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: 5
<< 2  3  4    6  7  8 >>

log in


posted on Feb, 17 2008 @ 02:04 PM
reply to post by Matyas

Well...i have not invested financially in a search for her (I could use Intelius or something), but if there is a chance to actually get an audience with her I would happily do it.

I may answer back in a few days with the results....gotta check the credit card balance after purchasing two new Prince O3 tennis racquets for my boys.

Lifestudent....i will review your information. Thanks for chiming in.
Any ideas on the whereabouts of Dr. Li, by any chance?

posted on Feb, 18 2008 @ 04:02 AM
Checking in

I will have stuff in the next few days... when I get a little free time...

As to the Army contact ... see email

posted on Mar, 21 2008 @ 01:12 PM
BFFT, Your research into Ning Li is very interesting. I have been interested in her whereabouts for a while, but have had no luck in finding anything relevant or current. However, I wanted to suggest you look into one of her co-workers at the University of Alabama. His name is Douglass Torr. He has several patents as well. The last thing I found about him stated that he was at the University of South Carolina (If i remember correctly). One interesting thing I found (though I dont know if it is true) is that he sent out an e-zine trying to raise funds to create an antigravity craft. I have found no current info on him. He seems to have disappeared just like Ning Li. Happy Hunting and I hope you have more luck than I have had

[edit on 21-3-2008 by justsomeboreddude]

posted on Mar, 21 2008 @ 04:11 PM
Here is some more info that may help you. It mentions an article in Wired magazie.

n South Carolina Torr had ventured into even stranger territory. He released a document of antigravity news and space drive technology in an amateur E-Zine. The document described a "gravity generator" that would create a force beam in any desired direction. Torr’s research and development have been limited by funding. When asked about his publication at the Office of Technology Transfer at the University of South Carolina, Torr exclaimed to Wired Magazine that his document had been presented prematurely and that it had received wider distribution than was originally intended. Torr told reporters that his team was still working on the technology, and would prefer not to receive any publicity at the time.

Taken from this site.. not sure how reliable it is

posted on Mar, 21 2008 @ 04:16 PM
Also check this out

Skeggs now forwarded to me an amazing document suggesting that Torr had ventured into even stranger territory. The document was Antigravity News and Space Drive Technology, an amateur zine that looked like a 1970s counterculture manifesto, generated on an old daisywheel printer, pasted into pages, photocopied, and stapled down the left edge. This science-oriented samizdat was a hopeless muddle of wacky ideas and grandiose claims, but on its back cover it reproduced an announcement from the Office of Technology Transfer at the University of South Carolina.

Taken from this article on

posted on Mar, 21 2008 @ 04:24 PM
Here is more info from that article. Easiest thing to do is search for torr in the article and read around all the paragraphs near his name. Though the whole article is good. Also mentions some patents he has applied for.

On the other hand, theories developed by Giovanni Modanese, Ning Li, and Douglas Torr portray a superconductor as a giant "quantum object" which might be exempt from Smoot's criticism, since Einstein's general theory has nothing to say about quantum effects. As Smoot himself admits, "The general theory is widely revered because Einstein wrote it, and it happens to be very beautiful. But the general theory is not entirely compatible with quantum mechanics, and sooner or later it will have to be modified."
from the same wired article referenced above

posted on Mar, 23 2008 @ 11:39 AM
Very interesting information.

I had gone too far down another rabbit hole and forgot to go back and look up Torr's skirt (if you will pardon the metaphor).

There are some interesting bits of info out there when you "google" his name.

