AOH :: WALLACE.TXT
More about the Wallace patents - Anti-Gravity Technology
|
From robert@wwa.comTue Nov 14 19:25:53 1995
Date: Tue, 14 Nov 1995 10:59:07 -0600 (CST)
From: Robert Stirniman <robert@wwa.com>
To: david@ibg.uu.se
Subject: About Wallace AntiGrav Patents
From: robert@wwa.com (Robert Stirniman )
Newsgroups: sci.physics,alt.sci.physics.new-theories,sci.physics.research
Subject: More Re Wallace AntiGrav Patents
Date: 13 Nov 1995 04:48:26 GMT
Organization: WorldWide Access - Chicago Area Internet Services
More About the Wallace Patents -- Anti-Gravity Technology
An article about the Wallace patents appeared in the British
magazine "New Scientist" in February 1980. This was written
nearly ten years after Wallace was awarded his patents.
Here's a paragraph from the article.
"Although the Wallace patents were initially ignored as
cranky, observers believe that his invention is now
under serious but secret investigation by the military
authorities in the US. The military may now regret
that the patents have already been granted and so are
available for anyone to read."
I know -- it's a tease. And the rest of the article is the
same way. It provides barely enough information to jab your
psyche a little, and not nearly enough to get you off your
comfortable ass. And who knows who the anonymous party of
"observers" are, who believe that a secret investigation is
underway by the military -- or whether these observers even
exist at all. None the less, the New Scientist has a fairly
well established track record for accurate identification of
new science trends and issues. And, while the editors of this
British journal may be prone to enjoyment of gossip and
innuendo, it generally turns out be grounded in truth.
One thing they got right for sure: The patents are
available for anyone to read. Get them. Study them. No
doubt, Wallace got many things wrong about the physical
theory of his invention. But, he did discover something
very important. It does work.
Regards,
Robert Stirniman (robert@wwa.com)
Subject: Re: More Re Wallace AntiGrav Patents
Followup-To: sci.physics,alt.sci.physics.new-theories,sci.physics.research
Date: 13 Nov 1995 04:49:05 GMT
Organization: WorldWide Access - Chicago Area Internet Services
The Wallace Patents and Politics of Science
Henry Wallace was an engineer at General Electric about 25 years
ago, and developed some incredible inventions relating to the
underlying physics of the gravitational field. Few people
have heard of him or his work.
US Patent #3626605 -- "Method and Apparatus for Generating
a Secondary Gravitational Force Field"
Awarded to Henry Wm Wallace of Ardmore PA Dec 14, 1971
US Patent #3626606 -- "Method and Apparatus for Generating a
Dynamic Force Field"
Awarded to Henry Wm Wallace of Ardmore PA Dec 14, 1971
US Patent #3823570 -- "Heat Pump" (based on technology
similar to the above two inventions)
Awarded to Henry Wm Wallace of Freeport NY July 16, 1973
Wallace discovered that a force field, similar or related to
the gravitational field, results from the interaction of relatively
moving masses. He built machines which demonstrated that this
field could be generated by spinning masses of elemental material
having an odd number of nucleotides -- i.e. a nucleus having a
multiple half-integral value of h-bar, the quantum of angular
momentum. Wallace used bismuth or copper material for his
rotating bodies and "kinnemassic" field concentrators.
Aside from the immense benefits to humanity which could result
from a better understanding of the physical nature of gravity,
and other fundamental forces, Wallace's inventions could have
enormous practical value in countering gravity or converting
gravitational force fields into energy for doing useful work.
So, why has no one heard of him? One might think that the
discoverer of important knowledge such as this would be
heralded as a great scientist and nominated for dynamite
prizes. Could it be that his invention does not work?
Anyone can get the patents. Study them -- Wallace -- General
Electric -- detailed descriptions of operations -- measurements
of effects -- drawings and models -- it is authentic. If
you're handy you can even build it yourself. It does work.
So what is going on?
