Inertial Mechanical Anti-Gravity
by Jerry Volland
I define anti gravity on the basis of an equal but opposite reaction to gravity.
If gravity pulling down on something causes it to go up an equal amount, then that is anti gravity. Other than this, I subscribe to the Gauge Theory of Gravitation. This theory postulates that when two bi-temporal photons combine, the result is a graviton. The two photons are basically indistinguishable and are equivalent, to some extent, to counter revolving masses. The Gauge Theory requires a 90 degree phase shift between the directions of the two photons, but I use 180 for this, and incorporate the phase shift between the rotation and an additional tipping motion. If the bottom of the counter rotating shafts are hinged, the weighted spokes going around (one on each shaft) will cause the shafts to flop back and forth.
With normal precession, this flop of the shaft will start as soon as the weight passes the half way point on the side, and starts moving towards the far end. Instead of this, I use a 30 degree phase shift such that the weights are already moving out, before the tipping starts. At the same time, as the machine is ready to launch, it’s tipped back and up from the horizontal by 60 degrees. So the weights move out one way and the motor frame tips the other way. Together, this gives the 90 degree phase shift.
As a consequence, when the machine has traveled through half of its reciprocating operation, the spokes point straight forwards. This direction is perpendicular to the straight out to the sides directions the spokes would have during the horizontal orientation, without my key phase shift effect. With my effect, the weights move out a little, then the plane of their rotation is tipped downwards. This action produces a reaction which is upwards. So anti gravity can be produced with phase shifted precession, when gravity acts to produce the precession.
Like some science fiction writers, I draw a distinction between anti gravity and the nullification, or shielding, of gravity, something which is actually referred to as a-grav: the absence of gravity. And negative gravity, as, for instance, dark energy, is also not the same as anti gravity. And neither is electro gravitics, which doesn’t derive any of its acceleration from gravity.
True anti gravity must involve a coupling of angular momentum with the local gravitational field. (This means a device will speed up and slow down, due to gravity, even in free fall.) So anti gravity is about moving mass – mass which moves in such a way that it generates a centrifuge force which constantly counteracts gravity. And this motion must be aided and enhanced by gravity for the counteraction to be exact. And for the term to apply.
The way I do anti gravity with counter rotating horizontal weights is the center of mass, including the motor, is off set from a tip point. This tip point is where any lift force which is generated will be applied. So gravity could actually pull the center of mass down a little while the rest of the mass lifts around the tip point. However, my video shows that both sides of the center of mass go up as gravity pulls the torque arm down.
The lift is caused by an out of phase tipping of the plane of rotation. During the time the plane of rotation is tipping, the mass has a special roll called quadrature. This means that it moves around two axes of rotation, with the tip axis being one of these axes. When gravity causes the tipping, lift is the result. (But the upwards acceleration is only as great as that provided by gravity.) The secret to my machine’s operation is a slight delay before the plane of rotation is allowed to start tipping. With the Gauge Theory, the quadrature roll is the result of the two photons coming together at an angle. So my various prototype machines have the counter rotation and the angle, although the masses are concentrated in lumps, rather than spread out, as would be a photon.
By definition, an anti gravity machine can neither go up nor fall down. It just sits at the altitude it’s released at. Exactly countering gravity prevents any falling but does not produce excess upwards lift. But that’s without any mechanical input powering the precession. My machine does exhibit a little fish tailing while it’s in the air, due to some slight rotational imbalance. However, the machine can’t tip over if unbalanced, since it is basically a gyroscope. Otherwise, it’s very important to recognize that an anti gravity machine produces one G of acceleration. This means that if the machine is turned on while it has upwards velocity, this velocity will continue after that thrust is removed. Gravity won’t be able to cause it to gradually slow down and drop back while it is running.
Gravity is four dimensional. (Einstein uses 8pi in GR, with 2pi being a complete circle in any one dimension.) With gravity as an action force, the resultant thrust can be aimed in other directions besides straight up. Other external action forces can also be used. A horizontal thrust can be redirected into vertical thrust, gyroscopically. (An airplane with a propeller or jet, but no wings.) My machines are actually split gyroscopes; the gyroscopical mass is split in half and placed on counter rotating shafts. Tipping a split gyroscope while all of the mass is on the same side of the shaft causes it to move upwards, rather than twist around like a normal gyro having mass on both sides of a single shaft. Anti gravity is practical, but higher thrusts produced mechanically will also provide advantage.
A remaining challenge is to design a test which will prove that the machine’s operation, while it is levitating, has an effect on gravity’s strength, especially above or below the device. There’s a million dollar prize for this proof.