Emerging Physics for Novel Field Propulsion

Last month Dr. Jochem Häuser gave his talk at the Aerospace Museum of California on McClellan Air Force Base near Sacramento, CA. The topic of his talk was “Emerging Physics for Novel Field Propulsion”. A full version of his supporting paper was co-authored with Dr. Walter Dröscher.

The paper reviews their novel concepts that might lead to advanced space propulsion technology based on gravitational-like force fields. In it they analyze the latest gravitomagnetic experiments performed at ARC Seibersdorf. They also discuss their re-interpretation of the general symmetry breaking mechanism leading to virtual particles of imaginary mass, which in turn, should be responsible for the conversion of electromagnetic into gravitational energy. They then go on to describe a novel experiment for the generation of a gravity-like field that could serve directly as a propulsion principle.

Largely this paper is a refined and succinct restatement of their current position with regards to Extended Heim Theory (EHT) and concludes with how best to advance the state of gravity-field like research and application. They state that, “…gravity-like fields most likely would lead to novel technologies in the general field of transportation, and thus should be of major interest to the public and, in particular, to industry. In addition, these fields might also be usable in energy generation.”

Also of interest is the mention of a shield effect by steel and multi-layer insulation (of the type used in spacecraft) that is predicted by EHT. One would surmise that the use of thin-layer materials such as MLI could then be employed to shield the effect selectively, producing a more easily manipulated and directed field.

Finally there is this mention, “Of even more practical importance would be the aspect of energy conversion from direct interaction between electromagnetism and gravitation or from employing gravity-like fields in nuclear fusion, for instance, in magnetic mirrors.”

In that one statement lies the hint that their work continues in the exploration of deriving energy directly from the interplay of magnetic and gravity-like fields. This gives an indication that one or both are still pursuing a patent to produce a source of clean energy (see this entry).

In the past I have noted that a focused gravity-like field could be employed to separate materials much like an ultracentrifuge. I have also noted how this might have dire implications for nuclear proliferation if employed in the separation of transuranic materials. But Drs. Häuser and Dröscher extend the potential more benevolently by suggesting that gravity-like fields might be employed to achieve hot nuclear fusion and thus bring this almost unlimited energy technology closer to realization.

Hot fusion from application of gravity-like fields? Theirs is a wonderfully ambitious prognostication.

Passive Manipulation of Gravito-Photons with Metamaterials?

In H.G. Wells’ novel The First Men in the Moon a scientist discovers “cavorite”, a mineral impervious to gravity that can also shield other materials from its effects. The search for materials with the ability to modify gravity have long been considered science fiction. But recently a paper by Minter, Wegter-McNelly and Chiao suggested that hypothesized High Frequency Gravity Waves (HFGWs) might be able to be reflected like a mirror by thin superconducting films when Cooper pairs are in motion. http://arxiv.org/abs/0903.0661

Whether this will be the case is uncertain and Chiao has had some setbacks with his “gravity-radio” experiments in 2003, but of greater interest to myself is not whether any passive material may be able to interact with gravity waves or gravitons to redirect their paths, but whether there are materials that would be able to interact with gravito-photons, the hypothesized particles in Extended Heim Theory.

My candidate would be metamaterials.

Metamaterials have been modeled to manipulate photons to create invisibility cloaks in a manner analogous to the warping of space by gravity. Researchers such as Ulf Leonhardt of the University of St. Andrews, John Pendry of Imperial College London and Dr Guenneau, at the University of Liverpools’s Department of Mathematical Science are just a few of the theoreticians that have made clear the potential of metamaterials.

They have also shown how metamaterials can mimic phenomena that have been associated with manipulations of space-time. Dr. Guenneau, explains. “Using this new computer model we can prove that light can bend around an object under a cloak and is not diffracted by the object. This happens because the metamaterial that makes up the cloak stretches the metrics of space, in a similar way to what heavy planets and stars do for the metrics of space-time in Einstein’s general relativity theory. http://www.physorg.com/news97945163.html

Ulf Leonhardt of the University of St Andrews in the UK working independently of John Pendry of Imperial College London, says, “This research shows how much electromagnetic or optical instruments can do… Interestingly, the new calculations are inspired by the geometry of curved space — a discipline that is normally in the firm hands of researchers in general relativity.”