For example, this website:

discusses some interesting "facts". If there are people who are more familiar with Maxwell's equations than me (not a hard feat, actually), perhaps they can chime in with input on the following:

After looking at the writeups about the NASA experiment and the Podkletnov experiment, I could see that both of the experiments were severely BLUNDERED! Yes, you heard that right. I'm sure both parties will be rather embarassed when you tell them the following, and see what their reaction is. Using the "Maxwellized" equations of gravity, and knowing the fact that the vortical motion (or spin vector) of the lattice ions in the disk must be aligned in a direction perpendicular to the plane of the disk, then the field lines of the "gravitomagnetic field" must be perpendicular to the plane of the disk also. This "gravitomagnetic field" would change with time, due to either the RF electric and magnetic fields applied, or to the spinning of the disk, or both. Indeed, in order to either create ordinary gravity or shield ordinary gravity, you must have a changing "gravitomagnetic field" in order to create that ordinary gravity field (per the "Maxwellized Equations"). Fact is, according to the "Maxwellized Equations", that the ordinary gravity field created by a changing (in strength), but always vertically oriented, gravitomagnetic field, would have to be HORIZONTAL, not vertical. In fact, the field lines of the generated ordinary gravity field are both horizontal and circular in nature. As an analogy, since the two types of gravity fields (i.e. ordinary gravity fields and "gravitomagnetic" fields) interact with each other exactly like electric and magnetic fields interact with each other, then consider the following. Any degreed electrical engineer will tell you that a collapsing vertical magnetic field will induce a circular horizontal electric field. This is the principle by which electrical generators work. Similarly, if a permanent magnet is thrust vertically through a horizontal circular coil of wire, then an electrical voltage is induced in the coil, due to the circular electric field which is produced by the moving magnet.

So, both NASA and Podkletnov were measuring for a change in gravity in THE WRONG DIRECTION!! They should have looked for any changes in gravity in the HORIZONTAL direction. Thus, the hanging weight in those experiments must have been pulled slightly either to the left or right (but not enough that they could visually see it).

The reason that Podkletnov got any results at all in the VERTICAL direction was simply due to the residual bending of the fields from the perfect horizontal, due to the finite size of the disk producing the fields. Then, there would have been a small but measurable vertical component to the generated gravity field.

I am unsure. This page has some of its "facts" wrong in other areas...but without being able to deduce the math, the logic of the above statement seems plausible.

As i find more, i will certainly post it. Thank you for bringing this back up again. With how my regular job has been, finding time and initiative for research is difficult.

posted on Mar, 23 2008 @ 11:00 PM
Check out this patent by Torr and Vargas. It looks like it was just issued on 2/7/2008.Torr and Vargas patent

Here is some contact info for Torr and Vargas (from 2004)
Jose G. Vargas1 and Douglas G. Torr2
PST Associates, 600 Westover Rd, Columbia, SC 29210
PST Associates, 5221 Tern Place, Fayetteville, NC 28311-

and check out page 229 of this pdf
Staif2004 pdf

Hope some of this helps. From what I can understand of the patent (which is not much) it looks like they snuck an antigravity device past the patent office.

posted on Mar, 23 2008 @ 11:12 PM

1. Field of the Invention

The invention relates to the generation of inhomogeneous electromagnetic fields and in particular, to the generation of fields that exert force on massive objects. Such fields have utility in the arts of mass acceleration (including object manipulation and propulsion) and communications.

Not all inhomogeneous electric field configurations will give rise to significant gravitational fields. The present disclosure shows preferred electrode configurations that give rise to inhomogeneous electric fields capable of producing significant gravitational fields. Significant gravitational fields means at least one or more of the following: 1. Gravitational fields with strength large enough to noticeably affect a mass (preferably a force of at least 1% or more of its weight, even more preferably on the order of 10% or more of its weight, most preferably greater than its weight).

The Charged Sphere

The electric field of the charged sphere is radial and therefore spherically symmetric. The spherical symmetry in turn produces a gravitational field with spherical symmetries. The electric field, E, of the charged sphere will decrease as 1/r.sup.2, where r is the distance from the center of the sphere. The derivative of the field scales as E/r where r is distance from the center of the sphere. Depending on the sign of its charge, the charged sphere would generate a gravitational force that would act to either attract or repel massive objects to or away from the center of the sphere. One use of such generators is as a device for producing, measuring and demonstrating gravitational effects and their principles. Other uses include any applications useful for applying forces to massive objects, and communications.

from the patent

posted on Mar, 24 2008 @ 06:54 PM
It is interesting how heavily he references Wallace and Brown. Very, very interesting.

