valbonesi enrico antigravity simulation 




                Sincerely, dott.Enrico Valbonesi 




come costruire un dispositivo antigravita'  (bulding antigravity engime measuremnet)





come costruire un dispositivo antigravita' 2  (bulding antigravity engime measuremnet2)





come costruire un dispositivo antigravita'3  (bulding antigravity engime measuremnet)





come costruire un dispositivo antigravita'4  (bulding antigravity engime measuremnet)





come costruire un dispositivo antigravita'5  (bulding antigravity engime measuremnet)





come costruire un dispositivo antigravita'6  (bulding antigravity engime measuremnet)





come costruire un dispositivo antigravita'7  (bulding antigravity engime measuremnet)





come costruire un dispositivo antigravita'8  (bulding antigravity engime measuremnet)





come costruire un dispositivo antigravita'9 (bulding antigravity engime measuremnet)





novita 1 gennaio 2002  (news1)





novita 1 maggio  2002 (news2)
Gravity and Antigravity David Pratt February 2001 Gravity and Antigravity David Pratt February 2001 Contents Part 1 The mass error (revised May 2001) Electrogravity Empty space vs. the ether Gravity anomalies References Part 2 Levitation technology (revised August 2001) Human levitation Theosophical writings References The mass error It is said to have been the sight of an apple falling from a tree that, around 1665, gave Isaac Newton the idea that the force that pulls an apple to earth is the same as that which keeps the moon in its orbit around the earth. The reason the moon does not fall to earth is because of the counteracting effect of its orbital motion. If the moon were to cease its orbital motion and fall to earth, the acceleration due to gravity that it would experience at the earth's surface would be 9.8 m/s² -- the same as that experienced by an apple or any other object in free fall. Newton's universal law of gravitation states that the gravitational force between two bodies is proportional to the product of their masses and inversely proportional to the square of the distance between them. To calculate the gravitational force (F), their masses (m1 and m2) and the gravitational constant (G) are multiplied together, and the result is divided by the square of the distance (r) between them: F = Gm1m2/r². The newtonian theory is accepted by most scientists today without question. However, it involves a contradiction. On the one hand it states that the gravitational force between two or more bodies is dependent on their masses, and on the other it admits that the gravitational acceleration of an attracted body is not dependent on its mass: if dropped simultaneously from a tower, and if air resistance is ignored, a tennis ball and a cannonball will hit the ground simultaneously. Furthermore, although gravitational force and gravitational acceleration are the same phenomenon, and force is proportional to acceleration, no symbol for the earth's surface gravity (g) or a term for acceleration appears in the gravitational equation. In the conventional approach, the above contradiction is overcome by invoking Newton's second law of motion, which states that the force applied to a body equals the mass of the body multiplied by its acceleration (F = ma); this implies that gravity pulls harder on larger masses. However, as several physicists, mathematicians, and philosophers have pointed out, this law is not based on experiment; it is an arbitrary definition -- a convention. Experiments cited in its support involve the identification of weight and force; they prove only that the weight of a body is equal to its mass times the acceleration (W = ma), and do not measure or define force per se [1]. Newton himself certainly believed that the gravitational force was due to and proportional to the quantity or density of matter. But it is a historical fact that to deduce from the earth-moon system that gravity obeys an inverse-square law (i.e. that its strength diminishes by the square of the distance from the attracting body), he did not need, nor did he estimate, the masses of the earth and moon. He needed to know only the acceleration due to gravity at the earth's surface, the radius of the earth, the orbital speed of the moon, and the distance between earth and moon. As Pari Spolter points out, 'there is no basis for inclusion of the term "product of the two masses (m1m2)", or for that matter, for inclusion of any term for mass in the equation of the gravitational force' [2]. Combining Newton's two equations for force, i.e. the equation for gravitational force and the second law of motion, gives: F = ma = Gm1m2/r². It can then be deduced that, for the equation to balance, the gravitational constant (G) must have the dimensions m³/kg.s² (volume divided by mass multiplied by time squared). Clearly G is a rather weird constant! The value of the gravitational constant was first measured directly by the Cavendish torsion balance experiment in 1798. However, a Cavendish-type experiment is not a proof of Newton's equation: on the contrary, such experiments assume that the equation is correct. In Spolter's view, it has not yet been ruled out that the very small angle of deflection of the torsion balance used in these experiments (or the very small change in its period of oscillation) is due to electrostatic attraction of the metallic spheres used; in one experiment in which the small mass of platinum was coated with a thin layer of lacquer, consistently lower values of G were obtained [3]. Spolter has written to several mainstream journals proposing further experiments to test this possibility, but her letters have been rejected. On the assumption that gravity is proportional to mass, the value of G can be used to estimate the earth's mass, and also its mean density, which turns out to be 5.5 g/cm³. This value is of course purely theoretical. All we know from actual measurements is that the mean density of the earth's outer crust is 2.75 g/cm³. Scientists have concluded that to obtain an overall figure of 5.5 g/cm³ the density of the inner layers of the earth must increase substantially with depth. Spolter points out that the currently accepted earth model is inconsistent with the law of sedimentation in a centrifuge. The earth has been rotating for several billion years, and if it was originally molten and rotated faster than today, the highest-density matter should have migrated to the outer layers. Also, heavy elements are rare in the universe, so it is hard to see how such large quantities of them could have become concentrated in the earth's interior. The 17th-century astronomer Johannes Kepler discovered the remarkable fact that the ratio of the cube of the mean distance (r) of each planet from the sun to the square of its period of revolution (t) is always the same number (r³/t² = constant). This relationship is known as Kepler's third law of planetary motion. Pari Spolter has made the major discovery that Kepler's third law can be derived from a new, simple equation for gravitational force: F = a.A , where a is the acceleration and A is the area of a circle with a radius (r) equal to the semimajor axis of revolution of the planet, moon, etc. in question (i.e. its average distance from the body it orbits).* Since A = (pi)r², this equation naturally implies that the acceleration due to gravity declines by the square of the distance. And since it includes no term for mass, it implies that neither gravitational force nor gravitational acceleration depends on the mass of the bodies concerned, thereby eliminating the contradiction at the heart of the newtonian theory of gravity. *Spolter argues that force is always independent of mass [4]. It is not force that is equal to mass times acceleration, but weight. Her equation for linear force is F = a.d (acceleration times distance). Her equation for circular force is the one given above: F = a.A. Using this equation, the gravitational force of the sun is found to be 4.16 x 1020 ms-2m2. This quantity is constant for all the planets, asteroids, and artificial satellites orbiting the sun, and is independent of the mass of the attracted body. The gravitational force of the sun calculated from Newton's second law of motion, on the other hand, is not constant, and ranges from 4.16 x 10³² newtons for Jupiter to only 0.31 newton for the satellite Pioneer 5. If we accept Newton's equation, we have to assume that the sun somehow recognizes each body orbiting it and doles out a specific amount of its attractive force for each one. Using Spolter's equation, the gravitational force of the earth is also constant (1.25 x 1015ms-2m2) -- for objects in free fall, for artificial satellites orbiting the earth, and for the moon. Using Newton's equation, however, the gravitational force ranges from 0.2 newton for the satellite ERS 12 to 1.98 x 1020 newtons for the moon. Similar results are obtained for all the planets in our solar system [5]. Newton's theory of gravity (and Einstein's too) ignores the rotation of the central body and the torque generated by the rotation. Spolter suggests that it is the rotation of a star, planet, etc. that generates the gravitational force and causes other bodies to revolve around it. This idea was also advanced by Johannes Kepler, and is supported by a number of other researchers [6]. Spolter shows that the mean distances of each successive planet from the centre of the sun are not random but follow an exponential law, which indicates that gravity is quantized, just as electron orbits in an atom are quantized. For planets orbited by several moons, she shows that here too gravity is quantized. The figures given for the masses and densities of all planets, stars, etc. are purely theoretical; nobody has ever placed one on a balance and weighed it! The masses of celestial bodies are calculated from what is known as Newton's form of Kepler's third law, which arbitrarily assumes that Kepler's constant ratio of r³/t² is equal to the inert mass of the body multiplied by the gravitational constant. However, this equation is dimensionally inconsistent: it implies that mass is equal to volume divided by time squared! The equation can be made to balance if G is assigned the weird dimensions mentioned above: volume divided by mass multiplied by time squared. But a constant such as G is only a proportionality number, and cannot be used to introduce the missing dimensions into an equation. The circular reasoning on which the newtonian theory of gravity