There was also an article http://www.space.com/scienceastronomy/080306-blackhole-fiber.html and news release on the creation of a fiber-optical analogue of the event horizon of a black hole. It simulated a gravitational phenomenon through the use of photonic-crystal fibers. A description of other instances of this effect is here: http://www.st-andrews.ac.uk/~ulf/fibre.html.

A paper published in the March 2009 issue of Society for Industrial and Applied Mathematics Review, “Cloaking Devices, Electromagnetic Wormholes, and Transformation Optics,” presents an overview of the theoretical developments in cloaking from a mathematical perspective. The cloaking version of a wormhole allows for an invisible tunnel between two points in space through which electromagnetic waves can be transmitted. http://dx.doi.org/10.1137/080716827

With such a close relationship between metamaterials and optical analogues of gravity events, and the generation of gravito-photons through gravito-magnetic interactions, perhaps one day metamaterials will be able to be designed to passively interact with propulsion or standing fields produced by gravito-photons. This might include the ability to pass through them, reflect them, or shape them to form gravito-lenses on a small scale.

AIAA lecture series

The American Institute of Aeronautics and Astronautics (AIAA) is sponsoring a dinner lecture series this month in Sacramento, California featuring a presentation by Dr. Jochem Häuser, co-author with Walter Dröscher on Extended Heim Theory.

The announcement reads as follows:

Dr. Häuser will be joining us from Saltzgitter, Germany, to present: Emerging Physics for Novel Field Propulsion Abstract: In this talk we present and discuss novel physical concepts that might lead to advanced space propulsion technology based on novel gravitational-like force fields. Such a propulsion technology would be working without propellant. This technology is based on the existence of two additional gravity-like fields, which are gravitational fields that are not described by conventional gravitation.

The paper begins with an introduction of the present theoretical and experimental concepts pertaining to the novel physics of these gravity-like fields. In the following section, the latest gravitomagnetic experiments performed at ARC Seibersdorf (2008) [refers to research by Dr. Martin Tajmar – editor] are analyzed, and a qualitative explanation for the highly varying measured results is given.

In section three, the physical basis (termed Extended Heim Theory, EHT) employed in the explanation of the ARC experiments is presented. EHT, based on the construction of a poly-metric (geometric approach), which is obtained by providing each point of external spacetime with an internal 8D space (Heim space), requires the existence of six fundamental interactions, three gravitational fields, which are both attractive and repulsive as well as the known electromagnetic, weak, and strong forces. Moreover, from the interpretation of the poly-metric, the existence of ordinary matter (fermions and bosons) as well as non-ordinary matter (virtual imaginary particles as well as stable neutral (heavy) lepton particles with rest mass) is postulated.

It is shown that conservation principles need to be applied to the complete physical system containing both types of matter. Furthermore, it is argued that the re-interpretation of the general symmetry breaking mechanism leads to virtual particles of imaginary mass, which in turn, should be responsible for the conversion of electromagnetic into gravitational energy (ARC experiments).

In section four, based on this conversion, the physical mechanism underlying the ARC experiments is discussed and comparison of EHT predictions and measured results are given. Arguments will be provided to ensure the consistency of the ARC measurements. The last section, based on the results of EHT, is dedicated to describe a novel experiment for the generation of a gravity-like field (acceleration field) that could serve directly as a propulsion principle, since the direction of the force should be along the axis of rotation of the disk (ring in ARC experiments) and not in the circumferential direction as is the case in the ARC experiments. Furthermore, the scaling of this experiment will be discussed and calculations will be given that show that a substantial force should be producible with current technology.

In the Conclusions the validity and consistency of gravitomagnetic experiments performed is argued and their relation to the existence of six fundamental forces is debated. The widespread scientific and technological consequences of gravity-like fields in the general area of transportation (earthbound, air and space), physics as well as cosmology are also outlined. Finally, recommendations are made how the state of gravity-field like research could be advanced both theoretically and experimentally.

