Obviously this is research that has not been disproved or completely confirmed yet, and that in itself is very interesting....
Comments?
http://www.enterprisemission.com/anti-grav.htm
NASA Finally Admits to Anti-Gravity Research --
Are They Trying to Prove it, or Kill it?
Some four years after the story first broke publicly about anti-gravity research being conducted by NASA, the space agency has finally admitted that the research has indeed taken place. In a space.com article that appeared in late September of this year, the nature and character of the research carried out since 1996 was revealed. As we first reported to you at that time, September of 1996, the research centers around the claims of a Finnish physicist, Dr Eugene Podkletnov, at Tampere University of Technology in Finland. While working on experiments on superconducting materials, Podkletnov and a colleague discovered what appeared to be a slight drop in the weight of objects suspended above the experiment cell. The cell, which consisted of a rapidly spinning disc of superconducting ceramic suspended in the magnetic field of three electric coils, was then tested with a variety of materials and objects suspended above it, with measurable and consistent effects. In each case, the objects suspended above the rotating magnetic fields lightened by from 0.5 percent to 2 percent, the latter achieved when a second counter rotating magnetic field was placed above the first. The team found that even the air pressure vertically above the device dropped slightly, with the effect detectable directly above the device on every floor of the laboratory.
Podkletnov and his team promptly submitted their work to one of the leading physics journals in the world, the Holland Journal of Physics, called Physica C. The paper not only survived the scrutiny of peer review, but was published back in 1992. In 1995, the Max Planck Institute of Physics did a follow up study, and was able to confirm the results. Surprisingly, or perhaps not so surprisingly, both the initial research and the Planck Institute confirmation were virtually ignored by the media in the United States.
And this is where things start to get interesting.
Podkletnov was then forced to withdraw a follow up paper submitted to the British Journal of Physics-D: Applied Physics, published by Britain's Institute of Physics. While the paper had passed all scrutiny and peer review, one of Podkletnov's co-author's suddenly and inexplicably withdrew his name from the paper without explanation. He then subsequently denied having done any of the research at all. A follow on investigation showed that he had indeed participated in the work, but for some reason lost his nerve at the last minute.
Given the significance of such a discovery, it is initially curious that a scientist would seek to be removed from receiving credit for it.
Yet in the context of what had happened to Pons and Fleischmann over "cold fusion" just a few years before, it makes more sense. Pons and Fleischmann were vilified by the scientific community and the press when it was reported by M.I.T. (the leading recipient of Federal funding for "Hot Fusion" research that they had failed to reproduce the results reported by the two University of Utah chemists. This finding by M.I.T. has been used as the basis for denying all attempts to patent a "cold fusion" device in the United States. What was never reported was that Dr. Eugene Mallove of M.I.T. had subsequently discovered that the data presented in M.I.T.'s response had been edited, and that the M.I.T. device had indeed produced more energy than had been put into it. M.I.T. had simply made sure that no one in the United States would take "cold fusion" seriously, thereby guaranteeing their steady supply of "hot fusion" funding. Like "cold fusion" and "extraterrestrial artifacts," "anti-gravity" is a so-called "third rail" of science. One of those subjects you just don't touch if you want to have a career.
To most modern scientists and institutions, the notion that gravity can be cancelled out, especially to the tune of 2%, is extremely threatening. Einstein argued that gravity is essentially geometry, a bending of space-time, rather than a force that can be counteracted. What Podkletnov's experiments and the Planck confirmation show is that Einstein was wrong, and that gravity can be significantly reduced. To face such a concept, that the so-called "laws of physics" are not "laws" at all, throws the whole set of assumptions of modern day physics into disarray. This has led to a rather severe backlash from the few scientists who have even heard of the work of Podkletnov or the NASA team.
"The theory of gravity is fairly well established, and I don't see it reversing itself," said Francis Slakey, a professor of physics at Georgetown University. The NASA project is "wasted money that could have been used to do legitimate space science," he added.
Even so, NASA quietly assembled a team at the University of Alabama and funded by the Marshall Space Flight Center at Huntsville to confirm the results. Ron Koczor, assistant director for science and technology at the Space Science Laboratory in NASA's Marshall Space Flight Center, put together a team led by Ning Li, a Chinese physicist. They attempted to build a machine of their own and reproduce Podkletnov's results. We had received reports from the inside that they had in fact accomplished a positive result -- that they had confirmed Podkletnov's results, but apparently this is not the case. When they failed to do so, the whole project fell apart. Li was accused by Koczor of spending more effort on proving her theories about how the effect was created rather than producing a working device. She then left for her native China, presumably to carry on her work for the communist government there. Podkletnov quickly distanced himself from the work, saying that the machine had not been built to his specifications. One observer, the university's Larry Smalley, a physics professor, implied that whole project was doomed from the outset and and says NASA simply failed to assemble a competent team of scientists who could give the project a serious chance. The events "amused me, stunned me and upset me," said Smalley. "It made me feel like they wasted time, a lot of money and a really golden opportunity to do something."
So why bother to do the research at all? Maybe because NASA knows that the failure of their project would have the same chilling effect (pun intended) on anti-gravity research in this country that M.I.T.'s "failure" had on cold fusion research.
But wouldn't NASA want to have a working anti-gravity device? Wouldn't that make their job so much easier?
Maybe. But it would also open the door to the one non-mainstream theory that predicts the exact anti-gravity effect that Podkletnov seems to have discovered: Richard C. Hoagland's Hyperdimensional physics. As Hoagland has discussed on many occasions, Dr. Bruce Depalma conducted numerous experiments on the effect of rotation and rotational magnetic fields on gravity. These experiments fit quite nicely within Hoagland's models of Hyperdimensional force, and Podkletnov's experiments would seem to be a confirmation of those earlier Depalma experiments. Obviously, Hoagland is the last person NASA would want to benefit from the discovery of a gravity shielding effect.
Fortunately, NASA has decided to fund another round of research and has contracted an Ohio firm to build a machine to Podkletnov's specifications. Hopefully this time around the space agency will commit the necessary resources to properly test what Podkletnov and the Planck Institute have already confirmed.
We assure you, we will step lightly around this issue, and watch the unfolding of this potentially revolutionary discovery very closely.
"
