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.


Anti-gravity and the search for Dr. Ning-Li

page: 2
<< 1    3  4  5 >>

log in


posted on Feb, 1 2008 @ 07:35 PM

Originally posted by bigfatfurrytexan
I have yet to hear your comments on her concept, and actual process.

If I ever find the actual article, I'll let you know. I could ask my theorist friends to take a look as well. There is too little meat in the pop-sci and alternatice links that you provided.

I appreciate your kudo's.

You are most welcome.

posted on Feb, 1 2008 @ 09:06 PM
Thank you Citizen. There is some VERY good information in those links.

Buddha, i have solved the problem of your need to analyze a published work from Dr. Li. In the last link provided by Citizen there are references to three:

20. Effects of a Gravitomagnetic Field on Pure Superconductors, Ning Li
and Douglas Torr, Physical Review D, Vol 43 No2 p457, January 1991
Li and Torr present Maxwells equations for gravitation using MKS
units. The equations are given in a form where the gravitomagnetic
permeability of a superconductor material is presumed to be different
than the permeability of free space. Vector equations for the
gravitational potentials are also presented. The canonical momentum
is derived (same finding as Ross paper). It is established that an
electrical current also results in a mass current, and an inter-
relationship is derived between the magnetic field and gravitomagnetic
field in a superconductor. It is established that the magnetic flux
in a superconductor is a function of the gravitomagnetic permeability,
and vice versa, resulting in a more rigorous form of the Meissner
equation and the London theory. It is shown that the gravitomagnetic
field must have a relatively large size in a superconductor, and is
on the order of 10E11 times larger than the magnetic field.

21. Gravitational Effects on the Magnetic Attenuation of Superconductors,
Ning Li and Douglas Torr, Physical Review B, Vol 64 No 9 p5489.
September 1992.
Li and Torr elaborate on their theory of the interrelationship of
the gravitomagnetic field and the magnetic field in superconductors.
It is established that the gravitomagnetic field must be sourced by
spin alignment of the lattice ions. The velocity of a gravitational
wave in a superconductor is estimated to be two orders of magnitude
slower than the vacuum velocity, resulting in an estimate of relative
gravitational permeability of a superconductor material which is as
much as four magnitudes greater than free space.

22. Gravitoelectric-Electric Coupling Via Superconductivity, Douglas Torr
and Ning Li, Foundations of Physics Letters, Vol 6 No 4 p371. (1993)
Torr and Li continue their analysis of gravitational effects in
superconductors. Abstract: "Recently we demonstrated theoretically
that the carriers of quantized angular momentum are not the Cooper
pairs but the latice ions, which must execute coherent localized
motion consistent with the phenomenon of superconductivity. We
demonstrate here that in the presence of an external magnetic field,
the free superelectron and bound ion currents largely cancel providing
a self-consistent microscopic and macroscopic interpretation of near-
zero magnetic permeability inside superconductors. The neutral mass
currents, however, do not cancel, because of the monopolar
gravitational charge. It is shown the coherent alignment of lattice
ion spins will generate a detectable gravitomagnetic field, and in the
presence of a time-dependent applied magnetic vector potential field,
a detectable gravitoelectric field."

Note the dates on these papers. She actualized her work in 1999, and these papers are 6-8 years older. This would indicate that she had funding, and therefore had someones ear.

To make it easier for you:



22. (this was linked above, i believe)

I would like to see some of our other physicist friends chime in here (no offense, Buddha
). I would like to have some homogeny in the feedback.

Good reseach, Citizen.

Now, mind you, i am not a physicist. I am a businessman (i manage a call center) that is just interested. I do have sources that provide me the scientific input but for raw research capability, you cannot beat ATS.

posted on Feb, 1 2008 @ 09:29 PM
Just like to give props to BFFT for bringing this to ATS attention -- very interesting indeed! I'll be doing a little research when I'm back from work...if I find anything interesting I'll be sure to let you know.

Until then... I'm eager to hear Buddha's thoughts on the articles above.

posted on Feb, 1 2008 @ 10:09 PM
I'm happy I could be of some help BFFT. I'm also hoping that the info I provided would be of some help to Buddha.
I love doing research on any given subject, but this particular thread caught my eye.
Details is what I thrive on.
Denying Ignorance is a wonderful thing.

posted on Feb, 1 2008 @ 10:11 PM
I am a really bad dork, and my Friday night is so interesting that i am sitting here researching anti-gravity.
I even got rid of the kids for the night...what am i doing?

