Newsgroup: it.discussioni.ufo
Titolo: Ancora sul bismuto e propulsione A.G.

Be' credo di dovervi delle spiegazioni:
1.- se ho fatto quella domanda evidentemente è perché ne so poco e credevo
che voi ne sapeste di più
2.- Lo so benissimo che il bismuto è l'elemento 83, posso anche aggiungere
che ha un p.a. circa uguale a 209 e che il suo nucleo ha una forma
particolarmente asimmetrica.
3.- Non volevo instaurare una conversazione scientifica, ma fare riferimento
agli esperimenti fatti appunto con questo sistema (coi quali sono riusciti a
far galleggiare piccoli oggetti) in base a ritrovamenti di rottami
appartenenti a presunti velivoli.
4.- per quanto riguarda la mia competenza in merito non sono certo un
luminare, ma credo che l'aver dato l'esame di Fisica I e Chimica di
ingegneria mi dia una certa familiarità con le cose di cui sto parlando.
Il sistema si basa su una serie di lamine sottilissime di bismuto e di un
conduttore (sinceramente ora non ricordo quale) che si alternano nomerose
volte. Perché il Bi? Perché
a.- il suo nucleo è "bello pesante".
b.- il nucleo del Bi83 risulta particolarmente "asimmetrico", il che
facilita la sua messa in rotazione
Quanto a questa famosa rotazione, essa non ha niente a che vedere con
reazioni nucleari e radioattività. Poiché, come quasi tutti sanno, esiste la
legge di Coulomb che fa attrarre cariche positive e cariche negative, un
flusso di corrente (sulla superficie delle lamine del conduttore) può,
grazie alla forma particolarmente asimmetrica del nucleo del Bi83, mettere
in rotazione il nucleo stesso.
Perché mai una roba del genere dovrebbe generare una propulsione A.G.?
Osservazioni del tutto sperimentali, cioè studio dei buchi neri e dei
suddetti pezzetti di rottame dei quali ora non mi sembra il caso di parlare.
se a qualcuno interessa informarsi su tali esperimenti e sulle basi
scientifiche del fenomeno può andare a:
 
www.stormloader.com/joshua/doppler.htm
è lì che ho letto la cosa.
carlos
www.rael.org