is based is nicely summed up in The Devil's Dictionary, which defines gravitation as follows: 'The tendency of all bodies to approach one another with a strength proportioned to the quantity of matter they contain -- the quantity of matter they contain being ascertained by the strength of their tendency to approach one another' [7]. Electrogravity Both gravity and electromagnetism obey the inverse-square law, i.e. their strength declines by the square of the distance. In other respects, however, gravity and electromagnetism seem to be very different. Electric and magnetic forces are bipolar, i.e. they attract and repel, whereas gravity is commonly believed to have only one polarity -- attraction. The presence of matter can modify or shield electric and magnetic forces and electromagnetic radiation, whereas no weakening of gravity has allegedly been measured by placing matter between two bodies, and it is assumed that this is true whatever the thickness of the matter in question. However, some experiments have found evidence of gravitational shielding. In the course of a series of very sensitive experiments over a period of 10 years, Q. Majorana found that placing mercury or lead beneath a suspended lead sphere acts as a screen and slightly decreases the earth's gravitational pull; other experimenters have found similar evidence of gravity absorption [1]. Erwin Saxl and Mildred Allen measured significant variations in the period of a torsion pendulum during a solar eclipse in 1970, implying that solar gravity was being shielded by the moon. Saxl also detected unexpected daily and seasonal variations [2]. Attempts to explain away these results in terms of poor experimental design are unconvincing [3]. Pendulum anomalies incompatible with newtonian gravity have also been detected by other investigators. During solar eclipses in 1954 and 1959, Maurice Allais (who won the Nobel Prize in Economics in 1988) detected anomalous disturbances in the azimuth of a paraconical pendulum (i.e. one suspended on a ball) [4]. In the course of observations conducted since 1987, Shu-wen Zhou and his collaborators have confirmed the occurrence of an anomalous force of horizontal oscillation when the sun, moon, and earth are aligned, and have shown that it affects the pattern of grain sequence in crystals, the spectral wavelengths of atoms and molecules, and the speed rate of atomic clocks [5]. During the total solar eclipse in 1997, a group of scientists detected gravity variations with a high-precision gravimeter [6]. Tom Van Flandern has suggested that anomalies in the motions of certain artificial earth satellites during eclipse seasons may also be caused by shielding of the sun's gravity [7]. The existence of gravity shielding was given further support by experiments conducted by E. Podkletnov and his coworkers at Finland's Tampere University of Technology in 1992. When a disk of superconducting material was magnetically levitated and rotated at high speed, up to several thousand revolutions per minute, in the presence of an external magnetic field, it was found that objects placed above the rotating disk showed a variable but measurable weight loss* of up to 2% [8]. Related research is being funded as part of NASA's Breakthrough Propulsion Physics Program. The effect discovered by Podkletnov is about 10 billion times greater than allowed for in general relativity theory! Nevertheless, it is tiny compared with the gravitational shielding/antigravity effects apparently achieved by some alternative researchers in the fields of free energy and electrogravitics; weight losses of up to 100% have been reported, often involving spinning objects [9]. *The weight of a body is equal to its mass multiplied by acceleration. Strictly speaking, an object with a mass of 1 kg weighs 9.8 newtons on earth. However, weights are commonly given in kilograms, with the gravity acceleration of 9.8 m/s² at the earth's surface being taken for granted. If the force of gravity acting on a body is reduced, its weight and inertia are likewise reduced, while its mass (in the sense of 'quantity of matter') remains the same. The gravitational force between two electrons is 42 orders of magnitude (1042) weaker than their electrical repulsion. The reason the electromagnetic force does not completely overwhelm gravity in the world around us is that most things are composed of an equal amount of positive and negative electric charges whose forces cancel each other out. On the other hand, it is believed that gravity is always attractive and that consequently there are no analogous cancellations. However, although it is usually assumed that electrons are attracted by gravity, this has not been verified experimentally due to the difficulty of the measurement. As we shall see, there is evidence that such an assumption is wrong. As long ago as 1830, O.F. Mossotti hypothesized that gravitational attraction resulted from the very slight excess of the force of attraction between unlike electrical particles over the force of repulsion between like electrical particles [10]. In the 20th century, physicist Max Born stated that once we had a more complete knowledge of the interaction of the forces in the atomic nucleus we might find that