INVENTOR'S 'IMPOSSIBLE' PROPULSION SYSTEM (OURS) PROVEN TO WORK BY NASA

Share

ION DRIVE PROPULSION CAR.png

Can ion thrust be amplified enough to lift objects in Earth's atmosphere? YES! It already has been achieved! Ion thrusters are now in use on spacecraft and on Earth. The key to domestic use is the amplifier. Much like a PA system amplifies sound radiation, an ion amplifier can deliver amazing new opportunities. Combined with high energy ultra-sonics, a whole new kind of systemology is possible!

 

ISSUED USPTO PATENT FILING DATE: November 2002

COMPETITOR FILING FOR MICRO-THRUSTERS FILING DATE:  September 26, 2006

120 OTHER COMPETITOR PATENT FILINGS AND WHITE-PAPERS RSEARCHED AND NONE, SO FAR, HAVE PROVEN EARLIER DATES

INVENTOR'S 'IMPOSSIBLE' PROPULSION SYSTEM PROVEN TO BE 'THE REAL DEAL' BY NASA

To win this patent award from the U.S. Government the inventor had to:

# 1.) Prove that the invention was better than any invention NASA had previously filed. THIS WAS ACCOMPLISHED TO THE SATISFACTION OF THE UNITED STATES GOVERNMENT!!!

# 2.) Prove that the aircraft and vehicles could fly without wings. THIS WAS ACCOMPLISHED TO THE SATISFACTION OF THE UNITED STATES GOVERNMENT!!!

# 3.) Prove that it could work. THIS WAS ACCOMPLISHED TO THE SATISFACTION OF THE UNITED STATES GOVERNMENT!!! After stating that the "technology was potentially 'impossible' in a notorious 'invention-letter-of-death' from the Patent Office, the inventor sent the U.S. Patent Office Director and Staff a video of one of the aircraft flying around in the conference room of Intel's lead patent team and then offered a demonstration to the U.S. Patent office of one of the devices flying in the Rotunda of the White House in Washington, DC. The inventor and third party Silicon Valley lawyer/observers swore, warranted and certified that the device was flying under electronic propulsion with no additional wires, cords, propellors or jets supporting it.

Commercial delivery of the technology to the public now only depends on next-stage commercialization funding and factory production.

EM DRIVE PANEL PROCESS.png

INVENTOR'S 'IMPOSSIBLE' PROPULSION SYSTEM PROVEN TO BE 'THE REAL DEAL' BY NASA

To win this patent award from the U.S. Government the inventor had to:

# 1.) Prove that the invention was better than any invention NASA had previously filed. THIS WAS ACCOMPLISHED TO THE SATISFACTION OF THE UNITED STATES GOVERNMENT!!!

# 2.) Prove that the aircraft and vehicles could fly without wings. THIS WAS ACCOMPLISHED TO THE SATISFACTION OF THE UNITED STATES GOVERNMENT!!!

# 3.) Prove that it could work. THIS WAS ACCOMPLISHED TO THE SATISFACTION OF THE UNITED STATES GOVERNMENT!!! After stating that the "technology was potentially 'impossible' in a notorious 'invention-letter-of-death' from the Patent Office, the inventor sent the U.S. Patent Office Director and Staff a video of one of the aircraft flying around in the conference room of Intel's lead patent team and then offered a demonstration to the U.S. Patent office of one of the devices flying in the Rotunda of the White House in Washington, DC. The inventor and third party Silicon Valley lawyer/observers swore, warranted and certified that the device was flying under electronic propulsion with no additional wires, cords, propellors or jets supporting it.

Commercial delivery of the technology to the public now only depends on next-stage commercialization funding and factory production.

Our team holds multiple issued and pending patents as well as trade secret disclosures and working prototypes on the technology suite.

EmDrive

EMDRIVE’S THRUST AND THE BIEFELD-BROWN EFFECT

NASA’s Peer-Reviewed EmDrive Paper Has Finally Been Published

After months of speculation and leaked documents, NASA’s long-awaited EmDrive paper has finally been peer-reviewed and published:

EmDrive

oDllYjXP_C_uba8C04hSzjl72eJkfbmt4t8yenImKBVvK0kTmF0xjctABnaLJIm9

THE BIEFELD-BROWN EFFECT :

brown-bb

From the 1st of Feb. till the 1st of March in 1996,  the research group of the HONDA R&D Institute conducted experiments to verify the Biefeld-Brown effect with an improved experimental device to reject the influence of corona discharges and electric wind around the capacitor by setting the capacitor in the insulator oil contained within a metallic vessel. They found that the weight loss by an alternate electric field, i.e. the dynamical effect, was greater than by the static one:

EmDrive’s thrust

If we place a solid dielectric inside the EmDrive’s cavity then, essentially, we will have an asymmetric capacitor subjected to electromagnetic radiation, i.e. the dynamical Biefeld-Brown effect (the Abraham force).

What if we do not place a solid dielectric inside the EmDrive’s cavity? Then EmDrive’s thrust is still due to the Abraham force, because the Abraham force appears not only in solid dielectrics, but also in liquid and gasdielectrics, like air in the EmDrive’s cavity.

nasa

NASA — National Aeronautics and Space Administration

It is a well established fact in the literature, that a force, or thrust, may be generated by a capacitor charged to a high potential [ the Biefeld-Brown effect ]. Although there are different theories regarding the basis for this phenomenon, there is no dispute that a force, or thrust, is generated by capacitors under such high voltages. However, the thrust generated by such high potential capacitors has been minimal and thus this phenomenon has had very limited practical utility:

https://drive.google.com/file/d/0B7kgKijo-p0ibm94VUY0TVktQlU/view

https://imgoat.com/uploads/723d092b63/108426.png

 

Share this:

  1.  

    tldr Thrust data from forward, reverse, and null suggested that the system was consistently performing at 1.2±0.1  mN/kW, which was very close to the average impulsive performance measured in air…The current state-of–the-art thrust to power for a Hall thruster is on the order of 60  mN/kW. This is an order of magnitude higher than the test article evaluated during the course of this vacuum campaign; however, for missions with very large delta-v requirements, having a propellant consumption rate of zero could offset the higher power requirements. The 1.2  mN/kW performance parameter is over two orders of magnitude higher than other forms of “zero-propellant” propulsion, such as light sails, laser propulsion, and photon rockets having thrust-to-power levels in the 3.33–6.67  μN/kW (or 0.0033–0.0067  mN/kW) range.