From the description given, it sounds almost like a discoid that has the generator as part of its function. If antigrav is associated, the wording used is very suspiciously similar to what you would expect from something like a Searl machine, or something from Ralph Ring/Otis Carr.

Nice find. Thanks for sharing.

posted on Mar, 24 2008 @ 07:16 PM
Thanks. It is interesting that you mention the Searl device. That is the first thing I thought of when I was reading the patent. They even mention Roschin and Godin. If i remember correctly they built a device like Searls and saw many of the same things he mentions, like cooling of the air, weight loss, etc..

From the patent

In July 2001, a three-day meeting of the American Institute of Aeronautics and Astronautics (AIAA) was held in Utah. V. Roschin and S. Godin presented a paper: An Experimental Investigation of the Physical Effects in a Dynamic Magnetic System. (American Institute of Aeronautics and Astronautics 2001 Meeting, AIAA-2001-3660). The paper described an assembly of static and rotating magnets, which purportedly achieved a gravitational effect. The authors reported reductions in observed weight ranging up to 35%. However, the paper gave no theoretical basis for the result.

I want to build one of these things
10,000 volts doesnt seem like that much, but I dont know that much about electricity so I am not sure.

You are right about the references to Wallace and Brown, and they even discuss capacitors in the patent, which is what Wallace originally found to loose mass which is why he started down that path.

Also in the patent they mention some guys from the University of South Carolina and how they built a device that did appear to loose weight. It is this same University that Vargas and Torr originally worked for, so it makes you think that maybe they directed the building of this test device.

posted on Mar, 24 2008 @ 07:19 PM
Take care when dealing with high voltage I'm a EE and don't like messing with anything about 5/12 Vdc.

posted on Mar, 24 2008 @ 07:28 PM
Check this web page out. It is about Roschin and Godin's experiment. It even states on this page that it was a replica of Searls work. It has drawings of the device as well.

Roschin and Godins work

There are tons of references to this you can google.

As I look into Torr, Vargas, and Li I think what happened over time was that Torr's work with both of them led to him building the Physics/Theory behind the device. If you look at Torr and Vargas work leading up to the patent they do a lot of work on trying to bridge General Relativity with other works using different mathematical models and even trying to use different types of mathematical models to prove parts of GR.

This makes sense to me. Because as a scientest, not an entrepreneur Torr found something with Li (antigravity effects). Being a theorist he wants to figure out why he got the effects and this drives him down a path to approach GR in different ways to create the theory behind the device. Then once he gets close he starts to use the theory as a basis to create more successful experiments.

I am amazed they got this patent through, because they generally reject anything "crazy" like antigravity. But that is why the patent is so carefully worded to talk about producing gravity effects as opposed to them saying hey we need a patent for this antigravity device. However, it seems apparent to me that if you have followed Torr's work that what he is really saying in the patent is hey I figured out this Antigravity thing and let me patent every possible thing I can think of related to it. Every configuration etc...

posted on Mar, 24 2008 @ 07:32 PM
Thanks Black Projects... I was mostly kidding. I would cook myself and probably every one in a 1 mile radius if I tried to build that thing. It does make me wish I was smart enough to understand the patent better. I should have taken EE in school

posted on Mar, 24 2008 @ 07:41 PM
One last thing and then I will shut up for the day. It still doesnt answer what happened to Ning Li. Maybe she was a 1 hit wonder and without Torr she couldnt build the theory behind what they had created, or maybe she went on to try to create a better device but couldnt without understanding more about the theory behind it. Or maybe she is behind all these black triangles everyone says they see, and she is still working for the military, now in secret. I cant believe that the US govt would let her go back to China if she knew what she seems to have known. I cant see them taking that risk even if they thought she was conning them.