Friday, March 13, 6-8:30pm, $15 – Students $20 – Members $25 – Non-Members

Combating effects of global warning

In a new report “Climate Change: Adapting to the Inevitable?”, published by the Institution of Mechanical Engineers, the authors state: “Changes in climate conditions will present engineers with a wide range of challenges. These challenges relate to how existing infrastructure and buildings may need to change to function under a new climate system, and how new systems can be designed and built to function under a different climate, thereby helping the world to adapt.“

How might these challenges be better addressed through the application of gravity modification technology for combating the effects of global warming? Implementations of gMOD such as lifting structures, retaining floodwaters and abating other effects of climate change brought on by fossil fuels may turn out to be economically viable solutions once gravity is under our control.

While the report focuses upon design changes that will “increase the resilience of infrastructure systems and components”, new technological domains such as gMOD could offer tools and tactics to ameliorate the impact of climate change. Countries such China, Thailand, Singapore and Indonesia face increasing sea levels that threaten their economies. Countries in central Europe and Africa face direct threat to their populations and energy independence as they enter cycles of drought and sweltering heat.

Environmental perturbation threatens the continued development of societies, their economies and channels scarce resources into the relocation of large populations from coastal regions. Tens or hundreds of billions of dollars to address these changes are at stake. So technological solutions – even nascent ones such as gMOD – are worth exploring for their potential application.


The report focuses upon our ability to adapt to change as well as continue efforts to use less fossil fuels, develop carbon-neutral energy technologies, capture and store carbon and assist more vulnerable countries. One of the first challenges under adaptation is to our coast regions.

The increased probability of flooding can be attenuated by use of gMOD to produce standing fields to act as virtual dykes and retaining walls. This is especially important for the continued operation of non-nuclear and nuclear power generation facilities that have been located on the coast or on flood plains to provide easy access to water for cooling requirements. Use of gMOD to provide extensive standing fields comparable to the seawalls of the Netherlands is not feasible except in cases of very short term application such as preventing storm surges during hurricanes or typhoons.

As highway transportation routes in coastal districts become flooded the most immediate short-term strategy might be to raise highway beds and relocated bridges. These coastal districts might provide the first opportunity to deploy gMOD assisted bridge structures or gravity-assist car ferries to convey passengers and vehicles.

Eventually a complete Intelligent Transportation System integrated with metro-wide WiFi and GPS systems will allow autonomous gravityships to replace ground freight transportation for shipping and logistics. Increased reliability will lead to gravity-assisted passenger vehicles and current infrastructure of highways and bridges will give way to digital infrastructures for managing traffic in Class G airspace – at altitudes 1200 feet above ground level. However the transition time for such a transition (total replacement will likely never be achieved) will take decades and is on the order of creating a national highway system.

Relocating residential areas away from flood plains to reduce the risk of flooding means that urban densities may need to be increased. Enhancing building engineering techniques through gMOD would allow for taller building designs through load reduction. Use of “floating architecture” techniques applied to single residences and multifamily dwellings would allow their aggregation in vertically “layered” urban spaces. Such a redistribution may be permanent or merely transient as weather patterns suggest precautionary relocation.

As climate change increases the perturbations in weather patterns contribute to long term heat spells and drought. As suggested in this blog in December, gMOD could be employed to mine and transport portions of glaciers ready to calf into the ocean thus reducing (or delaying) sea level increase while recharging ground water reserves in drought stricken regions.

A less Herculean task would be to employ gMOD stationary platforms to vertically moor large but light weight sun screens and filters to reduce heat infiltration and reflect light away from glaciers in order to slow their melting. Similar shades could also be employed to reduce the urban island heat effect in metropolitan areas and urban spaces.

Antarctic and Greenland glaciers continue to melt at a rate of 36 cubic miles per year. It has been noted by researchers that the loss of weight currently forcing the Antarctic landmass down will cause the continent rebound and displace more ocean as the continental shelf rises. The gravitational attraction of surrounding ocean waters to the six thousand foot Antarctic glaciers will be lost when they melt. This will reduce the ice mass’s current tidal effects in the southern oceans and further increase sea levels elsewhere.