One explanation I've heard is that Wallace ran up against
the politics of science, as dictated in the late 1960's by
the power-block at Princeton, who were primarily interested in
promoting the ideas of their main man, Einstein, and the
gravitation-is-geometry paradigm. Maybe there is some truth
to this story. Nowadays, there seems to be a piss-pot full
of theoretical physicists working on abstract geometrical
theories and other absurdly difficult mental masturbations,
while no one seems to have made any effort to provide a
theoretical explanation of the physics of a nuts-and-bolts
invention which could have enormous practical value.
Maybe we can blame it on the Princeton folks, but I'm more
inclined to believe that our defense industry black project
community has confiscated and suppressed knowledge of Wallace's
discoveries. All done of course under the most honorable and
sacred banner of national security. Well, it's been 25 years.
We ought to be real secure by now. Isn't it way past time for
some trickle down benefits to real people?
Wallace's inventions offer the potential of improving the
quality of life for everyone. Throughout history, political
suppression and hoarding of scientific knowledge has
inevitably resulted in a retardation of human advancement.
It continues today. When will we ever learn?
Regards,
Robert Stirniman (robert@wwa.com)
Followup-To: sci.physics,alt.sci.physics.new-theories,sci.physics.research
Date: 13 Nov 1995 04:50:36 GMT
Organization: WorldWide Access - Chicago Area Internet Services
Intrinsic and Extrinsic Angular Momentum and Suppressed Science
There is an important relationship between intrinsic and
extrinsic angular momemtum, microscopic and macroscopic
angular momentum, and quantum and classical level angular
momentum.
A body which is spinning within a larger macroscopic body
which is also spinning will tend to align the axis of its
angular momentum with the spin axis of the larger body.
For example, a gyroscope located on the earth, unless it is
in a frictionless gimbal, with always try to precess due to
the rotation of the earth into alignment with the earth's polar
axis, at which point it will no longer precess due to earth
rotation.
Another example. A cylinder of magnetic material spinning
around its longitudinal axis will develop a magnetic field
proportional to is angular velocity (Barnett Effect), because
the angular momemtum of the electrons in the material will
attempt to precess and come into alignment with the macroscopic
axis of the spinning cylinder, which also brings into alignment
the magnetic moment of the electrons, some of which have unpaired
spins (ferromagnetic), resulting in generation of a macroscopic
magnetic field. Similarly, it is know that a static magnetic field
itself contains angular momentum -- and spinning the source of the
static field, whether a magnet or DC current loop, will result
in a corresponding increase or decrease in the field strength.
Another example is the inventions of Henry Wallace, which were
discovered and patented about 25 years ago, when he worked at
General Electric. Wallace found that an unusual thing happens when
you spin elemental material which has an odd number of nucleotides,
i.e. having an "un-paired" value of angular momentum in the nucleus,
resulting in a multiple integer of a one-half value of the quantum
of angular momentum (h-bar). The spin of the nucleus will begin to
line up with the macroscopic spin axis, and will create a force
field related to gravity -- which Wallace called the "kinemassic" field.
Maybe I've missed it, but I've looked seriously, and there seems
to be no information in undergraduate or graduate level physics
reference books which mentions the relationship between
macroscopic and microscopic angular momentum -- much less
provides any analysis or explanation linking quantum angular
momentum to macroscopic angular momentum. Why not?
How does quantum angular momentum become organized from a
microscopic to a macroscopic level? Has anyone ever published
any work about this? I can't find any.
Robert Stirniman
=============================================================
Here's an interesting reply I received to the above questions.
Date: Sun, 5 Nov 1995
From: James Youlton <youjaes@annex.com>
To: Robert Stirniman <robert@wwa.com>
Re: Angular Momentum and the Barnett Effect
On Wed, 1 Nov 1995, Robert Stirniman wrote:
> Maybe I've missed it, but I've looked seriously, and there seems
> to be no information in undergraduate or graduate level physics
> reference books which mentions the relationship between
> macroscopic and microscopic angular momentum -- much less
> provides any analysis or explanation linking quantum angular
> momentum to macroscopic angular momentum.
