ENERGY

If we are going to develop New Energy we should at least know what energy is, as at the present time we seem to be walking around in a fog.

Everything we call energy corresponds to a factor of resistance applied against the accelerative energy of field, which means that we are doing work by the most difficult means possible.

We seem to have this idea that if we shove, push or pull something we are applying energy to the situation, but we are not doing anything of the kind, as all forms of work involve a factor of resistance acting against the field in which the work is being done, whereby no energy is applied in our effort to perform work.

So, what difference does it make what you call it as long as the work gets done?  It really doesn’t matter at all if you are satisfied with the existing situation, but if you want to find a simple method to access the free energy of Universe you should at least know what energy is.

To understand this situation we can use the example of a waterwheel, in relation to the flow of a stream providing the power required to turn the waterwheel.

Most of us would say that the water provided the necessary energy required, as the water, affected by gravity, pushes against the paddles of the wheel, whereby causing the wheel to turn.

But, the flow of the water applies no energy to the paddles, nor do the paddles convey energy to the wheel.

If we consider the flow of the water to be the result of gravity, we must also understand that the water itself is resistant to gravity, in that gravity is a condition of field.  And in this respect it is the continuous acceleration of the underlying field symmetrically focused to the center of field which causes the water to flow downstream.

Therefore there is a dynamic relationship existing between the water and the field, where the energy of field is acceleratively increasing relative to the dynamic energy potential of the water.
In this relationship the water is obliged to follow the path of least resistance, which is downstream, whereby every obstruction to the flow of the water applies resistance to the flow.

Therefore the water is resistant to the paddles of the wheel while the paddles are resistant to the flow of the water, which effectively slows the rate of flow.

This slowing of the water relative to the field in which the water is flowing causes an increase in the underlying energy potential of the water molecules.

But at the same time the resistance of the water against the paddles causes a decrease in the underlying energy of the paddles relative to an increase in the underlying energy of the water, as the flow of the water causes the paddles to move in the direction of the flow.

The water adds no energy to the wheel or to the paddles, but in fact causes the paddles and the wheel to suffer a loss of energy, which causes the wheel to turn.

The most amazing thing about this situation is that a turning wheel has less energy than one which remains relatively stationary.  So a turning wheel is subject to a loss of energy and an increase in resistance to a further increase in energy, which explains why machinery wears out.

What is equally amazing is the fact that should the water molecules possess sufficient energy the water would not flow at all, whereby there would be insufficient resistance to turn the wheel.

So, it would appear that we have things somewhat confused and slightly back to front in relation of our existing perception of energy.

To take this one step further we can consider the use of a water driven turbine to produce electrical power, where the turning of the turbine adds no energy to the grid but in fact affects a net loss of energy and a proportional increase in resistance.

How this new perception of energy might be of assistance, is in helping us to realize the true nature and importance of an underlying force of energy, which we have yet to employ for the purpose of our industry.

Whether we use coal, wood or gas we are still faced with the same situation, as none of these resource based products supply us with any energy, as their continued usage results in a net loss of energy affecting our environment.

The same is true in relation to the use of uranium to power a nuclear reactor, as the process adds no energy.  In fact we have yet to develop a method by which to employ energy for the purpose of our industry.

So where do we start?

We can begin by realizing that a stationary wheel has a higher energy potential than one which is turning, which gives us some clue as to the nature of an energy producing process.

So the quest for new energy is not simply a matter of building a better mouse trap, but involves the reinvention of the wheel.

I hope that some of you might have a little light turning on inside your head, as we are talking about a very significant jump from push and grind to high tech dynamics.   And that is quite a jump.

A truly non-linear drive system capable of affecting an increase in the underlying energy potential of the system itself is not going to involve the turning of wheels, but will involve the focusing of wheels relative to a central axis.

I have watched with interest as the foil lifters, subject to 50,000 volts, are forced to defy gravity, in respect to the idea that these experimental projects might lead to a system allowing for the control of gravity.

It would appear that the inventors have not sufficiently considered the dynamics involved in the process of gravity control; otherwise they would have already realized that the often repeated demonstrations do not involve a process by which to actually control gravity.

Gravity control involves the controlled modulation of the underlying dynamics of the system itself, where the system represents a relative unified field system existing relative to the field in which it exists.   And as such the system itself, in relation to the underlying dynamics of the system’s unified field, exists as a relative system of reference.

Therefore, the modulation of a gravity control system must occur within the context of the internal dynamics of the system itself, whereby affecting the inverse responses corresponding to the external dynamics.

Attempting to affect the internal dynamics from outside or from the external portion of field can only affect a temporary response, as it is only due to the external application of an electrical charge that the internal dynamics respond at all.  Once the source of power is disconnected the field reverts to its original dynamic state, which terminates the demonstration.

The externally applied charge is of a resistant nature, which temporarily affects an internal increase in energy relative to the field in which the lifter is situated, which is somewhat similar to looking through a magnifying glass at an ant.

The glass lens modulates the field existing relative to the lens without altering the condition of the field itself, whereby the ant appears both larger and closer to the point of observation.  But once the lens is removed the ant appears smaller and further removed from the point of observation.

This means that you can look at ants through a lens as often as you want and the results are going to be pretty much the same every time, as the focus of the lens is set relative to the field in which it is being employed.  So in order to modulate the field existing relative to the angle of the lens, in a controlled manner, requires you to be able to control the focus of the lens.

In relation to a single lens and or a lifter you do not have the ability to modulate the condition of field remaining relative to the lifter in a controlled manner.  Therefore, you must realize that, regardless of how many times you demonstrate the amazing lifter, the results are going to remain very predictable and somewhat repetitious.

In terms of gravity control, it is extremely doubtful that remote control is possible, as the system itself which provides for gravity control exists in a non-uniform relationship relative to the field in which it is being observed.  In other words the condition of space, time and motion remaining relative to the gravity control system is different than the space, time and motion remaining relative to the observer on the ground or in the air.

The same is true for any apparatus which demonstrates an antigravity affect, as without a system of control you have not achieved gravity control.

In other words, simply applying an electrical charge or an electrostatic charge to a devise does not demonstrate gravity control nor represent the necessary proof of principle.

This is not to suggest that such experiments are without merit or importance, in attempting to understand the principles involved, because they most certainly are important.  But we still have a long way to go and the need for research and development is critical to any further progress.

In fact the existing need for research and development is paramount to success, as without it, this is as far as it goes.

However, in terms of energy and resistance, it is of great importance that we not only realize that gravity control cannot be achieved by the induction of an electrical charge, but that gravity control will itself affect an electrical charge.

Therefore an electrical charge is achieved through a differential in the dynamic potential of the modulating system relative to the field in which it exists.

In other words, gravity control provides for more than just an efficient means of transport, as this same process is capable of providing the electrical power required for all our human industry.

To learn more read some of the early posts on this blog, or check out the Gravity Control Blog located at www.gravitycontrol.org or go to the gravity control forum.  You will also find references and links to other interesting web sites at www.gravitycontrol.org