One potential deployment of gMOD would be to create thousands or tens of thousands of gravitationally attractive zones throughout mid-ocean areas to lift water above sea level thus reducing sea levels in temperate coastal zones. Should one or a few zones fail the resultant mid-oceanic wave produced would be small compared to tsunamis caused by earthquakes or sea mound collapses.


Modifying gravity and generating fields for propulsion, repulsion, standing walls, etc. does not at first glance appear to be a means for generating power. However, Extended Heim Theory theorist Walter Dröscher has already filed patents for producing energy through the artificial gravity generated by gravitophotons. More on this patent is not currently known but the nature of experimental results may shed some light.

Dr. Martin Tajmar’s experimental results in generating gravitomagnetic fields by the rotation of condensed matter measured effects thirty orders of magnitude larger than predicted by general relativity. That is, the fields detected in his laboratory were a thousand billion billion billion times greater than classical gravity should be able to explain.

It should be noted that Noether’s First Theorem predicts that energy is conserved for energy transactions that do not vary over time. Should an exchange of energy – such as the transition of potential energy to kinetic energy when a ball is dropped – be different on Tuesdays than it is on Thursdays then symmetry is lost and the system is non-conservative.

Imagine a waterwheel where the energy of falling water under the influence of gravity (gravitons) is less than that required to lift the same volume of water under the influence of gMOD (gravitophotons). Clearly this system is non-conservative and would result in excess energy that could be transmitted through a waterwheel to turn electric turbines.

Even without direct energy production the usage of fossil fuels could be reduced by gMOD through its potential to lighten loads in rail and air transportation and thereby friction in engines and powertrains. Airplanes and highway vehicles would run more efficiently and consumption of fuel – whether fossil fuel or renewable biofuels – would be reduced.


So gMOD might help us adapt to the changing environment and generate cleaner energy. But even as we transition to cleaner technologies the atmospheric levels of carbon will continue to increase until carbon production is reduced to a level than can be countered by the absorptive capabilities of our oceans and forests. Can gMOD be employed to absorb and store carbon directly?

A uniformly accelerating system is considered equivalent to a local gravitational field according to Einstein’s Principal of Equivalence.  Under this principal the difference between centrifugal forces and gravity cannot be distinguished by an observer inside the system.  Any process requiring a centrifuge to separate materials by their specific gravity could be reproduced by a suitable artificial gravity field.  Such centrifuging could be applied to the bulk separation of liquids and gaseous aggregates.

Carbon dioxide has a higher specific gravity than oxygen or nitrogen. In the atmosphere it could be separated from the atmosphere by a gMOD-moderated centrifuge. Stations could be established at sources of CO2 such as industrial smokestacks or extraction sites for natural gas. CO2 could then be contained under pressure and shipped to storage facilities. If credence is given to inventors Wallace and Hollingshead then lower temperatures in the range of 100K accompany artificial gravitational field generation and the gas may be frozen as a solid and shipped more conveniently.

Technology Transfer

Sharing this technology with developing nations facing imminent coastal inundation would minimize disruption of world markets. Because economic distress can be accompanied by political strife, technology transfer to adapt to climate change may help those countries remain politically stable.

Of course, any new technology has its risks and gMOD does provide an opportunity to utilize it capabilities for non-benevolent purposes – from crowd control and military uses to centrifugal separation of transuranic isotopes.


As noted in the IME report, “the implementation of these solutions and their further innovation will depend on political, economic and social will”. The use of gMOD for coping with climate change will similarly depend upon political, economic and social will and involve substantial cultural change as well. But in the end the transition to a more flexible and robust system employing gMOD to counter changes in our environment brought about by our own actions will better position us for continued growth and opportunity in the last half of this century.

Tenuous connections – part 1

Hollingshead – Wallace – Dröscher/Hauser

The following discussion attempts to articulate some similarities between mechanisms behind Dröscher and Hauser’s (D&H) Extende Heim Theory (EHT) and Hollingshead’s Marcus Device. Connections between the nascent EHT and Hollingshead’s unproven technology are extremely speculative yet intriguing.