So..i started to run down some of the Podkletnov information, just to get a basis on what the technology entails. Anyone who has ever even looked into anti-grav concepts surely must familiar with this individual. The following two papers are filed by him:

A Possibility of Gravitational Force Shielding by Bulk YBa2Cu3O7-x


Weak Gravitational Shielding Properties of Composite Bulk Yba2Cu3O7-x

gotta go get some back later!!!

posted on Feb, 2 2008 @ 12:22 AM
Well for starters I am completely unfamiliar with the anti gravity concept, seems intriguing though. I think that Miss Ling has ran into a wall though and that wall is the this. The missing piece of technology hasn't been created yet. She is trying to create super advanced tech with not so super advanced tech. Sure the gov't funded her plan because their desperate for anything that will give them a tactical advantage. I mean it wasn't a lot of money really when you consider how much is spent on real scientific applications. I am not saying that it is not possible but it seems like she had grand ideas with no way to back them up. If it was truly possible then more than likely the air force would have introduced that kind of thing by now. We would see aircraft that can just float or have "shields" to protect them from attack. I don't think they would classify it either, it would just be the next step in the progress of man kind (not to mention really kick ass ) like the first computer, or the invention of flight it would just be known so that it could be improved and used to make even better stuff.

Chase her all you want, but it seems that more than likely she has settled down and just put that idea on the back burner. Like the scientist before her this is just not possible at this time. Hey who knows maybe you will create the thing yourself, you seem to want and need this to be real so bad. Study the math and the mechanical concepts behind it. For now its all star trek ideas. If the gov't will give her cash to waste just because it seemed like it would work then who knows!

(Note she probably took the money and moved to another country. She may have been nothing more than a really good con artist.)

To conclude, I did state that I do not know anything about gravimetric fields but I will check it out later as for now I am to tired to follow the links. Information changes minds and creates new ideas all the time. Perhaps my view will change.

posted on Feb, 2 2008 @ 01:02 AM
That is always a possibility. However, the facts don't support that she retired from a wild goose chase.

I have been going back to the drawing board, rereading links and searching out new terms for cross reference.

One thing that stands out is Henry Wallace. It would seem that he didn't provide complete information in his patents...but the concept caught the eye of the DoD, and they spent some time researching it as well.

New Scientist, 14 February 1980, Patents Review
This article is one of the only references to Wallace's work anywhere
in the literature. The article provides a brief summary of his
invention and ends with this intriguing paragraph. "Although the
Wallace patents were initially ignored as cranky, observers believe
that his invention is now under serious but secret investigation by
the military authorities in the US. The military may now regret that
the patents have already been granted and so are available for anyone
to read."

That was written in 1980 by a somewhat respected, albeit somewhat "pulpy" science magazine. New Scientist is not known for making broad, crankpot assertions.

Then, in 1990, Dennis Cravens of Science Applications International Corp filed a report with Edwards AFB (yes, thats right, EDWARDS AFB) entitled, "Electric Propulsion Study" (i cannot find the actual report right now...i am still searching and would be appreciative if anyone in the audience would let me know if they find it...look for AL-TR-89-040. there are many references to it, but no actual report yet. Also, it is reported that it is registered under DTIC as ad-a227121 but i cannot find it there, either). Dennis Cravens summary is something along the lines of:

patents are written in a very believable style which include part
numbers, sources for some components, and diagrams of data. Attempts
were made to contact Wallace using patent addresses and other sources
but he was not located nor is there a trace of what became of his work.
The concept can be somewhat justified on general relativistic grounds
since rotating frames of time varying fields are expected to emit
gravitational waves."

Perhaps Wallace's work, and mimicry of results achieved by others such as Brown, Carr, and Searle, is what had caught the eye of the DoD. Whether you believe the aforementioned individuals to be cranks or not, the underlying theme behind their claims has a sort of sameness that demands further investigation.

Now, having shown that the science behind the matter is feasible (and had the attention of our DoD, as well as NASA), i would like to point your attention to the fact that we have the technology to pull it off. The anecdotes state that she was able to levitate a bowling ball above her superconducting disk (i would LOVE to have video of that). That would intimate that the technology is available.

Besides, i have a friend that is very, very well attuned to the field of materials science, specifically nano's. I can assure you that we have the technology from a superconductor standpoint. I could likely post some level of proof on this, but i literally have hundreds of emails covering different nanotechnological patents, and finding what i am looking for can be difficult.

