Eugene Podkletnov Plans Commercial Applications for Anti-Gravity Generator

page: 1
9
<<   2  3  4 >>

log in

join

posted on Apr, 7 2014 @ 04:20 PM
link   

Eugene Podkletnov
During the last two years we made considerable advances in this research and, using all the information that we had before, we have now the technology which allows us to make objects heavier or lighter.



If you aren't familiar with Podkletnov, it may be because his initial claims were disregarded on the basis of circumstance and, possibly, simple disbelief. In 1996, he withdrew his peer-reviewed article from publication in the Journal of Physics after the speculation arose, fueled by its leaking to the main-stream media. The withdrawal was assumed to be his admission to false claims, or possibly inaccurate results. Since then, numerous labs have been alleged to have attempted to further his research.

Read More in this Wired article



But that isn't what I've come here to share today. The quote above is from an interview with Podkletnov from July 2013 with some exciting, yet incredulous, statements.

Again, for the unfamiliar, Podkletnov's known work includes a "rotating disk" experiment that allegedly reduces the affects of gravity, and an "Impulse Gravity Generator" which allegedly creates gravity waves.

The rotating disk required a superconducting material, cooled to extreme temperature using liquid nitrogen. In the interview, Podkletnov claims to have advanced this technology:


Eugene Podkletnov
We can actually work without superconductors using normal conductors and some other composite materials and they give practically the same effect or even better effect than super conductors.

Our last research shows that, working with composite materials that do not include superconducting materials at all, we are able to create gravity fields in space, in the air, in different objects, and all the objects in the vicinity of our Artificial Gravity Generator, we can control their weight.



When asked if he has published any of his new research:

Eugene Podkletnov
No. These things are entirely new so we haven't published any materials yet because this is part of our know-how. And we also prefer not even to make any patents at present because we would like to go directly from the stage of research to the stage of engineering and application.



He goes on to further explain what possible "engineering and application" could imply:

Eugene Podkletnov
The main application of course will be the transportation system. It will be a new transportation system on the planet Earth and in Space because our technology allows to move very heavy objects with big speed, or on the contrary, very low speed. We do not pollute the environment. We don't have any radioactive material. The system doesn't produce noise, doesn't produce exhaust gasses, takes a very small amount of energy to activate it. It's practically the dream of every engineer.

At the same time, parallel to transportation, we can speak about new energy production plants which are based on Artificial Gravity Generators because half of a turbine can be made heavier or lighter and it will begin to rotate just by itself. It's a new approach which will later eliminate all oil or gas burning power plants. Also we want to definitely eliminate radioactive material.

Our systems are reliable, very safe, and much more efficient than the systems that people use at present.

And definitely speaking about the future of these Artificial Gravity Generators, we can speak about traveling to different planets because now it will be much easier than with primitive rockets. And we can speak about mining in space because with our systems we can bring pretty big asteroids to the Earth very slowly, not burning in atmosphere. And if needed, we can move very heavy objects to the Earth's orbit, so if we want to make a series of space-stations, that is not a problem.

But definitely a lot of research and engineering work should be done and we think that we are approaching this stage.



This interview is exciting because it is the first time he has expressed confidence in actual real-world application of his research. I believe this would suggest some break-through level work being accomplished and can only hope to see it in my life time.

Or maybe it's a hoax. You be the judge!


Here is a link to the full interview.

And a link to the MP3 for those whose computers won't play it (like mine).

An ATS thread about his previous interview.




posted on Apr, 7 2014 @ 04:24 PM
link   
Well,
I can imagine all the cool things I would do with a lightsaber, but that doesn't mean they are real.
If this is cutting edge tech, I don't understand why he wouldn't want a patent. I mean, I see the reason he stated, but that doesn't sit well with me.
If I developed anti-grav I would at least want to hold the patent for it.



posted on Apr, 7 2014 @ 04:29 PM
link   
Well if this isn't a hoax he's just signed himself and others up for a visit by the suicide squad. I hope he's arranged a way his research can be open-sourced.



posted on Apr, 7 2014 @ 04:32 PM
link   
Patenting is part of the issue.
Ever hear of the invention secrecy act? if he patented it, chances are the government would gobble it up never to be seen.
Patents have stalled our development as a species, as patents are only used to make money off things.