The inventor Marcus Hollingshead (referred to in earlier entries here and here) stated several years ago that according to analysts at a Cambridge physics lab a proton is “pushed to become a neutron” in the nuclei of his device’s central iron “Rp”. The result according to Hollingshead is the production of local gravity lensing, cooling effects, force fields and also “by-products” (ionizing radiation) which presumably are due to a nuclear mechanism.

Hollingshead hypothesized no specific nuclear mechanism, but I have often wondered if other gMOD claimants may have posited a nuclear mechanism for devices exhibiting similar side effects. There is one: Henry Wm Wallace.

Is Wallace’s proposed nuclear mechanism a good fit for Hollingshead’s claims? I’ll save the look at claimed force field similarities for a later date. Today the focus is upon potential mechanism and reported similarities in cooling effects.

Comparisons to Wallace

The mechanism for the heat pump lowering the temperature (down to 100K) of Hollingshead’s Marcus Device may have been elucidated within Wallace’s US Patents No. 3626606 and 3823570. Wallace, a scientist at GE Aerospace, was issued patents in the early 1970s for the generation of a time-variant “kinemassic” (gravitomagnetic) field. He posited that a refrigeration effect concomitant with a gMOD effect was due to “polarization of the spin nuclei of the lattice structure due to the polarization effects of the applied kinemassic force field.  The polarization results in a change in the specific heat property of the crystal material“. As a result the lattice vibrations (phonons) within a target crystalline structure established an appreciable temperature reduction.

Wallace posited that by aligning the nuclear spin of materials having an odd number of protons and neutrons (any material with an odd number of protons and neutrons is a fermion) greater order is created in the material thus resulting in a change in specific heat. Heat flows away from the material and thus it acts as a heat pump.

The resultant precession of nuclear angular momentum was suggested to be similar to a rapidly spinning ferrous material. Wallace said that there was an analogy between un-paired angular momentum in these materials and the un-paired magnetic moments of electrons in ferromagnetic materials.

Wallace is unclear about his exact meaning of “polarization of the spin nuclei” and the magnitude of the effect. However, there is a well-studied phenomenon, dynamic nuclear polarization (DNP), which is a phenomenon that make possible highly accurate MRI medical imaging. DNP has been intensively investigated since the 1950s, primarily at low magnetic fields. DNP is considered one of several techniques for hyperpolarization, the nuclear spin polarization of a material far beyond thermal equilibrium conditions (down to cryogenic levels).

Thus a well-established phenomenon, DNP, which is achieved at low magnetic field strength could be a basis for Hollingsheads’ reported cooling effects if Hollingshead’s device can be tied to DNP.

Assuming Wallace’s nuclear mechanism underlies the cooling of the Marcus Device, does Wallace’s “ kinemassic force ” further connect to Dröscher and Hauser’s gravitophoton mechanism?

Comparisions to D&H

Dröscher and Hauser (D&H) and their Extended Heim Theory provide a theoretical basis for the experimental results found by Martin Tajmar. Tajmar’s results (as suggested by D&H) suggest a coupling to massive Cooper pair (electron pair) bosons produced by superconducting niobium.

In Tajmar’s experiments the superconductivity provides for spontaneous symmetry breaking, forming Cooper pairs occurs at very low temperatures responsible for the Meissner effect. This means that the magnetic field lines cannot penetrate into the medium and remains in a thin layer on the surface. D&H state, “Hence, there is a finite range electromagnetic field, which corresponds to a massive photon. The penetration depth of the field is associated with the wavelength of the photon and is mass is determined by its Compton wave length “.

According to D&H such coupling has much lower requirements in terms of magnetic field strength, current densities, etc. to produce an equivalent effect with fermionic coupling. Perhaps Wallace’s gMOD effect is due to bosonic coupling to the phonons in the crystalline lattice of his material, but fermionic coupling through the proton seems less likely to provide a measurable effect.

