RUSSIAN Alexey Chekurkov MAGNET HIGH VOLTAGE ANTIGRAVITY spinner

[activ25]

The mass doesn't exist, it is an electromagnetic attraction followed by a repulsion, the sum is not 0, the frequency is high. Matter acts like a rotor (only the rotor). Difficult to build a device because you need something that can create a wave, but the matter creates the wave and the wave is always under external influences, others rotors, so the matter is always in phase with the external signals. The best could be to build the wave without the matter or force the matter to be in phase like we want.

[Acca]

 Zoltan has published this in 2003 on electro-statics and now it's in a pdf document.. Alexi has all four components in his lifter and electrostatics is just one aspect here to make this lifter work..

Acca..
Inconsistencies in EM Theory - the Kelvin Polarization Force Density Contradiction

by Zoltan Losonc_


v. 1.2 (29.10.2018)


Abstract



Calculations of resultant electrostatic force on a charged spherical or cylindrical capacitor with two sectors
of different dielectrics, based on the classical formulas of electrostatic pressure, Kelvin polarization force
density, and Maxwell stress tensor predict a reactionless force that violates Newton's 3rd law. Measurements
didn't confirm the existence of such a reactionless thrust, thus there is an apparent inconsistency in the
classical EM theory that leads to wrong results.[/font]
https://feprinciples.files.wordpress.com/2018/10/dielectrophoretic_force_anomaly_1-thruster_v1-2.pdf

 
The practical concept of reaction-less force and Newton's 3^rd law
Before starting the description we should clarify briefly the issue, what does the violation of Newton's 3^rd law mean, and define the concept of reaction-less force. According to our everyday experiences, forces are exerted upon a body either by physical matter through direct mechanical contact, or by force fields that are originating also from physical matter. Thus the force-field acts as a mediator medium between the two bodies made of physical matter and it develops an action and reaction in distance, but the forces seem to be the same as if the bodies would act upon each other through direct mechanical contact.
Newton's 3^rd law declares that if a physical body acts upon a second physical body with force a F then the second body will also act upon the first body with a force of same magnitude but opposite direction –F. That means, if there is an active force tending to accelerate a body then there must also exist another reaction force of same magnitude and opposite direction acting on a second body, and there cannot exist an active force without a reaction force.
If there would be such force then we could call it a reaction-less force, since it does not require any reaction force, or the presence of a second body (to react) in order to be active and accelerate a physical body. According to this interpretation if we measure a unidirectional electrostatic force (developed by the E-field) upon a thruster, we can call it reaction-less since it does not develop any reaction force upon physical matter and it does not require the existence of a second physical body in order to be active and be able to accelerate the thruster. This active force is originating from the electric force field and thus we might expect that consequently the reaction force should be transferred to the physical matter that creates this field (to electric charges, and from them to the atoms of a body); the law of action-reaction between physical bodies should still remain valid. However, in the case of E-field thrusters the sources of the accelerating E-field are the same charges that are present on the surface of the electrodes and the reaction force would act on these charges counteracting the active accelerating force. Thus no resultant thrust would exist on a thruster without the presence of external force fields and physical bodies. If we still prove that a resultant unidirectional thrust can exist upon a thruster that does not originates from external medium then it is justified to call it reaction-less since from a physical and practical point of view the reaction force does not manifest in the perceived rough physical dimension.
The force fields are special manifestations, energetic states of the background ether, and they are part of the 'ether sea' in which all matter flows. Thus they can lean upon this subtle fluid substance that represents a reaction background to interact with physical matter. Now we could say that we have found the reaction background and the law of action-reaction is still valid, since the force-field (i.e. the ether) bears the reaction force that should have the same magnitude as the action force upon the thruster. However, the substance of the reaction background (the ether) belongs to a more subtle dimension, and it is not a rough physical matter that would have the same characteristics as the well known physical matter. Therefore from practical point of view we can still call the discussed thrust 'reaction-less' within the rough physical dimension (or frame of reference) to differentiate it from the usual forces that always invoke a reaction force upon physical bodies.
 
http://energythic.com/view.php?node=208

[catgrep]

Hi Any updates on this?

[justawatt]

https://youtu.be/8-Whrxqq40k

Please follow his channel for Alexey ufo update
https://youtu.be/WyDsLVVLKVc

Below is the circuit diagram for gravitometer which comes the author itself

[onepower]

I think this is fake for several obvious reasons...

1)they always use a camera angle which obscures what's happening.
It looks like a branch is being moved over the device in one video but if you watch the branch tip it doesn't actually move over it.
If they really wanted to prove there was no fishing line attached from above then why not move to the side and move the branch
or there hand completely over the device proving there is no line?. So it's more about what they didn't do than what they did.

2)The craft moves exactly as if clear fishing line was attached from above. It bounces up and down in the wind and has no left
to right movement as if it was hung from above. They could have easily moved the wires below off center or left to right proving
it was not hung from above but they didn't. As well in the video off to the left we can see what looks like a 3" pole, not a tree but
a pole in the video, lol. The craft not being able to be moved off center all but proves it's a fake in my opinion. Hell they could
have walked around like a child with a balloon but they couldn't and the device never moves off center. 

3)They claim it is high voltage including the standoffs on the sides as shown in the diagrams. In the video they touch these
standoffs and move the craft a little with there bare hands. If it was actually high voltage they would have gotten a jolt so
again it's clearly another amateur hour Russian fake.

4)Look at the person supposedly demonstrating his scientific discovery to the world. He looks like he was just rummaging
through a dumpster and has the presentation skills of a 3 year old. Would you present a real technology like this?, lol.
It's obviously another Russian scam in my opinion.

Regards
AC