If someone is not really interesting in making money, what would be the point of patenting it.

"Oh, you can't use that, that's mine!, unless you pay me. Oh you want to do this not for profit? Its mine!"
edit on 7/4/14 by AzureSky because: (no reason given)



posted on Apr, 7 2014 @ 04:35 PM
link   
Why is it always the case with these "groundbreaking mavericks" that they pitch you the tall talk all these grand plans for commercialization and how it's going to set the world on fire when the blinding obvious elephant in the room is the lack of any credible evidence demonstrating that the claims are anything but baloney?



posted on Apr, 7 2014 @ 04:37 PM
link   
reply to post by Kukri
 


'Opensource' is the new buzzword for the old "build it yourself so I don't have to be held liable for false advertising" scam.



posted on Apr, 7 2014 @ 04:41 PM
link   

rangerdanger

If I developed anti-grav I would at least want to hold the patent for it.


Or, you know, fly around in public in my anti-gravity machine shouting "hey everyone, invest in my company, this sh#t really works!".

But that's just me.



posted on Apr, 7 2014 @ 05:15 PM
link   

GetHyped
reply to post by Kukri
 


'Opensource' is the new buzzword for the old "build it yourself so I don't have to be held liable for false advertising" scam.


Or a good way to avoid your invention disappearing into warehouse 14 and never seeing the light of day.



posted on Apr, 7 2014 @ 06:02 PM
link   
Evgeny Podkletnov is the real deal. I have been following him since his original piece in 96. I followed Dr. Ning Li, who took his research to NASA. I also followed her disappearance (i have a thread on here about The Missing Dr. Ning Li from a few years ago). It may be possible that she is in China now, as there is a Dr. Ning Li working on the HFGW program that Dr. Robert Baker and Dr. Hal Puthoff are working on with China.

Dr. Baker happens to be a headhunter for ARL, and a Dean of Science at UCal-Berkeley. He extended an offer from ARL to Li to take her research from NASA to ARL. He also paid her $200k, if memory serves, as a retainer/sign on bonus. She took the money, but according to Baker she disappeared. He also claimed that Li and her husband prepared the best Chinese food he had ever had while he dined at their house.

I say all this to point out: Uncle Sam thought enough of Podkletnov's work to have Dr. Li investigate. They then thought enough of her work to offer her a chance to pursue it with the Army Research Lab. They even paid her a sign on bonus.

Now, if you believe that she would just vanish, and never report to work....then you might be the most gullible human alive.

It all started with a paper published by Dr. Evgeny Podkletnov in 1996.



posted on Apr, 7 2014 @ 06:09 PM
link   
reply to post by bigfatfurrytexan
 


Now, if you believe that she would just vanish, and never report to work....then you might be the most gullible human alive.
Yeah.
Or I might think "She never reported to work? Or did her work lead to nothing so her grant died so she had nothing publish or report to?"
edit on 4/7/2014 by Phage because: (no reason given)



posted on Apr, 7 2014 @ 06:21 PM
link   

Phage
reply to post by bigfatfurrytexan
 


Now, if you believe that she would just vanish, and never report to work....then you might be the most gullible human alive.
Yeah.
Or I might think "She never reported to work? Or did her work lead to nothing so her grant died so she had nothing publish or report to?"
edit on 4/7/2014 by Phage because: (no reason given)


Well...here is what i did on her:

www.abovetopsecret.com...

It has been suggested to me that I not really pursue my search for information any further. So i have not.

But here is what Dr. Baker had to say about the matter (quoted in the aforementioned thread):


I really appreciate your interest in High-Frequency Gravitational waves. I have not heard from Dr. Ning Li for several years. In Huntsville several years back her husband prepared what my wife and I consider the best Chinese meal we have ever had. At the time I was evaluating her work on HFGWs/superconductors for the US Army. According to them she never presented them with a final report on the $500,000 contract that they paid her. I have no idea where she is or what she is doing. I am working with a Professor Fangyu Li from Chongqing University . You can find information on our activity at www.GravWave.com. Regards, Robert Baker



posted on Apr, 7 2014 @ 06:28 PM
link   
Who funded his research?