Remember, even a 2% loss in relative weight would yield HUGE financial impacts, especially when considered alongside the DoD "Heavy Lift" program.

posted on Feb, 2 2008 @ 11:36 AM
Well I got some rest and now I am on a mission to learn what I can about this apparently not new idea of anti-gravity. People have been scratching their heads in confusion about it for more than half a century. I found a PDF file from one of the links all over this thread which took me to another link that showed me some interesting math and spoke of manipulating something called the ZPE which is the zero point energy (concept) behind which the universe is apparently held together. Its also spoke of QV which is quantum vacuum. The experiments that have been attempted to "control gravity" were not controlling gravity directly but more so having an effect on the ZPE using electromagnetic fields and the inertia from the action of spinning a device (superconductor). I don't know enough about physics to really comprehend the QV and how it relates to this concept of gravity manipulation. It was noted that the ZPE and it other part represented in the math was ZPF (zero point force). I beleive the ZPE is not visible but is more a force, and the ZPF is the action that would be seen by people if the technology was to exist.

Why don't we just take a note from the aliens here and build a space shuttle or something like it that is made out of the material in the prototype. Just make a separate outer casing that spins really fast while it is being charged with electrical energy. That seems to be all that was required to make a non conductive material float. As is noted the size of an object is directly related to the strength of gravity field that permeates it. Meaning that the experiments are small and therefore didn't produce much effect on the object, but a large one should have a much greater effect on object being manipulated. The interior of the craft would have to have walls of ceramic or some kind of fancy plastic so not only would the casing cause the craft to float on the outside, but the interior would have gravity inside to keep the people and objects in space from floating around. At least it seems like that would be the case, then again the people inside my themselves smashed against the wall unable to move because the filed is pulling them towards it. I really have no idea, but hey I don't see anyone else trying to come up with ideas on how to "make it real". Its not just going to invent itself you know and knock on your door. I'll keep reading into it though and see if I can find anything in science that indicates we have at least built some better prototypes.


posted on Feb, 2 2008 @ 03:29 PM
Yes it is funny that she seems to have vanished. I think I heard she went back to China. Anyone come across that? Also I wonder what is the most recent thing she wrote.

posted on Feb, 2 2008 @ 03:38 PM
For Buddhasystem (and any other physicist that decides to drop by), i found this information while perusing some of the links that we been turning up. Honestly, there is so much information out there that i am running down (much of it cross referencing the materials science information i have been pouring over in recent months) that i am losing track of where i am at, exactly, in the rabbits hole.

Here's an
interesting news brief from Infinite Energy magazine, July/Aug 1995, Dr Eugene
Mallove - editor. (603)-228-4516

A bombshell paper has just been published in the American Journal of Physics,
Vol 63 No 8, August 1995, pages 694-705, "Maxwell's Equations in a Rotating
Medium: Is There a Problem?" by Gerald N. Pellegrini and Arthur R. Swift (the
latter of the Dept of Physics and Astronomy, University of Massachusetts,
Amherst MA)"

The paper is a direct challenge to Special Relativity. It proves one of two
things about a classic 1913 experiment of Wilson and Wilson that was used to
verify the prediction of relativity that "a moving magnetic dipole develops an
electric dipole moment.' The conclusion of the paper is that Special
Relativity does NOT agree with this experiment -- and no one has ever
challenged the quality of the experiment.

Peregrinni told Infinite Energy that he thinks that all of relativity as well
as Maxwell's equations as descriptors of EM radiation are now called into

A nice link detailing how the experiment by Wilson^2 worked:

The quote of suggested purpose for this experiment:

This gizmo is sometimes called a "homopolar" generator. This is a nice experiment to start arguments in a graduate course on electromagnetic theory.

This really only goes to show that from the perspective of true science, nothing is final (yet), and therefore, nothing is impossible.

[edit on 2-2-2008 by bigfatfurrytexan]

posted on Feb, 2 2008 @ 03:47 PM
Thanks for the additional links BFFT.I have some time to look around,so I'll see what I can find to add.

posted on Feb, 2 2008 @ 04:10 PM
Much of the early work of Dr. Li was comprised of theory pushed aggressively by Dr. Podkletnov.

The good Dr., it seems, has truly been a pioneer in the search of just exactly what gravity is, and how we control it. I will be cross posting this information in another thread, as well, as it is relevant there, too.