gravitation was the result of 'something left over, a sort of incomplete compensation' [11]. And nuclear physicist Lucien Gerardin suggested that gravitational attraction may be due to 'kinetic electromagnetic phenomena within the atomic nuclei', 'a very small residue of interaction between electricized particles' [12]. Mainstream science has not pursued such ideas, and is as far away as ever from understanding gravity. Various experimental results point to a link between electromagnetism and gravity. For instance, Erwin Saxl showed that gravity and electricity interact under dynamic conditions. He found that when a torsion pendulum was positively charged, it took longer to swing through its arc than when it was negatively charged [13]. Bruce DePalma conducted numerous experiments showing that rotation and rotating magnetic fields can have anomalous gravitational and inertial effects [14]. Podkletnov's experiments seem to confirm this. One of the most important early figures in electrogravitics research was physicist and inventor T. Townsend Brown [15]. Beginning in the mid-1920s, he discovered that it is possible to create an artificial gravity field by charging an electrical capacitor to a high voltage. He built a capacitor which utilized a heavy, high charge-accumulating dielectric material between its plates and found that when charged with between 75,000 and 300,000 volts it would move in the direction of its positive pole (this is known as the Biefeld-Brown effect). When oriented with its positive side up, it would lose about 1% of its weight. He attributed this motion to an electrostatically-induced gravity field acting between the capacitor's oppositely charged plates. By 1958, he had succeeded in developing a 15-inch-diameter model saucer that could lift over 110% of its weight. He obtained many patents for his devices. Brown succeeded in arousing the interest of the US Air Force: As early as 1952, an Air Force major general witnessed a demonstration in which Brown flew a pair of 18 inch disc airfoils suspended from opposite ends of a rotatable arm. When electrified with 50,000 volts, they circuited at a speed of 12 miles per hour. About a year later, he flew a set of 3 foot diameter saucers for some Air Force officials and representatives from a number of major aircraft companies. When energized with 150,000 volts, the discs sped around the 50 foot diameter course so fast that the subject was immediately classified. Interavia magazine later reported that the discs would attain speeds of several hundred miles per hour when charged with several hundred thousand volts. Brown's discs were charged with a high positive voltage on a wire running along their leading edge and a high negative voltage on a wire running along their trailing edge. As the wires ionized the air around them, a dense cloud of positive ions would form ahead of the craft and a corresponding cloud of negative ions would form behind the craft. Brown's research indicated that, like the charged plates of his capacitors, these ion clouds induced a gravitational force directed in the minus to plus direction. As the disc moved forward in response to its self-generated gravity field, it would carry with it its positive and negative ion clouds with their associated electrogravity gradient. Consequently, the discs would ride their advancing gravity wave much like surfers ride an ocean wave. [16] Skeptics claimed that the discs were propelled by more mundane effects such as the pressure of negative ions striking the positive electrode, but Brown later carried out vacuum chamber tests which proved that a force was present even in the absence of such ion thrust. It is interesting to note that the occupants of one of Brown's saucers would feel no stresses at all, no matter how sharply it turned or how fast it accelerated, because the ship and occupants would respond equally to the distortion of the local gravitational field. Figure. A side view of one of Brown's circular flying discs showing the location of its ion charges and induced gravity field. Early in 1952 Brown submitted a proposal that the military develop a disc-shaped antigravity combat vehicle with Mach 3 capability. A declassified aviation industry intelligence report indicates that by September 1954 the Pentagon had launched a secret government programme to develop a manned antigravity craft of the type proposed. In the mid-1950s, over ten major aircraft companies were actively involved in electrogravitics research. Since then no publicity has been given to whatever work in electro-antigravity the US military has conducted. Paul LaViolette suggests that electrogravitic technology developed since then may have been put to use in the B-2 Stealth Bomber to provide an auxiliary mode of propulsion. He bases this inference on the disclosure that the B-2 electrostatically charges both the leading edge of its wing-like body and its jet exhaust stream to a high voltage. Positive ions emitted from its wing leading edge would produce a positively charged parabolic ion sheath ahead of the craft while negative ions injected into its exhaust stream would set up a trailing negative space charge with a potential difference in excess of 15 million volts. . . . [This] would