An anti-gravity device based on inertial propulsion earned U.S. Patent 7,900,874 for inventors Harvey Emanuel Fiala (Downey, CA), John Emil Fiala (Spring, TX) and John-Arthur Fiala (Spring, TX). The device they say could power flying saucers that would have abilities now attributed to UFOs, as well as cars, amusement park rides, toys and satellites. It could even be used to move comets and asteroids.
According to the inventors, the device employs two separate processes that do not require a propellant and do not produce an equal and opposite reaction against any external form of matter in the Local Inertial Reference Frame and do not violate Newton’s Laws in the Universal Reference Frame. The first process produces horizontal motion, relies on the earth’s gravitational field as an external force, and has been successfully tested. The second process produces vertical motion and relies only on the aether. It has been successfully tested considering the effect of the earth’s gravity.
After consulting with prominent physicists, based on current definitions, the earth’s gravity is definitely considered an external field (and force). If a one pound object is sitting on a table, the gravitational field causes it to exert a one pound force on the table and to keep the object from falling the table responds by exerting an equal and opposite upward directed force. Contemporary thinking is largely that because the gravitational field is by definition exactly perpendicular to the horizontal, it can not be used to cause an object to move horizontally. This has been true for all the approaches that have been tried in the past, but that does not prove it cannot be done. It just remains for someone creative enough to figure out how to do it, and this patent defines that unique process.
The two processes referenced above are examples of converting the rotary motion of a spinning rotor into unidirectional linear motion.
Gravity causes the phenomenon of natural precession (precession not using a man-made forcing torque). It is common knowledge that a spinning precessing rotor has a reduced level of inertia and angular momentum in the direction of precession while it is precessing, although that process is currently not well understood or agreed upon. Consider a one-foot long axle with one end on a pivot point attached to a base and a spinning rotor on the other end. By removing a support at the rotor end of the axle and relying on gravity to precess or move the spinning mass 60.degree., for example, and then reinserting the support so that precession stops, the mass of the rotor will have moved a linear distance of exactly one foot (equilateral triangle). The mass will have moved this distance of one foot and it will have done so with a reduced level of inertia and angular momentum and hence with a reduced reaction against the pivot point and hence against the base.
Inertial propulsion consists of two different levels of performance. The simpler forms of inertial propulsion produce only movement with a velocity limit that cannot be exceeded and is referred to as Horizontal Motion by Mass Transfer (HMT) and VMT. Although the simpler forms produce significant acceleration during the beginning of each cycle, they do not produce sustained acceleration (SA), and as such, are generally not suitable for propulsion to distant stars, although they may be suitable for interplanetary travel, in particular for unmanned vehicles, depending on the level of the development of the technology. However, VMT is clearly suitable for moving manned or unmanned vehicles in outer space applications where little or no significant gravitational fields exist, such as maneuvering near the Space Station, small planets, asteroids, comets, libration points, geostationary orbits, or in general, any orbit where the centrifugal force cancels the gravitational force, and for spacecraft attitude control’.
The more desirable form of inertial propulsion has a higher level of performance and produces sustained acceleration (SA). The essence of this invention deals with sustained acceleration only in a limited sense. Full details relating to sustained acceleration will be disclosed after further research has been completed and a model has been built that can satisfactorily and repeatedly demonstrate sustained acceleration.
It is widely accepted that the inertia of a non-rotating body is proportional to its mass and is an instantaneous function of all the rest of the mass in the whole universe8,9 via the medium of the aether (also called the universal lattice or universal reference frame). It follows directly that an accelerating mass has an interaction with all of the rest of the mass in the aether10. Rotation of a body involves centripetal acceleration, which is a subset of more generalized acceleration. In the specific instances of the devices disclosed in this invention, the accelerating mass is a spinning precessing mass having a reduced level of inertia in the direction of precession, depending on its construction. Since the inertia of a body is a function of its interaction with the aether, the reduction of the inertia of a spinning precessing mass in the direction of precession is also a function of its interaction with the aether. The exact reason for the reduced magnitude of inertia and angular momentum during precession and a calculation of the magnitude of its reduction is not well understood or agreed upon by many present day physicists. The inventor has derived his own formula for the reduced inertia and angular momentum as shown in later paragraphs.
The essence of the two processes for inertial propulsion is that a spinning mass has a reduced value of inertia while it is precessing in one direction and full inertia while it is not precessing and is being pushed or propelled back in the opposite direction to its starting point. While it is precessing with a reduced level of inertia, its center of mass is moving in an absolute reference frame in one direction while the vehicle that contains it will be moving with a lower velocity in the opposite direction. But when the spinning mass stops precessing and has full inertia and is driven back to its reference position within its vehicle, forcing it back has a full reaction on the enclosing vehicle that moves the enclosing vehicle by an amount related to the ratio of the mass of the spinning rotor (while not precessing) to the mass of the rest of the complete vehicle assembly. One cycle of this propulsion consists of precessing forward with a reduced level of inertia and then resetting the spinning mass back to its reference position with full inertia resulting in a net movement forward. The cycle is then repeated continuously for further movement forward.