While reading through the following website, i ran across a very interesting piece of information.

Podkletnov's Force Beam
During experimentation with colleague Giovanni Modanese, Podkletnov found that by stimulating a rotating superconductor with a high-voltage electrical arc, a beam of force was created that is currently unexplained by contemporary physics.

The "mystery-force" appears to have a repulsive effect on nearby materials, and appears to be a focused beam of force, although the exact nature of the force that causes the repulsion is still under scrutiny.

It then links to a patent filed by Dr. Podkletnov (US 0108005, but the version i saw was V2, which concerns me....but i did have to pull it from a mirror site). This patent describes the methodology for creating his "force beam".

The abstract:

The detection of apparent anomalous forces in the vicinity of high-Tc superconductors
under non equilibrium conditions has stimulated an experimental research in
which the operating parameters of the experiment have been pushed to values higher
than those employed in previous attempts. The results confirm the existence of an
unexpected physical interaction. An apparatus has been constructed and tested in
which the superconductor is subjected to peak currents in excess of 104 A, surface
potentials in excess of 1 MV , trapped magnetic field up to 1 T, and temperature
down to 40 K. In order to produce the required currents a high voltage discharge
technique has been employed. Discharges originating from a superconducting ceramic
electrode are accompanied by the emission of radiation which propagates in a focused
beam without noticeable attenuation through different materials and exerts a short
repulsive force on small movable objects along the propagation axis.
Within the
measurement error (5 to 7 %) the impulse is proportional to the mass of the objects
and independent on their composition. It therefore resembles a gravitational impulse.
The observed phenomenon appears to be absolutely new and unprecedented in the
literature. It cannot be understood in the framework of general relativity. A theory
is proposed which combines a quantum gravity approach with anomalous vacuum

In essence, what we have here is a pulse gravity generator that is able to focus its energy into a "beam".

emitter kept at the temperature of 50-70 K were accompanied by a very short pulse of
radiation coming from the superconductor and propagating along the axis line connecting
the center of the emitter and the center of the target electrode in the same direction as
the discharge. The radiation appeared to penetrate through different bodies without any
noticeable loss of energy. It acted on small interposed mobile objects like a repulsive
force field, with a force proportional to the mass of the objects.
As the properties of this
radiation are similar to the properties of the gravity force, the observed phenomenon was
called a gravity impulse.

The beam actually interacted with the spheres on a level that is congruous to their mass? That is a spectacular breakthrough, as it truly does seem to mimic a gravitational force.

Here, however, we encounter a conceptual difficulty. Suppose to place on the trajectory
of the beam a very massive pendulum (say, 103 Kg). If the effect is gravitational, then
the acceleration of a test mass should not depend on its mass. However, it is clear that in
order to give this mass the same oscillation amplitude of the small masses employed in the
experiment, a huge energy amount is necessary, which cannot be provided by the device.
Therefore the effect would seem to violate the equivalence principle. Considering the backreaction
is probably necessary, namely the fact that the test mass exerts a reaction on the
source of the impulse. This reaction is negligible as long as we use small test masses.

This is very interesting material, indeed!

posted on Feb, 2 2008 @ 05:12 PM
King Buddhaguruknowitallgod himself listed a, b and c. Here's D: Abducted, murdered and technology confiscated by the powers to be that you might be working for!! Doesn't make much sense going black project or us govt after her initial comments!! E: maybe she went on a hunt for buddhasystem so that he could enlighten her as to where she went wrong on the application of said theory!! this seems very plausible. F: maybe she took the money after all and went fishing!

Great post!! Let us know if you find her!! My thoughts are with her!!

posted on Feb, 2 2008 @ 06:53 PM
reply to post by BlackProjects

Where did you hear that she may have went back to China? Do you have any way of finding some kind of source for that info?

It would be a VERY interesting development if this were so. China is already forging ahead with stem cell research, and i fear we are beginning to lose a competitive advantage to them. The loss of our scientists is something that should concern all of us.

posted on Feb, 2 2008 @ 07:00 PM
reply to post by buddhasystem

There is an electrical momentum particle theory.

Suspension by using these tiny circulating mag fields.

Well the mag field is circular.