Where does this leave Hollingshead? His device employed low level magnetic fields suitable for DNP, but the lack of crystalline lattice materials (except perhaps for the existence of ferrite cubic lattice structures in his pure iron Rp) leaves us wanting a suitable boson candidate for coupling.

But if the materials of the Rp are lacking in suitability, perhaps its structure revives its candidacy. The Rp had an iron core surrounded by several layers of Kapton dielectric and thin (1.5 mm) iron shells. The electromagnet coils pulsed the Rp at closest approach but the dielectric would have isolated the depth of the magnetic field to the thickness of the shell, much like a ferrite ring isolates the field of an attached magnet. This depth of the shell is very much greater than a comparable penetration depth due to the Meissner effect, but perhaps it too generates a photon sufficiently massive.

Since the Marcus Device is a highly charged device (4.2 Kva in its iron core coils and capacitive Rp) perhaps this energetic state capable of producing ionizing radiation contributes to a massive photon… or does so enhanced by coupling to phonons in the crystalline structure of pure iron.

So some key questions for further inquiry are:

  • Do D&H’s proposed absorption of gravitophotons by protons also result in polarization of the spin nuclei? And if so, does this realignment lead to Hollingshead’s cooling effect?
  • Can gravitophotons (either attractive or repulsive) couple with phonons in crystalline lattice materials?
  • Does Hollingshead’s device produce finite range electromagnetic fields suitable for producing massive photons?

gmod and global sea levels

While waiting for the long-promised joint paper by Dröscher and Häuser a thought occurred about how gMOD might help resolve one of the most serious long-term threats of global warming… sea level rise and the displacement of tens of millions of people living in coastal communities.

The Greenland Ice Sheet is the second largest body of ice on the planet, surpassed only by the Antarctic Ice Sheet. It contains 2.85 million cubic kilometers of ice and is steadily losing that water through melting. It might take a couple of hundred years for the ice sheet to melt if global warming continues to increase at its current rate, but if it does the level of the oceans could rise more than twenty-three and a half feet (over seven meters).

The Greenland Ice Sheet splits off and falls into the ocean at glacial outlets by a process known as “calving”. Loss of volume of the sheet has increased to 220 cubic kilometers per year.

If an implementation of gMOD can be developed that is capable of both propulsion and the ability to hoist massive amounts of weight and volumes of material, then one of the first pragmatic… and necessary… applications on Earth might be the mining of the Greenland Ice Sheet to remove the global threat posed by the melting portions of the ice sheet.

Rather than letting the glaciers melt or calve into the ocean the face of the glaciers would be mined for their ice by a technique that might best be termed as “glacial face mining”, or GFM. The natural process of calving would accelerated but the mined ice would not contribute to the rise in sea levels.

The ice would be removed to areas of the globe in need of fresh water to irrigate fields, to replenish watersheds, or to refill lakes. Some of the chunks of ice could also be buried to insulate them from rapid melting, much as how kettles were formed naturally by retreating glaciers.

Similar plans to hoist tons of forestry products have been proposed using dirigibles, though the tonnages involved in mining ice sheets would be more comparable to that of mountain top removal or open pit mining. However the outcomes of glacial mining would have a much more beneficial impact on the world.

High vs Low Tc and Tajmar’s Results

In this blog’s posting of April 14, 2008, “Independent Support of Tajmar’s Theory” reported that Tajmar’s artificial gravity results appeared as temperatures approached that of low temperature (low-Tc) superconducting niobium. There was no such effect found for high-Tc superconductors composed of copper oxide compounds. Tajmar’s study did not explain why there should be such a difference, but should different mechanisms underlying low and high Tc superconductors be found it would add weight to his findings.

Tajmar’s theory depends upon the bosonic pairing of electrons known as “Coopers pairs”. Cooper pairs also exist for high-Tc materials, yet the question has remained until now whether Coopers pairs form in the “pseudogap”, that transition temperature just before high-Tc superconductivity. If found to form and if found to be based upon a mechanism different from low-Tc superconductivity it would bolster Tajmar’s findings.

Today researchers have confirmed with new imaging techniques that electron pairs do emerge in the pseudogap but employ mechanisms very different from theories for conventional low-Tc superconductors such as niobium.