set up an artificial gravity field that would induce a reactionless force on the aircraft in the direction of the positive pole. An electrogravitic drive of this sort could allow the B-2 to function with over-unity propulsion efficiency when cruising at supersonic velocities. [17] Figure. A side view of the B-2 showing the shape of its electrically charged Mach 2 supersonic shock wave and trailing exhaust stream. Solid arrows show the direction of ion flow; dashed arrows show the direction of the gravity gradient induced around the craft. Another electrogravitics researcher is John Searl, an English electronics technician [18]. In 1949 he discovered that a small voltage (or electromotive force) was induced in spinning metal objects. The negative charge was on the outside and the positive charge was around the centre of rotation. He reasoned that free electrons were thrown out by centrifugal force, leaving a positive charge in the centre. In 1952 he constructed a generator, some three feet in diameter, based on this principle. When tested outdoors, it reportedly produced a powerful electrostatic effect on nearby objects, accompanied by crackling sounds and the smell of ozone. The generator then lifted off the ground, while still accelerating, and rose to a height of about 50 feet, breaking the connection with the engine. It briefly hovered at this height, still speeding up. A pink halo appeared around it, indicating ionization of the surrounding atmosphere. It also caused local radio receivers to go on of their own accord. Finally, it reached another critical rotational velocity, rapidly gained altitude, and disappeared from sight. Searl says that since then he and his colleagues have built over 50 versions of his 'levity disk', of various sizes, and have developed a form of control. He claims to have been persecuted by the authorities, resulting in wrongful imprisonment and the destruction of most of his work, so that he has had to start all over again. Although he has been dismissed as a con man, there is evidence that the Searl effect is genuine. Two members of the Russian Academy of Science, V.V. Roschin and S.M. Godin, carried out an experiment with a Searl-type generator, and observed a 35% weight reduction, luminescence, a smell of ozone, anomalous magnetic-field effects, and a fall in temperature. They concluded that orthodox, etherless physics cannot explain these results [19]. Empty space vs. the ether In newtonian gravity theory, it is assumed that gravity propagates instantaneously across empty space, i.e. it is believed to be a form of action at a distance. However, in a private letter Newton himself dismissed this idea: That gravity should be innate, inherent, and essential to matter, so that one body may act upon another at a distance through a vacuum, without the mediation of any thing else, by and through which their action and force may be conveyed from one to another, is to me so great an absurdity, that I believe no man, who has in philosophical matters a competent faculty of thinking, can ever fall into it. [1] Newton periodically toyed with the idea of an all-pervading ether (filling his 'absolute space'), and thought that the cause of gravity must be a spiritual agency, by which he understood 'God'. The need to postulate an ether is underlined by G. de Purucker: We either have to admit the existence of [the] ether or ethers, i.e., of this extremely tenuous and ethereal substance which fills all space, whether interstellar or interplanetary or inter-atomic and intra-atomic, or accept actio in distans -- action at a distance, without intervening intermediary or medium of transmission; and such actio in distans is obviously by all known scientific standards an impossibility. Reason, common sense, logic . . . demand the existence of such universally pervading medium, by whatever name we may choose to call it . . . [2] Logically, every type of force must ultimately be produced by the activity of material -- though not necessarily physical -- agents of some kind, moving at finite, though possibly superluminal, speeds. In 1905 Albert Einstein rejected the ether as 'superfluous', preferring the vacuous concept of 'empty space'. In 1915 he published his general theory of relativity, which is essentially a theory of gravity. He did not challenge the newtonian notion that inert mass was the cause of the gravitational force. But whereas Newton attributed gravitational attraction to the density of matter, Einstein assumed that the same quantity of matter ('gravitational mass') somehow warped the hypothetical four-dimensional 'spacetime continuum' and that this deformity made the planets orbit the sun. In other words, gravity is not regarded as a force that propagates but is said to result from masses distorting the 'fabric of spacetime' in their vicinity in some miraculous way. Thus, rather than being attracted by the sun, the earth supposedly follows the nearest equivalent of a straight line available to it through the curved spacetime around the sun. However, 'curved spacetime' is a geometrical abstraction -- or rather a mathematical monstrosity! -- and can in no way be regarded as an explanation of gravity. Although it is commonly claimed that relativity theory