at the beginning you are just acting silly or being a
fool.Or, have no understanding of the term equilibrium or Newtons laws
for that matter. Now a question, Why did Maxwell use the term
"displacement current" and what was he suggesting what was being
displaced from the control of gravity? Now get going, collect a lot of
random words. Put them in a container and shake it and pull out a word
at a time as you normally do with any written response.

you can oppose gravity, but you cannot neutralize it. yes, you can
levitate with magnets, but if gravity were not still in operation the
item would fly off into space due to centrifugal force. if just
levitating something is evidence of neutralizing gravity then you can
do it by just using pressurized air to lift something... of course you
could theorize that the military has figured out how to neutralize
gravity because they use hovercraft, that would make a nice conspiracy
theory.

On Dec 4, 9:28*am, K1TTT wrote:
On Dec 4, 2:50*am, Art Unwin wrote:



On Dec 3, 7:46*pm, Richard Clark wrote:

On Fri, 3 Dec 2010 14:22:53 -0800 (PST), some gomer wrote:
There is no way a charge can travel in a straight line up to the
heavens and down again
without the neutralisation of gravity and without the auspices of
spin .

How does one neutralize gravity? *The anti-gravity of comic books?

Let's see, the energy of an electromagnetic interaction is
10000000000000000000000000000000000000000 times greater than gravity.

So, when an electron pushes a charge against gravity, it has 400dB
more effect than gravity pulling back. *In comic book terms, that is a
Thousand, Billion, Billion, Billion times stronger than gravity.

An ant weighs 0.003 grams, and the Earth weighs 5.9 x 10^27 g, so you
would need 10000000000 planet Earths to replicate the neutralization
between the energy of gravity and the energy of electromagnetic
interaction (assuming the ant was an electron of ant-like proportions,
energy-wise).

Such is the sandtrap of neutralization across units of measure. *It is
much like the folks of 100 years ago claiming a car couldn't drive up
a hill without a warp drive engine with a dilithium crystal controlled
gravimetric field displacement manifold.

As we all know (or almost all), Gene Roddenberry is the authority to
turn to on the basis of this last claim being fulfilled some 50 years
from now by Zefram Cochrane developing the first warp-capable
starship. *How we currently get to the top of hills in a car is
considered as an example of superstitious mass hysteria.

We can all rest assured that this meets the criteria of not coming
from any text book because it hasn't happened yet. **Whew* *Hence, it
cannot be disproven. *Don't rush to the patent office however, this is
considered Post-Art.

73's
Richard Clark, KB7QHC

Just rubbish
You are just being foolish. Have you never elevated anything using
magnets? If you haven't then buy a kit to see it for yourself.
The same is used in many places in science
and Industry where transport is raised to avoid friction. I warrant
that you probably can see same on video on the net or a frog suspended
in air .
If you cannot neutralize gravity then you cannot have straight line
trajectory. Period. When a particle is raised from a surface then you
do not have to account for friction when propelling
or accelerating it. Thus all energy applied is used solely to achieve
radiation without the burden of friction created by skin depth which
is not accounted for in Maxwells equations as it reduces efficiency.
As I said at the beginning you are just acting silly or being a
fool.Or, have no understanding of the term equilibrium or Newtons laws
for that matter. Now a question, Why did Maxwell use the term
"displacement current" and what was he suggesting what was being
displaced from the control of gravity? Now get going, collect a lot of
random words. Put them in a container and shake it and pull out a word
at a time as you normally do with any written response.

you can oppose gravity, but you cannot neutralize it. *yes, you can
levitate with magnets, but if gravity were not still in operation the
item would fly off into space due to centrifugal force. *if just
levitating something is evidence of neutralizing gravity then you can
do it by just using pressurized air to lift something... of course you
could theorize that the military has figured out how to neutralize
gravity because they use hovercraft, that would make a nice conspiracy
theory.

I am anxious to look at the browsing hints you supplied in your other
posting . But for the moment I want to look at the word "neutralize"
which I refer to as generating a state of equilibrium. We are
obviously intending the same meaning or observation so now I have to
look up the dictionary to see what the problem is with the term
"neutralize"
Thank you

you can oppose gravity, but you cannot neutralize it.

Let's compare the force of gravity of earth to the force of
electromagnetic interaction of electrons:

Take a balloon,
rub it against your hair,
put the balloon close to the ground,
pick up an ant with electromagnetic interaction,
Gravity loses.

If this were "anti-gravity" then patents would be used for wallpaper.
(Have I just revealed a secret? Are there any new antenna designs
appearing on WikiLeaks?)

73's
Richard Clark, KB7QHC