It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.

Please white-list or disable in your ad-blocking tool.

Thank you.


Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.


Bushman discloses Anti Gravity

page: 2
<< 1   >>

log in


posted on Jul, 6 2007 @ 02:28 AM

Originally posted by rocksolidbrain
In the second part when the magnet is dropped inside the copper tube, it falls slowly because of the well known lenz's law. The falling magnet generates currents in the tube which oppose its fall. So nothing magical about his "proofs". I think he took Serada for a ride. Interesting interview anyway.

But I'm not so sure on the oppositely paired magnets falling slower in a free fall. No experiments found.

Hes not taking him for a ride, hes demonstrating a priciple, of getting a induced field in a non magnetic material. The induced field produces back-emf which is usually seen as a problem. This is similiar to mag-lev trains that eric laithwaite developed. Its relating it to opposing fields and their interaction with earth field which would be a different purpose. Did you hear what he said about the first nuclear powered craft he showed? He was implying without actually saying that it uses that opposing field effect. In the photo it does look like two huge magnets which he said went in the middle section. If this is true we could pair two electromagnets with opposing fields against each other and test the mass weight within the field no? With $5000 a piece neos, that would have to be one powerful field.

As you notice when asked about the alien craft by sereda he gets a little hot-headed and short. I think it was kind of naive for sereda to flat ask a question like that to someone like this. This guy talks of only what hes allowed.

posted on Jul, 6 2007 @ 03:43 AM
Great Stuff !!. Nick Cooke, formerly of Janes Defence Weekly interviewd Bushman at Lockheed Martin in 2000 for Cooke's documentary "Billion Dollar Secret" and Mr Bushman talked about the same weights being dropped and one (magnetically enhanced) constantly hitting the ground later than the other same weight and dimension object.


posted on Jul, 6 2007 @ 08:47 AM
I just watched this video from another source and I was just about to YouTube it when I watched this thread. To me it's one of the best videos I've seen in a long time since he talks about as much as he probably can talk about.

Read the comment about the Celt here too, about Bushman supposedly "toying" with Sereda. This is just nonsense, I don't even understand how one would come to this conclusion with having the material about a celt at hand? Doesn't matter if we label it a "toy", it's still something quite puzzling (just read the NewScientist article). My take on Bushman, if anything he was showing Sereda the basics to get his point across, it's also things like this that is what is needed to get some people heads to start spinning a bit (obviously not all..).. the fact that there are some very basic things each and everyone can do that just doesn't quite fit into the standard a01 mold of physics we all get taught in highschool - i.e, it doesn't have to be true, the "fact" that two objects, no matter their mass, have to land on a planetary body at the same time when dropped (as they did for newton).

And it's stuff like this - we need to get into a highschool labs, maybe more than we need to learn "facts" and "laws".

[edit on 6-7-2007 by lasse]

posted on Jul, 6 2007 @ 12:09 PM

Originally posted by Freezer
Hes not taking him for a ride, hes demonstrating a priciple, of getting a induced field in a non magnetic material.

Assuming that he did that celt and Cu pipe demo to explain the basics of what he calls 'anti-gravity', I'll give him a benefit of doubt until someone demonstrates the truth of his opposing magnet experiment.

With 5000 bucks a piece, (I wonder why these are so expensive), its beyond an average person or a small lab to do it. At least I can't.
I'm sure it will fail with less powerful magnets. It will take some extraordinary force to have any effect on earth's weak magnetic field.

posted on Jul, 6 2007 @ 12:33 PM
I've seen that toy before - you can find them lots of places. They don't violate the laws of physics, but like a good magic trick, can create that appearance. I can't remember the trick, but we figured it out once. The toy is in contact with the table, so isn't absent external torques - no one should expect angular momentum conservation in this case.

Any claim that this is a violation of Newton's laws destroys the man's credibility, and I've no need to listen any further.

Can anyone document the Ben Rich quotes, or are they urban legend?

new topics

top topics
<< 1   >>

log in