Scusate, il sito è stato spostato e non trovo il nuovo indirizzo, quindi vi
incollo qui tutte le informazioni
Here is a missing chapter from a future physics book.
Chapter 7: Antigravity by Joshua Gulick
Section 1: What is antigravity? Section 2: How was antigravity harnessed?
Section 1: What is antigravity?
As was noted in Chapter 2, Einstein's "cosmological constant," a postulated
minute repulsion force necessary to account for the absence of universal
gravitational compression was not completely rejected until 1999 when it was
discovered that it was not a constant at all, but must have varied over the
universe's life. Equations didn't allow for the acceleration of the newborn
universe accurately without increasing the cosmological constant.
Also that year, it was determined that the beautiful, unexplained, axial
jets of matter and x-rays and gamma rays observed from black holes, neutron
stars and galactic centers were the result of a repulsive force arising
perpendicular to their rotation. [see
http://science.msfc.nasa.gov/newhome/headlines/ast11jun97_1.htm
 for info on
these jets. Note that the jets appear to turn on and off as one would expect
if matter passed over the axial repulsive fields variably] The repulsive
effect is so strong from galactic centers that if our sun were placed in the
repulsive field, its entire mass would be accelerated almost instantly to a
speed quite near to the speed of light. Not only that, but the light emitted
by the sun would be compressed to x-ray and gamma-ray energies as it
traveled down the repulsion gradient. This wavelength compression happens in
an opposite fashion to the wavelength expansion that is theorized to occur
as light nears a massive gravitational source. Soon after these discoveries
were described, the"cosmological constant" was discarded and equations
describing the antigravitic effect substituted.
The antigravitic effect is best visualized as a two-body interaction. Assume
the two bodies have equal mass and therefore equal gravitational pull.
Assume the bodies are in a stable orbit around one another, maintaining an
equal distance between them. The bodies orbit in a single plane around a
single axis. As they orbit, a repulsive force is emitted from each body
perpendicular to the orbital plane. The force is equal to each body's
resistance to the gravitational pull of the other. In other words, the
resistance to orbital compression is redirected perpendicular to the orbital
plane. In our example, the average repulsive effect could be visualized as a
cylinder or repulsion perpendicular to the orbital plane and intersecting
with the orbital path. The repulsive force increases exponentially as the
orbital plane is approached. As the mass and orbital speeds increase, the
antigravity forces are likewise increased.
In most situations, the antigravity force is insignificant, due, in part, to
the perpendicularity of the effect and also because the gravitational forces
resisted are normally quite small. However, a black hole's gravitational
pull is hardly small. It's this incredibly strong gravity that causes the
huge antigravitic displays from black holes as their cores rotate and resist
further compression.
Descriptive equations of antigravitic interactions are only simple in two
dimensions. It's impossible to predict the repulsive effect generated by the
complex and variable rotation of our sun. Suffice it to say that repulsion
is strongest from the axis and negligible from the plane of rotation. It is
this repulsive effect that accounts for the planarity, or disk-like shape of
our own solar system and the repulsion of enough matter to form our Oort
cloud. It is also this effect that accounts for the planarity of a black
hole's accretion disk and even the planarity of galaxies.
Section 2: How was antigravity harnessed?
No discussion of antigravity would be complete without discussing the
discoveries that allowed humanity to harness the repulsive force. In 1999
again, it was discovered that the antigravity effect could be duplicated in
a laboratory by spinning atomic nuclei at very high speeds. An atom's
nucleus is ultra-dense, not so unlike a tiny black hole. Because nuclei
rotate fairly stabily and without friction, it is possible to accelerate
their rotation to their maximum speed and produce very strong antigravitic
effects.
So, how does one make nuclei rotate? It was discovered that certain nucleic
geometries reflect, to a small degree, the movements of nearby electrons.
The elements that exhibit such geometries have an odd number of protons and
an even number of neutrons. In such atoms, the protons are not uniformly
dispersed throughout the nucleus. Instead, one side of the nucleus is
slightly more positive than the other. Elements that have this unbalanced
nuclear charge are called electro-rotational elements. They exhibit a slight
natural antigravitic effect which may be deduced by observing their atomic
radii. The atomic radii of electro-rotational elements are significantly
smaller than expected due to the repulsive effect generated by neighboring
atoms. The electro-rotational element with the most massive nucleus is
Bismuth, element 83. Its nucleus has the greatest gravitational pull and
therefore can demonstrate the largest antigravitic effect when spun.
It was discovered that a sufficient electrical charge passed down a
micro-thin ribbon of Bismuth sped and aligned the rotation of the Bismuth
nuclei so that the axis were aligned perpendicular to the electrical flow.
It was also discovered that micro-layers of Bismuth exhibit near
superconductive properties at room temperature. This near superconductivity
happens as the nuclei spin at very high speeds and act as miniature
flywheels, guiding the electron flow and reducing electrical resistance.
[Note from Joshua 4/24/99: my latest findings seems to suggest that
micro-filaments and micro-layers of Bismuth exhibit true supeconductivity at
room temperature. See the info on the first page of my website.]
The first atomic antigravitic device was constructed in 1999. My, that was a
busy year! The device was simply a 10 centimeter wide ribbon of Bismuth half
a kilometer long and an average of 3 microns thick. It was coiled around a
hollow copper core with a similar, 25-micron thick dielectric ribbon coiled
around the core and between each Bismuth layer. The free end of the bismuth
ribbon was grounded. When a high-voltage charge was applied to the copper
core, the device punched through the ceiling and roof of the lab at a speed
that was later estimated to be around Mach 8.
The antigravity platforms that we see every day use three standard
antigravity generators of this type mounted at angles around an axis with
120 degrees separating each. Other designs were explored. One of the most
successful ideas was to apply the Bismuth and dielectric layers directly to
the exterior surface of a craft. This antigravitic "skin" slightly lowered
manufacturing costs and allowed easier repairs. It also allowed us to
explore our solar system with a greater safety factor and at higher speeds
due to the protection from micro-meteorites offered by the repulsion field
that surrounded the craft. [To see some fragments of actual antigravitic
"skin" and learn about them, visit 
http://www.artbell.com/rosreprt.html
 ]
The first shape to get its antigravitic skin was the cigar shape. It was
coated with the successive Bismuth and dielectric layers. When a sufficient
high-voltage charge was passed across the Bismuth micro-layers from one end
to the other, the repulsive field was generated tangential to the "skin" and
perpendicular to the axis plane, giving a nice, stable lift. With the
addition of two standard antigrav generators (one at each end of the cigar)
maneuverability was achieved.
The traditional "flying saucer" shape was explored next. It was coated
similarly and charged from top to bottom. Again, the repulsive field was
generated tangential to the "skin" and perpendicular to the axis plane.
Sitting on the ground, it repulsed laterally, providing zero lift. To direct
the repulsion force from the lateral, the electrical flow needed to be made
to travel around the axis instead of taking the shortest, fastest route
between poles. The closer the spiraling of the electron flow, the closer the
repulsive field aligns with the axis plane and therefore repulses more up
and down. This spiraling was accomplished first with a spirally wound core
and then more efficiently with a winding just deep of exterior surface. With
this design, only one standard antigrav generator mounted axially is needed
to provide maneuverability. [Note from Joshua 4/24/99: the addition of a
ferrous layer near the winding, may or may not increase efficiency. I don't
know. Using pulsed, high voltage DC, it's possible that in such an
arrangement, nucleic rotation would be affected by both the electrical flow
and the magnetic field.]
There are limitations to these craft arising from the fact that all the
repulsive forces are directed tangential to the surface and never reach the
interior of the craft. This limited the acceleration and deceleration to
that which a human body could withstand. Then somebody had a brilliant idea.
Why not put the occupants outside, on top of the craft. This way, the
repulsion forces generated would, to a large degree, counter-balance the
inertial forces on occupants as the craft accelerated. This is why we see
domes on the top of early designs. Eventually, it was discovered that by
using an exterior surface that had a sine wave ripple instead of a smooth
surface, the repulsive effect could be directed into the interior.
In conclusion:
Antigravity has allowed us to safely explore our solar system and to send
explorers at high speeds to nearby stars. It gave us unlimited, clean,
electrical power. It brought humanity together as nothing had before and
caused us all to think seriously about our collective future. It eliminated
much of our pollution and allowed our planet to begin to heal. It also made
everyone look carefully at the magnificent design of the Universe and
consider that it may have been intelligently created.
A personal statement from the author
Of course, this information is not really from the future any more than I
am. This information is, however, factual, though perhaps not
chronologically correct.
You may have noted the non-traditional format of this paper. This was done
for a reason. I was torn between releasing a highly scientific paper that
most would not understand and releasing a non-technical document that would
be disregarded by the scientific community. With this format, I may have the
best (or worst) of both. I am working on a journal-ready treatise, though.
And now, I would like to personally and sincerely apologize to the
individuals, governments and corporate entities that may have to change
their plans, and/or accept financial and other losses due to the release of
this knowledge. However, I believe that it is quite proper now to release
this information and allow our society its rightful technological leap. For
if antigravity itself does not allow super-efficient electrical generation
due to the Laws of Conservation, it certainly does provide the means to
supply our entire electrical requirements. For, with simple antigravity
platforms high in the atmosphere and very long wires reaching down to the
ground, as Tesla proposed, we may siphon off as much electricity as we like
from our atmosphere, which is continually being recharged anyway.
In order to offset the negative a bit, I presently offer my ideas, designs,
and theories, indeed my antigravitational technology, and my ability to
profit from it - to every individual, government, and corporate entity. But
only if we agree to one condition. We have to share it. And we have to help
those whose lives are disrupted due to it. Oh, that's two conditions. Well,
we should do both, but we must share.
Oh, it will be weird to see strange things floating around. I wonder if
they'll make the horses bolt?
For more information on this and my other research, or to comment on this
paper, please contact me at:
Joshua Gulick 69 and One Half N. Franklin Street Delaware, OH 43015
or you may use my e-mail address: 
joshua...@cheerful.com
But, I would rather you use the bulletin board on my site:
http://www.freez.com/joshua
I have never been employed as theoretician, but any employment offers (joint
research, perhaps - I'll work cheap!) or other proposals may be sent to the
same address(es). If you would like to be involved in the next stage of my
research, let me know.
Thanks and God bless,
Joshua
P.S. If you think it is worthwhile, please forward this to others who might
appreciate it. Include your comments, too, if you would. You may copy,
redistribute, publish, or do whatever else you want with this paper; I
reserve no rights, but please acknowledge my contributions