Just the right cycles and voltage to capture support, gravity is not involved.

posted on Feb, 2 2008 @ 10:07 PM

Originally posted by Some_Guy_With_no_Life
Why don't we just take a note from the aliens here and build a space shuttle or something like it that is made out of the material in the prototype. Just make a separate outer casing that spins really fast while it is being charged with electrical energy. That seems to be all that was required to make a non conductive material float.

Indeed! Why don't we just simply take an existing alien blueprint and build the goddamn thing already! The thing is to get "it" charged with electrical energy! That seems to be all! Piece of cake! Electricity, dude!

posted on Feb, 2 2008 @ 10:28 PM
What is BRUTAL TRUTH and FACT is that Buddah's "C
" theory that she had NEVER been published before has been PROVEN to be false. In FACT she has ben published numorous times in well respected peer-reviewed journals. Also fact...the .mil/???.doc file will not download...for me at least..if others can get it...please do and POST it in this thread. Any .mil link you can get to is NOT "classified" so it would be helpful if we KNEW what was in the .mil doc file on the 1st page. Since it appears none of us have access to more than the abstracts...we cannot debate the math or ratioanle of her theory.

We CAN 'speculate' on several things since she went to NASA for awhile, naievly thinking it was a "civilian" Space Agency" that Dark Mission has absolutely proven to be false. It ALWAYS was an arm of the DOD. having found this out...she did whatever was necessry to try and realize her dream that this technology be used for the GOOD OF ALL...and NOT just to be used and made another Area 51 technology that we are linkely not to see in our lifetime.

Likely she signed a contract with some University that had some obscure fine print exceptions that ALLOWED the DOD to "abduct" her and the DOD military budget item on page one is one piece of evidence of that.

let's face it..the Powers in Charge are getting rich by keeping us all guzzling Oil and paying Power companies to keep the elctric meter turning, and to stand in line and take off shoes to get into a tin can to fly from one place to another....again using an OIL based comodity do it.

How many QUAD-Trillions of buck-a-roos would be loss if this was made freely avaiable??? uncalcuable...therefore it is entirely possible that her invention well NEVER see the "PUBLIC" light of day. Now floating giant black triangles we've seen across the world...the US not worried about China, Russia, or Japan going to the Moon or Mars...hey the DOD already had bases there
through SWORD- Space Warefare Operaions n Reasearch Department....likely using Ms Li's work to get it all done.


posted on Feb, 2 2008 @ 11:33 PM

Originally posted by buddhasystem

Originally posted by Some_Guy_With_no_Life
Why don't we just take a note from the aliens here and build a space shuttle or something like it that is made out of the material in the prototype. Just make a separate outer casing that spins really fast while it is being charged with electrical energy. That seems to be all that was required to make a non conductive material float.

Indeed! Why don't we just simply take an existing alien blueprint and build the goddamn thing already! The thing is to get "it" charged with electrical energy! That seems to be all! Piece of cake! Electricity, dude!

Isn't there an equations that tries to ascertain the amount of energy potential in a specific frame of space? I seem to recall hearing that a cubic foot of space should be capable of generating some ungodly amount of electrical energy. Do you know anything about that?

posted on Feb, 3 2008 @ 02:35 AM
No I don't really know about that cubic feet/massive energy deal. Never heard of it, but I feel pretty stupid in this post, some of the guys here seem way out of my league. Until we have a smaller compact means of producing millions of volts/amps then my idea for "just building a ship" to test it out seems very pointless. It would be like building a car but not putting the gas tank on it. We potentially have the propulsion/hover thing in sight but to power it is still a problem. Unless you like the thought of having a super long power cord for it (just kidding) Well perhaps we are missing something all together here, maybe trying the experiment in space would be better. The 0 gravity of space might make the force field more powerful or do something unexpected since on earth it has to deal with the earths gravity. See what stops most researchers is lack of cash and the manpower/resources to try and build experimental space craft, plus NASA is so poorly funded. If indeed the application of an anti-gravity forcefield has been constructed it undoubtedly has its share of downsides, such as only moving small mass or only exerting a seemingly weak reduction of the the effects of gravity. Not to mention the mega power consumption/or lack of necessary power to produce a filed of any use. Any thoughts on that?

[edit on 2/3/2008 by Some_Guy_With_no_Life]

posted on Feb, 3 2008 @ 07:39 AM
reply to post by Some_Guy_With_no_Life

Go to the Sandia webpage and check out the Z machine. I believe that it provides enough energy to power their earth more than 80 times over.

We are not there yet...but we are getting thisclose.

<< 1    3  4  5 >>

log in