You're catching on. The subject of compound angular momentum, or
internal and external angular momentum, or intrinsic and extrinsic
angular momentum has been a repressed subject for about 2 and half
decades. Add to that list, spherical pendulums, Coriolis effect, except
as applied to balistics and meteorology as used by the US military,
and Shafer's pendulum, that neat little device used as the artifical
horizon of aircraft.
> How does quantum angular momentum become organized from a
> microscopic to a macroscopic level? Has anyone ever published
> any work about this? I can't find any.
There isn't any that I know of, though back in the late fifties, there
was a fellow named Edward Condon at the University of Colorado who was
fairly proficient on the subject. So much so that he wrote the rotational
dynamics section, called noninertial dynamics at the time, of the
reference "The Handbook of Physics" which he also co-edited (Chapter 5).
I don't recall offhand who the publisher was (Harcourt/Brace?), though
it was endorsed by the American Institute of Physics.
Later, when Mr Condon was the head of the USAF project 'Blue Book', he
labored to suppress his own work when the directive was handed down from
the Navy's Turtle Island project.
James Youlton
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Note:
Edward Condon was not involved with project Blue Book, but was
involved in a different study of UFOs for the USAF which
resulted in termination of the Blue Book project. Condon's
first known involvement with study of UFOs was in 1943, when
he was engaged by the military to assess the FooFighter phenomena.
After the nationwide wave of UFO sightings in 1966, Condon
was appointed head of a new committee to "study" the problem,
The Committee for Scientific Study of Unidentified Flying
Objects. He proceeded immediately to ridicule and debunk
the idea of UFOs, even before the committee began it's
"investigation". There are many files of information now
circulating which document Edward Condon's sad turn from
scientific pursuit of truth to the dark side of politics.
But, that's another story.
Here's an excerpt about the Condon committee which comes
from the research report about UFOs prepared by Major
Brummet and Captain Zuick in May 1974 for the USAF Air
Command and Staff College.
By September 1947, the United States Air Force (USAF)
had become sufficiently interested in the growing number
of UFO reports by reputable, respected citizens to estab-
lish "Project Sign", later named "Project Grudge", and
finally renamed "Project Blue Book", the Air Force program
for investigation of UFOs. Project Blue Book remained
in effect for over twenty-two years and investigated re-
ports of 12,618 sightings. Unexplained sightings ranged
between the official Project Blue Book report of 6 per
cent to UFOlogist estimates of 54 per cent. Despite the
wide variance in unexplained sightings, Secretary of the
Air Force, Dr. Robert Seamans, announced the termination
of Project Blue Book on December 17, 1969. The decision
to discontinue UFO investigations was based on an eval-
uation of a report prepared by the University of Colorado
entitled, "Scientific Study of Unidentified Flying Ob-
jects," more commonly referred to as the "Condon Report";
a review of the Condon Report by the National Academy of
Sciences; past UFO studies; and two decades of Air Force
experience investigating UFO reports. (6:141)"
....
Project Blue Book was terminated on December 17, 1969,
by Secretary of the Air Force, Robert C. Seamans, Jr.
The decision to discontinue UFO investigations was based
on a report prepared by the University of Colorado
(Condon Report), a review of that report by the National
Academy of Sciences, past UFO studies, and Air Force
experience in investigating UFO reports.(21:297) Sec-
retary Robert Seamans Jr., stated that the program "no
longer can be justified either on the ground of national
security or in the interest of science.(15:76) Many
experts disagree with the conclusion of the 1500 page,
$539,000 independent Condon Study that took over two
years to complete. The Condon Study concluded that :
Nothing has come from the study of UFOs in
the past 21 years that has added to scientific
knowledge. Careful consideration of the record
as it is available to us leads us to conclude
that further extensive study of UFOs probably
cannot be justified in the expectation that sci-
ence will be advanced thereby.(1:2)
One of the major critics of the Condon Study was
an amateur UFO organization, The National Investigators
Committee for Aerial Phenomena (NICAP). As indicated
by the Condon Report , NICAP in the past has spent much
effort in attacking Air Force UFO policies and attempting
to influence Congress. NICAP warned members of the
Colorado Project to beware less the Condon Project turn
out to have been "hired to whitewash the Air Force."