What do you think about Robert Baker and GravWave? Seems like the Torr and Vargas patent addresses a lot of the things they are trying to develop.

posted on Mar, 24 2008 @ 07:48 PM

Originally posted by BlackProjects
Take care when dealing with high voltage I'm a EE and don't like messing with anything about 5/12 Vdc.

Interesting. The refinery explosion here in Big Spring ruined the house i live in. The foundation is a loss, i think. My grandmothers estate owns it (we were going to sell it once we paid off the estate). I just rent it (at market value).

I am having to move into a new house. It is another family rental property (i will move to another location soon, and won't invest my money on local property). But it has a HUGE workshop that overlooks the city. I cannot wait to move in. We are redoing the hardwood floors first, so it will be awhile...but that workshop makes me drool.

I am currently planning some experiments into Schumann Resonance with my son for his next science fair.

Back tot he topic...i could swear i have seen anti-grav patents on plenty of occasions. But i think it mostly is limited to people that the government deems "reputable" (i.e., under contract).

posted on Mar, 24 2008 @ 07:57 PM
reply to post by justsomeboreddude

Dr. Robert Baker seems to be quite a character. The outfits he wears in some of those images on his website with his lovely wife are fairly eccentric. But he seems to be very well connected to the Chinese.

Earlier in this thread i posted the results of my e-mail inquiry to him about Ning-Li. That was a strange encounter, honestly. I got two replies from two different emails. One said basically "Nope, sorry". The other was more detailed. He stated something along the lines of "I haven't seen her since she hosed the US Army out of $500k, which I arranged for her." He didn't seem very warm about the topic and i let it go.

I also emailed her former "boss" at NASA, and he said she was in Maryland the last he had heard. If it is true it would allude to a health issue that may have taken her out of the spotlight. Who knows? Maybe she got into medicine somehow, as the only things i can think of in Maryland are medical and clandestine (she looks like she would be an awkward secret spy, LOL).

But, back to Dr. Baker...his work seems to be fairly interesting. I am not sure i like his Chinese connections. It does affirm that our government is much more amiable to the Chinese government than they posture, as Dr. Baker is also a "head hunter" for the Army Research lab, funneling talent and inspiration their way.

Much of the "lattice ions" stuff is starting to look like it is being completely revolutionized by Claude Poher and his "universon".

posted on Mar, 24 2008 @ 10:03 PM
Well you just made me realize that I contradicted my own self.. lol
I ask you about Robert Baker who I know is in China.. and then I say they would never let Li go to China. Maybe I need a day off

I did read all your posts about you search for Li. That is why your thread interested me so much. I appreciate/respect you taking the effort to email those people in your search for her.

One thing I find interesting is that Torr and Vargas never use the word superconductor in their patent. For some reason I expected that.

As I ponder that the device in the patent is like the Searl device it makes my head swim. I always thought that guy was just another nutcase. Especially since he designed it from a dream and he could never reproduce it. I just figured he was milking every sucker he could find for a little cash.

On yoube if you search for DrTerryMoore you will see videos by Dr. Terry Moore. He is actually trying to build the Searl device with Searls help. It is taking forever though.

posted on Mar, 25 2008 @ 12:38 AM

posted on Mar, 25 2008 @ 11:43 AM
BFFT, I forgot to tell you that I am sorry to hear that your house was damaged in the explosion. Hopefully, it isnt too bad for you and your family.

Zorgon, I guess you are right about the expense of building the Searl device. I didnt really mean to come off so negative. I think it is awesome that they are trying to build it and I was really just expressing impatience because I am excited to see the results.

But I still feel like the Searl thing is kinda BS. Because this guy supposedly build this thing in the 60's, and it worked great. Now everytime he is building one of these they just cant seem to get it right.

It just seems like if you could build these things in the 60's over and over again with 60's tech, then you should be able to reproduce it cheaper, faster, better with 2008 tech.

Any opinions on this?

new topics

top topics

<< 2  3  4    6  7  8 >>

log in