I had assumed that his research laid in a defunded state, with him maybe trying to scratch by on his own. Obviously he was fairly well funded....i wonder who?

And, do they agree with him not patenting it?



posted on Apr, 7 2014 @ 06:35 PM
link   
reply to post by bigfatfurrytexan
 

So my thought still stands; No results. No report. Thanks for the half mill though!



posted on Apr, 7 2014 @ 08:52 PM
link   

Phage
reply to post by bigfatfurrytexan
 

So my thought still stands; No results. No report. Thanks for the half mill though!


Are they really that easy to dupe? You think so? Just shaft them for the dough, and they won't bother to pursue it? No harm, no foul?



posted on Apr, 7 2014 @ 09:13 PM
link   
reply to post by bigfatfurrytexan
 

What's to pursue?
Scientists don't have to return grant money if their research doesn't pan out.



posted on Apr, 7 2014 @ 09:36 PM
link   
reply to post by Phage
 


He went on, in a second email from a second email address:


I have lost track of Ning Li since refereeing her never completed Army contract. You probably have found the www.GravWave.com site. If not, then take a look. Robert Baker



posted on Apr, 8 2014 @ 08:26 AM
link   

bigfatfurrytexan
It has been suggested to me that I not really pursue my search for information any further.
That's kind of creepy. I have no idea what happened with Li, but I got a signing bonus my first day at a new job and if I had taken the money and run they had little recourse. They had checked me out pretty thoroughly before making the offer, so they knew I wasn't going to do that, but in Li's case who knows?

As for Podkletnov, the troubling thing to me about his research has been the small size of the effect which could easily fall within experimental error. I'm trying to stay open minded that he may have found a small effect, but I think it's just as likely to be experimental error, maybe even more likely. There's an article on antigravity research where a reporter went to see an antigravity experiment claiming results similar in magnitude to Podkletnovs, and the reporter was able to spot the source of the experimental error which the researcher hadn't accounted for. It happens.



posted on Apr, 8 2014 @ 08:34 AM
link   

Phage
Or I might think "She never reported to work? Or did her work lead to nothing so her grant died so she had nothing publish or report to?"


As I understood it from being sort of around the place at the time, she took the money that was earmarked for producing a demo device and instead funded basic research with it, then took off with the notebooks and data.



posted on Apr, 8 2014 @ 08:53 AM
link   
reply to post by Arbitrageur
 


as i understand it, the common theory was angular momentum, more or less.

however, since then quite a bit of scratch has been sent to China to support a program that involves Dr. Hal Puthoff. That, in itself, is very interesting. I am officially the worlds worst pretend physicist here, so take this as you will. But the core premise of the work that Dr. Baker referenced above is to create a high frequency gravitational wave generator and detector. I am unsure the presumed applications of such.....but if the core premise is similar to Podkletnov's, as has been suggested, then Podkletnov has a 6 or 7 year head start on them.

I am still curious as to who funded his research.

I do understand that the overall view on HFGW is fairly bearish. But Podkletnov's point about even fractional reduction in gravitational effect being worth enormous amounts of fuel value is spot on. So I am confident that even a relatively small affect would still be seen to be of enormous value. And seeing that the US science machine continued to pursue his work once he sequestered....pretty intriguing.



posted on Apr, 8 2014 @ 08:57 AM
link   

Bedlam

Phage
Or I might think "She never reported to work? Or did her work lead to nothing so her grant died so she had nothing publish or report to?"


As I understood it from being sort of around the place at the time, she took the money that was earmarked for producing a demo device and instead funded basic research with it, then took off with the notebooks and data.


That would be in keeping with what she was doing at NASA, too. Money wants results. She didn't seem interested in providing results. She seemed more interested in laying groundwork.

Which is intriguing. The Ning Li that is associated with the Baker/Puthoff project in China....is it the same person? Could it be that she funded the groundwork of her research on the US's dime, then took it back to China to finally produce a result? Is this the basis of the cooperative effort? Quite a bit of supposition there, i know. But it makes your mind wander.





top topics
 
9
<<   2  3  4 >>

log in

join