(End of excerpt from USAF research report)
=================================================================
Well there you have it. Has the military really been
suppressing new science knowledge for almost 50 years now,
or is it just another one of those wild and crazy conspiracy
rumors?
Regards,
Robert Stirniman (robert@wwa.com)
Subject: Re: More Re Wallace AntiGrav Patents
Followup-To: alt.alien.visitors,sci.physics,alt.sci.physics.new-theories,sci.physics.research,alt.paranet.ufo
Date: 13 Nov 1995 04:51:02 GMT
Organization: WorldWide Access - Chicago Area Internet Services
Andrew Parle (parlea@stanilite.com.au) writes regarding
the Wallace inventions:
>However, if that is not the case, then perhaps you should consider
>the possibility that it does not work. This would then be sufficient
>explanation for no-one ever hearing of Wallace or his inventions.
Yes, what you say would seem to be a most rational explanation,
maybe even the most rational explanation. That is -- the reason
no one has ever heard of Wallace, is simply because his inventions
don't work. And surely an invention like this discovered by a
scientist at a renowned company such as General Electric, which
was awarded two patents, and has enormous possible practical
value and unestimable consequences in physical theory and experiment
(we are talking about gravity control) -- would have been tested and
evaluated by at least one or more independent research organizations.
Guess what -- either it was never tested, or it was tested
and the results were classified. There is NO published
information about evaluation of the performance or non-
performance of Wallace's invention. So what looks more
rational -- was it never even tested, or did we just never
get to see the results. And why have we never seen the results?
What is more likely -- because it didn't work, or because
it did?
>So unless you can produce a working model, I guess the obvious
>answer is: just another inventor who thought he had made a
>discovery but in fact had made a mistake.
Wallace has already produced a working device, and you refuse to
even look at. Why would I expect that you would bother to look at
one that I might produce? If we were able to look at any kind of
test results for Wallace's device. That would be helpful. But
the thing is -- there aren't any tests to look at, at least not
in the public domain. Most peculiar.
Anyhow, if you prefer to entirely discard the idea that the invention
might actually work, with no serious consideration whatsoever to
the possibility that it's been suppressed. OK by me. It's refreshing
to see someone these days with so much faith in our defense and
national security agencies. And hey, don't worry about them UFOs
either. You know, that's all a bunch of nonsense too, right?
For anyone interested in new-physics and gravity control, I suggest
you start by studying the patents. Wallace's invention does work.
Regards,
Robert Stirniman (robert@wwa.com)
Subject: Re: More Re Wallace AntiGrav Patents
Followup-To: alt.alien.visitors,sci.physics,alt.sci.physics.new-theories,sci.physics.research,alt.paranet.ufo
Date: 13 Nov 1995 04:51:23 GMT
Organization: WorldWide Access - Chicago Area Internet Services
Where to Get Copies of Wallace Patents
Patents awarded to Henry Wm Wallace for "anti-gravity" technology:
US Patent #3626605 -- "Method and Apparauts for Generating
a Secondary Gravitational Force Field"
Awarded to Henry Wm Wallace of Ardmore PA Dec 14, 1971
US Patent #3626606 -- "Method and Apparatus for Generating a
Dynamic Force Field"
Awarded to Henry Wm Wallace of Ardmore PA Dec 14, 1971
US Patent #3823570 -- "Heat Pump" (based on technology
similar to the above two inventions)
Awarded to Henry Wm Wallace of Freeport NY July 16, 1973
The original full text description and all drawings from every
US patent ever issued, is available on microfiche at patent
depository libraries throughout the country. It cost about
10 cents per page to make paper copies. You have to go there.
If you don't take the kids, you might enjoy it.
