reply to post by drew hempel
I don't know if I believe Stan Deyo or not. I do not think Deyo really has an understanding of the physics going on nor a working theory that allows
him to make provable or falsifiable predictions. That video you linked to while interesting, did not really tell us much. He didn't really say how
a propulsion device could be created from his interpretation of gravity. He also didn't say what equations one could use that would back up his
predictions that planets settle into certain orbits as a result of the ripples in the Sun's gravity. To my knowledge there is no evidence showing
gravity is stronger in the orbital paths of this solar system's planets than in between these orbital paths.
The problem with the zero point energy crowd, the group that believes that zero point energy underlies the universe and can be extracted, is that none
of these people have a real working physics theory to back up this belief and make predictions which could then be proven or falsified.
That is not to say zero point energy isn't real, but without a theory, zero point energy and tapping zero point energy becomes blind trial and
That is why I did not bring up McCandlish's claims that the ARV flux liner with its mercury vacuum tube in the center column somehow taps into zero
point energy and produces electricity. I cannot find a theory that I could use that would make predictions and back up McCandlish's claims on this
component of the ARV.
Until such a theory arises, for now, I think I will stick with the gravitophotons and propulsion aspects of Extended Heim Theory.
In my future experiments, after I prove or falsify the gravitational propulsion claims of EHT, I might attempt to put a mercury vacuum tube diode in
the center of the electromagnetic coil or in the center of the flywheel out of curiosity, to see if electricity is emitted from the diode's cathode.
It stands to reason that if some of McCandlish's claims about the physical construction of the ARV are real then the others are worth testing as
Furthermore, Marcus Hollingshead did say that the RP or reference point (a capacitor at the center of his spinning toroid coils) did degrade and the
iron transformed into different atoms. He thought this was due to electron capture, a process that transforms an atom's proton into a neutron when
an atom's electron is forced into the nucleus. But electron capture in stable atoms almost always results in a very quick beta decay where the new
neutron turns back into a proton and an electron is expelled from the nucleus. One could not generate electricity from this to my knowledge and it is
highly unlikely that one could get more electricity out than was put in. Of course it's possible the phenomenon could be something other than
Again though, without a working theory, this is essentially just blind trial and error.
[edit on 14-1-2010 by Bobbox1980]