Though Dr. Tajmar and his colleagues including Clovis de Matos and Walter Droscher are in general (though not complete) agreement on the theory behind gravitomagnetic field modification they represent only a few of the researchers in gMOD. Mention of the gravitomagnetic effect goes back as far as Heaviside in the 1880s. Researchers include academics, but also inventors and, admittedly, some zealots. If only some of these researchers’ reports of gMOD effects are true one would presume that they must be based upon the same physics as that of Tajmar et al.
Skepticism is the rule with regards to the inventors. There is far more anecdotal reporting in that group than peer-reviewed research by them. But when effects are reported that fall into line with Tajmar’s results, then perhaps they too have found some aspect of gMOD worth investigating.
First I’ll divide the discussion into two categories: those devices that operate in the temperature range of condensed matter (i.e. superconducting) and those that operate at or near room temperature. Tajmar is in the condensed matter (CM) camp, but we should also make mention of University researchers Ning Li and Douglas Torr. In the room temperature (RT) camp are inventors John Searl, Henry Wallace and Marcus Hollingshead. Others exist in both camps, but the key points can be made with these exemplars.
In their peer published papers (Physical Review B), researchers Li and Torr used Type II superconductors rather than Tajmar’s Type I superconducting materials. Li posited that time-varying magnetic fields would produce a small a small gravitomagnetic effect through the spin alignment of lattice ions (see phonons in Part 2). This contrasts with Tajmar’s assertion of Cooper pair bosons as being the component eliciting the effect. Li’s last paper on the topic was in 1992.
The RT camp is not represented in peer-reviewed literature and is reported only anecdotally. Searl reportedly configured magnetic rollers (rotors) to rotate around a central magnetic plate (stator). After a critical angular acceleration was reached the powered device ionized the air and accelerated electrons, producing superconducting temperatures and a CM state. In recent years his Web site has discussed how the gravity effects were generated through the formation of unimpeded Cooper pairs (similar to Tajmar’s theory). Several devices were supposedly lost to flight before a dielectric was employed to moderate the effect. This supposedly happened in the mid 1940’s, 60 years before Tajmar reported his results with de Matos.
Wallace, a scientist at GE Aerospace, was issued patents in the early 1970s for the generation of a “kinemassic” (gravitomagnetic) field. He posited the effect was due to nuclear spin, not electron spin. The resultant precession of nuclear angular momentum was suggested to be similar to a rapidly spinning ferrous material. Wallace based his experiments upon elements with odd number of nucleons (neutrons and protons), saying that there was an analogy between un-paired angular momentum in these materials and the un-paired magnetic moments of electrons in ferromagnetic materials (ref <a href=”http://www.padrak.com/agn/WALLACE.html”>Stirniman</a>).
In November of 2002 Hollingshead reported effects when he spun three pairs of counter-rotating rings composed of electromagnet stubs (looking like inward-pointing stud collars) around a central soft iron <i>reference point</i> (RP) stator. The RP stator was configured as a sphere, wrapped in a dielectric and surrounded by another layer of metal, thus acting as a capacitor when electrically charged. When the rings were spun synchronously gMOD effects were achieved at least four orders of magnitude higher (literally lifting boulders and crushing work benches) than Tajmar’s micro-g experiments. Hollingshead also reported that when the device was stationery and spun up a dramatic drop in temperature surrounding the RP occurred.
Hollingshead makes no claims regarding the pairing of electrons, but like Wallace suggests that nucleonic mechanisms are in play and that “protons are pushed into becoming neutrons” in the iron nuclei of atoms in the RP. He even discusses contamination of the RP with “by-products” that attenuate the effect over time. Whether Hollingshead now claims bosonic interactions is unknown due to his publicly taciturn nature.
Both Searl and Hollingshead reported creation of an ionized halo around their stationary devices, even though Hollingshead claimed he had never heard of Searl before developing his device. Both reported the generation of a vacuum around the devices as air was pushed outward. Wallace also hypothesized the generation of a shield effect, while Hollingshead claimed actual generation of a shield… and reported bouncing small objects off of it.
In a 2006 article in New Scientist, Tajmar similarly discussed the potential ability to create a “shield” with such a gravity effect. He 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.” When asked by this blogger about Hollingshead however, Tajmar replied that he did not think that effect (if true) was related to his research. [see my Addendum to Inventors in COMMENTS]
Continued in Part 2