Regards,
Robert Stirniman (robert@wwa.com)
=================================================================
PATENT AND TRADEMARK DEPOSITORY LIBRARIES
______________________________________________________________
Patent and Trademark Depository Library Program
United States Patent and Trademark Office
Crystal Plaza 3, Room 2C04
Washington, D.C. 20231
Phone: 703-308-3924.
_________________________________________________________________
Reference Collection of U.S. Patents Available for Public Use in Patent
Depository Libraries
The following libraries, designated as Patent and Trademark Depository
Libraries (PTDLs) receive current issues of U.S. Patents and maintain
collections of earlier-issued patents as well as trademarks published
for opposition. The scope of these collections varies from library to
library, ranging from patents of only recent years to all or most of
the patents issued since 1790 and trademarks published since 1872.
These patent and trademark collections, which are organized in number
sequence, are available for use by the public free of charge. Each of
the PTDLs, in addition, offers supplemental reference publications of
the U.S. Patent Classification System, including the Manual of
Classification, Index to the U.S. Patent Classification and
Classification Definitions, and provides technical staff assistance
in using such publications in gaining effective access to information
contained in patents and trademarks. CASSIS (Classification and Search
Support Information System) and other CD-ROM products for searching
patent and trademark information are available at all PTDLs.
Facilities for making paper copies of patents and trademarks from
either microfilm or paper collections are generally provided for a
fee.
Since there are variations in the scope of patent collections among
the PTDLs and in their hours of service to the public, anyone
contemplating use of the patents at a particular library is urged to
contact that library, in advance, about its collection and hours in
order to avert possible inconvenience.
State Name of Library Telephone
Alabama Auburn: Auburn University
Libraries (205) 844-1747
Birmingham: Birmingham Public
Library (205) 226-3680
Alaska Anchorage: Z.J. Loussac Public
Library (907) 562-7323
Arizona Tempe: Noble Library, Arizona
State University (602) 965-7010
Arkansas Little Rock: Arkansas State
Library (501) 682-2053
California Los Angeles: Los Angeles Public
Library (213) 612-3273
Sacramento: California State
Library (916) 654-0069
San Diego: San Diego Public
Library (619) 236-5813
Sunnyvale: Patent Information
Clearinghouse (408) 730-7290
San Francisco
San Francisco
Public Library (415) 557-4488
Colorado Denver: Denver Public Library (303) 640-8847
Connecticut New Haven: Science Park Library (203) 786-5447
Delaware Newark: University of Delaware
Library (302) 831-2965
District of Washington: Howard University
Columbia Libraries (202) 806-7252
Florida Fort Lauderdale: Broward County
Main Library (305) 357-7444
Miami-Dade: Miami-Dade Public
Library (305) 375-2665
Orlando: University of Central
Florida Libraries (407) 823-2562
Tampa: Tampa Campus Library,
University of South Florida (813) 974-2726
Georgia Atlanta: Price Gilbert Memorial
Library, Georgia Institute of
Technology (404) 894-4508
Hawaii Honolulu: Hawaii State Public
Library System (808) 586-3477
Idaho Moscow:University of Idaho
Library (208) 885-6235
Illinois Chicago: Harold Washington
Library (312) 747-4450
Springfield: Illinois State
Library (217) 782-5659
Indiana Indianapolis: Indianapolis-Marion
County Public Library (317) 269-1741
West Lafayette: Purdue University
Libraries (317) 494-2873
Iowa Des Moines: State Library of Iowa(515) 281-4118
Kansas Wichita: Ablah Library, Wichita
State University (316) 689-3155
Kentucky Louisville: Louisville Free Public
Library (502) 561-8617
Louisiana Baton Rouge: Troy H. Middleton
Library, Louisiana State
University (504) 388-2570