When multiple IPDs are operated in parallel and properly phased, approximately uniform motion can be realized. Each individual IPD, were it the only one, will start and stop during each cycle, but continuous movement is developed by the combination of multiple devices in an assembly. Whatever variations in velocity would exist can be smoothed out with springs and shock absorbers. But because each individual IPD can stop each cycle (were it not for the other devices operating in association with it), when it is required that the vehicle as a whole come to a full stop, this can be done in a single cycle, or a maximum of the number of cycles over which the velocity variations are smoothed out, analogous to a multi-stage electronic filter for reducing voltage ripple. Such a vehicle could literally stop in a distance equal to a few of its overall lengths. On the ground, it could perform all of the maneuvers that have been attributed to airborne UFOs, such as turning square or sharp corners and sudden stopping or acceleration. These maneuvers are all attributes of a vehicle employing the simpler form of inertial propulsion (MMT) described earlier.
The devices employing the earth’s gravitational field can be constructed so simply that inertial propulsion toys are an absolute certainty. A small inertial propulsion toy radio controlled car that moves but does not have drive power to its wheels could easily sell for under $25 to $50 depending on its quality.
Amusement park rides could use inertial propulsion. The rides could stop essentially instantaneously during an emergency. Proper seat belt restraints would be required. Merry-go-rounds, Ferris wheels, and all carousel type rides are examples that could use inertial propulsion.
Aircraft in level flight could use inertial propulsion to save on fuel costs to the extent that generating electrical energy for inertial propulsion would be more efficient than developing thrust using jet engines. Because objects have their normal weight during normal flight, MMT could be used to increase the flight speed during normal flight and reduce the speed during landing. This would be helpful for takeoffs and landings on short runways and to reduce noise to below legal limits during takeoffs and landings where this is critical (for example, the John Wayne Airport in Orange County, California). Dirigibles could be powered by MMT. Submarines could move in total silence with no external moving parts.
An MMT device could propel a glider using only solar power and batteries. No propellant or fuel would be required. The most efficient glider has a glide ratio of over 70:1. A Boeing 767 has a glide ratio of about 12:1. The Space Shuttle has a glide ratio of about 3:1. A glider or aircraft using MMT would use a small part of its forward velocity to develop lift to overcome the glide ratio while most of its velocity would contribute to the aircraft forward velocity.
The use of inertial propulsion units will generate completely new industries and employment opportunities, and as soon as sustained acceleration (SA) is developed, travel to the stars can be realized.
The nearest major star to the earth is Alpha Centauri. At an acceleration of only two g’s, a round trip to Alpha Centauri, even allowing one year in orbit around the star for observations, could be completed in approximately five years. An astronauts spouse and children would still be there and waiting for him/her.
The embodiment employing the use of a gravitational field represents man’s first real and practical exploitation of a gravitational field on earth to accomplish motion in a direction perpendicular to the gravity field. If as much development was put into optimizing an inertial propulsion engine as has been put into automobiles, a “Lamborghini” type of car could be built that might theoretically do zero to 40 mph in less than one second. Such a Lamborghini employing inertial propulsion would have four wheels, but no engine or transmission or differential or gear trains leading to them. The wheels would be used strictly for holding the vehicle off the ground with the front wheels also used for steering.
New mechanism for creating thrust.
This invention relates to a mechanism for converting the centrifugal forces produced by rotating masses to produce a single unbalanced propulsive force acting in one direction, so as to provide unidirectional linear motion to a supporting vehicle, and more particularly, to such a mechanism comprising a number of radial arms rotatable about a common axis which arms carry unbalanced weights at their ends which also rotate about axes parallel to the common axis and are aligned when the arms are super-imposed.
A new scientific paper about a novel anti-gravity device needs to be understood and commented.
A recent peer-reviewed paper by Prof.C.Provatidis claims to have developed a new mechanical anti-gravity device capable of producing net impulse (thrust) using rotating masses. It is an open-access paper entitled: C. G. Provatidis, A device that can produce net impulse using rotating masses, Engineering, Vol. 2, Number 8 (Aug. 2010), pp. 648-657, which can be downloded from: http://www.scirp.org/journal/eng/
I encourage the members of this site to have a look and probably express their impression and comments.
Moreover, I see that the paper continues previous research, i.e. a patent application in 2008, one Conference paper in 2009, and two Conference presentations in April and July 2010.
A good friend informed me that, as an exception, author’s talk in Nashville (26th July 2010) was fully recorded in a videotape by Conference staff. It is worth-mentioning that the Conference used about 22 parallel sessions, with approx. 20 listeners per session. In this particular talk, there were 70 sitting persons plus over over 20 standing people up to the room door.
The author has also published a peer-reviewed paper in the Russian Journal, which can be downloaded from: Theory of Mechanisms and Machines, 2010, Vol.8, Iss.1, pp. 34-41; direct link: http://tmm.spbstu.ru/15/Provatidis_15.pdf