As quoted in this publication), “Together, the existence of preformed electron pairs… should help clarify the picture of high-Tc superconductivity, Brookhaven physicist Peter Johnson said. For example, the findings rule out some theories to explain the high-Tc phenomenon…”, including certain “spin density wave” (SDW) and “charge density wave”(CDW) derived theories. Johnson’s findings are consistent with competing theories such as “Mott insulators” and “charge stripes” that do not apply to low-Tc superconductors.

This further reinforces the distinctions between conventional low-Tc superconductors and high-Tc superconductors that Tajmar found.

gMOD and the LHC

I’ve been asking my associates, who are more knowledgeable about Heim Theory, what impact the experiments being conducted at the Large Hadron Collider (LHC) would have on testing the validity of Heim Theory. Remember that Droscher and Hauser’s Extended Heim Theory has been the best theoretical model of Tajmar’s gravity generation results.

The LHC experiments include efforts to find supersymmetry particles as well as the Higgs boson, which is suggested as imparting mass to all other subatomic particles. However, Heim Theory is not dependent upon the Higgs mechanism for the concept of mass. According to hdeasy, a frequent poster on PhysOrg Forum, Heim Theory posits that mass is caused by a six dimensional cyclic process or flux. If this flux is open, you have virtual particles. If it closes to form a 6-D circuit, it gives a real particle whose mass is given by this 6-D flux.

No Higgs particle is needed as it is another mechanism for assigning mass. Note that of the six dimensions involved in assigning mass, three are like time. The other three are the familiar space dimensions (length, breadth, height).

Heim theory is based on quantizing space, in 2-D quanta of area (Planck length)*(Planck length) called metrons. This aspect is similar to Loop Quantum Gravity (LQG), a theory gaining acceptance over string theory. Find the Higgs and that is bad news for Heim Theory.

A Wikipedia article on Heim Theory which is viewed as a reliable non-technical discussion by Heim adherents, states “confirmation of supersymmetry … would falsify all existing versions of Heim theory, which are mutually exclusive with supersymmetry.” If results of the LHC experiments find no Higgs or superspartners (a feature of most versions of string theory) then that spells the end for the Higgs mechanism of mass and many versions of string theory.

The remaining alternative theories to Higgs and accounting for the breaking of electroweak symmetry (including Heim Theory) would gain new attention and scrutiny.

How likely is it that this long-suspected Higgs particle will not be found? Who else thinks that not finding the Higgs might be a more interesting outcome? Physicist Stephen Hawking for one.

Hawking told BBC Radio he’d bet US$100 that the LHC won’t find that tiny Higgs particle. While Hawking said the LHC’s conditions should theoretically allow it to be discovered, he said it’d be “much more exciting” if it didn’t — leading to his wager.

Professor Higgs, 79, who first postulated the existence of the particle 44 years ago, disagrees in a recent interview. “My understanding is he puts together theories in particle physics with gravity… in a way which no theoretical particle physicist would believe is the correct theory. From a particle physics, quantum theory point of view, you have to put a lot more than just gravity into the theory to have a consistent theory and I don’t think Stephen has done that. I am very doubtful about his calculations.

Gravity Probe B, Tajmar and EHT

During this year’s AIAA (American Institute of Aeronautics and Astronautics) Dröscher and Hauser presented their paper “Gravity-Like Fields and Space Propulsion Concepts” which drew comparisons between values predicted by EHT (Extended Heim Theory) and the troubled Gravity Probe B.

In May the Sr. Review Committee at NASA Headquarters did not grant the Gravity Probe B team its final funding extension. Gravity Probe B is a long-standing experiment to measure gravitational frame dragging. As reported in New Scientist, the probe’s data was unexpectedly noisy. However, Tajmar has explained the “noise” in a recent paper and in their AIAA paper Dröscher/Hauser explain how the “noise” is actually misalignment and frequency shifts that fall well within the expected values projected by EHT and its predicted two additional gravity-like fields.