Maine Orono
Orono: Raymond H. Fogler Library,
University of Maine (207) 581-1678
Maryland College Park: Engineering and
Physical Sciences Library, (301) 405-9147
University of Maryland
Massachusetts Amherst: Physical Sciences
Library, University of (413) 545-1370
Massachusetts
Boston: Boston Public
Library (617) 536-5400 X 265
Michigan Ann Arbor: Engineering Transpor-
tation Library, University
of Michigan (313) 764-7494
Big Rapids: Abigail S. Timme
Library, Ferris State Library (616) 592-3602
Detroit: Detroit Public Library (313) 833-1450
Minnesota Minneapolis: Minneapolis Public
Library and Information Center(612) 372-6570
Mississippi Jackson: Mississippi Library
Commission Not Yet Operational
Missouri Kansas City: Linda Hall Library (816) 363-4600
St. Louis: St. Louis Public
Library (314) 241-2288 X 390
Montana Butte: Montana College of Mineral
Science and Technology Library (406) 496-4281
Nebraska Lincoln: Engineering Library,
University of Nebraska-Lincoln (402) 472-3411
Nevada Reno: University of Nevada-Reno
Library (702) 784-6579
New Hampshire Durham: University of New
Hampshire Library (603) 862-1777
New Jersey Newark: Newark Public Library (201) 733-7782
Piscataway: Library of Science
and Medicine, Rutgers University (201) 932-2895
New Mexico Albuquerque: University of New
Mexico General Library (505) 277-4412
New York Albany: New York State Library (518) 473-4636
Buffalo: Buffalo and Erie County
Public Library (716) 858-7101
New York: New York Public Library
(The Research Libraries) (212) 714-8529
North Carolina Raleigh: D. H. Hill Library, North
Carolina State University (919) 515-3280
North Dakota Grand Forks: Chester Fritz Library,
University of North Dakota (701) 777-4888
Ohio Cincinnati: Cincinnati and Hamilton County,
Public Library of (513) 369-6936
Cleveland: Cleveland Public
Library (216) 623-2870
Columbus: Ohio State University
Libraries (614) 292-6175
Toledo: Toledo/Lucas County Public
Library (419) 259-5212
Oklahoma Stillwater: Oklahoma State
University Library (405) 744-7086
Oregon Salem: Oregon State Library (503) 378-4239
Pennsylvania Philadelphia: The Free Library of (215) 686-5331
Pittsburgh: Carnegie Library of
Pittsburgh (412) 622-3138
University Park: Pattee Library,
Pennsylvania State University (814) 865-4861
Puerto Rico Puerto Rico Mayaguez: General Library
University of Puerto Rico Not Yet Operational
Rhode Island Providence: Providence Public
Library (401) 455-8027
South Carolina Clemson: Clemson University
Libraries Not yet operational
South Dakota Rapid City : Devereaux Library,
South Dakota School of Mines and
Technology (605) 394-6822
Tennessee Memphis: Memphis and Shelby County
Public Library and Information
Center (901) 725-8877
Nashville: Stevenson Science
Library, Vanderbilt University (615) 322-2775
Texas Austin: McKinney Engineering Library,
University of Texas at Austin (512) 495-4500
College Station: Sterling C. Evans
Library, Texas A&M University (409) 845-2551
Dallas: Dallas Public
Library (214) 670-1468
Houston: The Fondren Library,
Rice University (713) 527-8101 X 2587
Utah Salt Lake City: Marriott Library,
University of Utah (801) 581-8394
Virginia Richmond: James Branch Cabell
Library, Virginia Commonwealth
University Library (804) 367-1104
Washington Seattle: Engineering Library,
University of Washington (206) 543-0740
West Virginia Morgantown: Evansdale Library,
West Virginia University (304) 293-4510
Wisconsin Madison: Kurt F. Wendt Engineering
Library, University of
Wisconsin-Madison (608) 262-6845
Milwaukee: Milwaukee Public
Library (414) 278-3247
Wyoming Wyoming
Casper: Natrona County
Public Library (307) 237-4935
The entire AOH site is optimized to look best in Firefox® 3 on a widescreen monitor (1440x900 or better).
Site design & layout copyright © 1986- AOH
We do not send spam. If you have received spam bearing an artofhacking.com email address, please forward it with full headers to abuse@artofhacking.com.