Mettere in rotazione dei nuclei atomici attraverso l'utilizzo della corrente
non č niente di trascendentale, sicuramente č piů facile che non accelerare
particelle...
Distinti saluti
carlos

č lě che ho letto la cosa.
In quasto sito si legge che l'autore si chiama Joshua Gulik, ha
VENTICINQUE anni e ha studiato BIOLOGIA.
Dice anche di essere AUTODIDATTA in COSMOLOGIA e FISICA utlizzando
libri di testo e leggendo qua' e la' su INTERNET.
E questo lo chiami un riferimento con delle BASI SCIENTIFICHE?
Questo tipo ne sa probabilmente meno di te, se e' vero che studi
ingegneria all'universita', non mi pare proprio quella che si dice una
FONTE AFFIDABILE...
Se basi le tue affermazioni su quello che dice questo tipo, allora
anche il mago Otelma diventa attendibile :-)
--
bye, Wolf
"There is no OFF position on the genius switch"
David Letterman
My home page about UFO and X-Files:
http://www.geocities.com/Area51/Zone/1165/

anche il mago Otelma diventa attendibile :-)
Infatti avevo chiesto informazione al NG se ben ricordi :-) se avevo delle
certezze ti pare che mi mettevo a chiedere?
Ciao, cordiali saluti, sei una brava persona però un po' troppo malfidata
;-)


-----
Fabio Andreozzi
## supportate le sig. minimaliste ##

motori di ricerca che ho usato nel mio reply del 1 aprile.
PS: Si, credo proprio che tu abbia ragione, grazie ancora.

Ciao, cordiali saluti, sei una brava persona però un po' troppo malfidata
Non si tratta di avere piu' o meno fiducia, ma di nutrire qualche
dubbio sulla capacita' di un "dilettante" come dice di essere Joshua
Gulik di raccogliere con cognizione di causa e competenza del
materiale su un argomento cosi' ostico.
Non credo che lui abbia le conoscenze per potere valutare con
sicurezza se il contenuto di tali documenti sia affidabile e che abbia
delle basi scientifiche e sperimentali solide, d'altra parte tu stesso
dici che hai chiesto informazioni in quanto non conosci l'argomento,
ma allora mi chiedo come puoi affermare che presso questo signore si
possono reperire delle "basi scientifiche" sull'argomento.
PS grazie per la "brava persona", ma evidentemente non mi conosci bene
:-)))