The paper is also valuable in that it breaks into sections the the present experimental basis for the existence of these novel gravity-like fields, discusses the main physical features of EHT, discusses all relevant experiments, determines the nature and type of the fundamental interaction(s) responsible for gravitomagnetic effects, and finally, posits a novel experiment for the generation of a vertical gravity-like field that might serve as test for their propulsion principle.

In short, a very good summary article on where we are with gMOD as predicted by EHT. Finally, their closing remark gives a glimpse into their excitement. “Needless to say, control of gravity would lead to completely new technologies, comparable to the advent of electricity and magnetism in the 19th century.”

Field effects

Hauser and Droscher’s suggested reconfiguration of Tajmar’s original “Gravito Magnetic Experiment” (often abbreviated “GME”) to one that provides propulsive fields (GME 2) for flight represents only one potential field effect of gravity modification. In a cover story on Dr. Tajmar in New Scientist magazine. Tajmar said, “Levitating cars, zero-g playgrounds, tractor beams to pull objects towards you, glass-less windows that use repulsive fields to prevent things passing through. Let your imagination run riot: a gravitomagnetic device that works by changing the acceleration and orientation of a superconductor would be the basis for a general- purpose force field.”

Tajmar has also suggested the potential of building zero-g simulators on Earth, but since these and other effects are not propulsive how do we describe this new vocabulary of non-propulsive field effects from gravity modification?

Tajmar is not the first to describe various gravity field effects. Inventor Marcus Hollingshead suggested there were seven categories of fields in his interviews with Tim Ventura of American Antigravity. Though Hollingshead’s claims remain unsubstantiated, some of his designations can be instructive. This blogger wrote of potential applications of Hollingshead’s fields in OhmyNews, but it is time to revisit them in light of Tajmar’s foreshadowing of useful gravitomagnetic fields related to his discovery.

Glossary of Field Terms

The field names suggested here are purely descriptive and are yet to be demonstrated:

Propulsion – “Propulsive” motion of a device generating a gMOD field
Thrust – “Push” force on an object at a distance
Traction – “Pull” force on an object at a distance
Standing – “Shield” force pushing radially outward
Membrane – “Containing” force acting as a bubble
Shearing – “Cutting” and punching force
Suppression – “Constraining” force on liquids and motion of particles
Optical – “Lensing” force similar to “gravitational lensing”
Intersecting – “Neutralizing” force intersecting other fields

The following graphic representations are recommended for as a visual shorthand when referring to the different fields:


Here are some suggested applications beyond Tajmar’s comments:

Propulsive –
Terrestrially, most appropriate for levitating vehicles, platforms, emergency egress and sports equipment. Beyond Earth, for propellant-less space vehicles.

Thrust –
Push force useful for supporting unstable structures, levees and producing local microgravity. Could be medically useful for reducing pressure on severe burns or pressure ulcers. Directed thrust field “fingers” could sweep minefields or be used in redirecting and controlling the flow of molten materials without contamination. In the lab, could be used in place of ultracentrifuges.

Traction –
Applying a traction field to increase mechanical load could be an excellent tool for athletic conditioning, physical rehabilitation and artificial gravity environments for space flight.

Standing –
Weak standing fields could be used as a “virtual screen door” to prevent the ingress of flies or mosquitos. Strong fields might be used as windscreens, as dynamically shaped airfoil and hydrofoil bodies for airplanes and submersibles, or to avoid collisions with small objects. Strongest standing fields could push away atmosphere for the creation of high vacuum environments without walls.

Membrane –
Glass-less windows and containment of inert atmospheres for specialty welding are suggested. Small membrane field generators could be thrown into industrial fires to trap combustion products and smother fires.

Shearing –
For cutting, punching, boring, shaping and compression of light materials such as foils and aerogels.

Suppression –
Could be suitable for controlling the rate of chemical reactions and for constraining the shifting of liquids and granular materials during transport.

Optical –
Shaping paths of light for optoelectronics and visual displays. Would make possible new dynamic optics for microscopes or telescopes and perhaps a gravitational equivalent of photonics (gravitonics)?

Intersection –
For windows or doorways into other fields without influencing their operation.