has been confirmed by observational evidence, there are alternative -- and far more sensible -- explanations for all the experiments cited in its support [3]. General relativity theory claims that matter, regardless of its electrical charge, produces only an attractive gravitational force, and allows for only very tiny gravitational shielding or antigravity effects. Furthermore, it does not predict any coupling between electrostatic and gravitational fields. In fact, T.T. Brown's pioneering 1929 paper that first reported the discovery of electrogravity was turned down by Physical Review because it conflicted with general relativity. According to quantum field theory, the four recognized forces -- gravity, electromagnetism, and the weak and strong nuclear forces -- arise from matter particles constantly emitting and absorbing different types of force-carrying 'virtual' particles (known as bosons), which are constantly flickering into and out of existence. The gravitational force is supposedly mediated by gravitons -- hypothetical massless, uncharged, infinitesimal particles travelling at the speed of light. Since gravitons would apparently be identical to their antiparticles, this theory, too, appears to rule out antigravity, and it also fails to explain electrogravity. Experimental support for these particle-exchange theories is completely lacking, and it is not clear how they can account for attractive as well as repulsive forces. It is sometimes said that bosons carry a 'message' telling matter particles whether to move closer or move apart -- but this explains nothing at all. Moreover, in the standard model, force-carrying particles, like fundamental matter particles, are regarded as infinitely small, zero-dimensional point-particles -- which is clearly absurd. As a result of these idealized notions, quantum calculations tend to be plagued with infinities, which have to be done away with by a trick known as 'renormalization'. Einstein spent the last 40 years of his life attempting to extend the geometrical notions of general relativity to include electromagnetic interactions, and to unite the laws of gravitation and the laws of electromagnetism in a unified field theory. Many other mathematicians also worked on this subject, and some of these theories introduced a fourth, curled-up dimension. None of these attempts was successful, and the search for a unified theory continues. Some scientists believe that string (or superstring) theory, which first emerged in the 1970s, is a major step towards a 'theory of everything'. String theory postulates that all matter and force particles, and even space (and time!) as well, arise from vibrating one-dimensional strings, about a billion-trillion-trillionth a centimetre (10-33 cm) long but with zero thickness, inhabiting a ten-dimensional universe in which the six extra spatial dimensions are curled up so small that they are undetectable! This theory has no experimental support; indeed, to detect individual strings would require a particle accelerator at least as big as our galaxy. Moreover, the mathematics of string theory is so complicated that no one knows the exact equations, and even the approximate equations are so complicated that so far they have only been partially solved [4]. Some scientists believe that beyond string theory lies M-theory, which postulates a universe of 11 dimensions, inhabited not only by one-dimensional strings but also by two-dimensional membranes, three-dimensional blobs (three-branes), and also higher-dimensional entities, up to and including nine dimensions (nine-branes). It is even speculated that the fundamental components of the universe may be zero-branes [5]. Such crazy ideas do nothing to advance our understanding of the real world and merely show how surreal, if not grotesque, pure mathematical speculation can become. There are, however, several more promising approaches that link gravity and electromagnetism. According to quantum theory, electromagnetic fields (and other force fields) are subject to constant, utterly random* fluctuations even at a temperature of absolute zero (-273°C), when all thermal agitation should cease. As a result, 'empty space' is believed to be teeming with zero-temperature energy in the form of fluctuating electromagnetic radiation fields (the zero-point field) and short-lived virtual particles (the 'Dirac sea') [6]. Formally, every point of space should contain an infinite amount of zero-point energy. By assuming a minimum wavelength of electromagnetic vibrations, the energy density of the 'quantum vacuum' has been reduced to the still astronomical figure of 10108 joules per cubic centimetre! The reason we do not normally notice this energy is said to be because of its uniform density, and most scientists are happy to ignore it altogether. However, many experiments have been carried out whose results are widely regarded as consistent with the existence of zero-point energy. The presence of surfaces changes the density of vacuum energy and can result in vacuum forces, an example being the Casimir effect -- an attractive force between two parallel conducting plates. However, far more experimental work is needed to test the theory and alternative explanations. NASA's Marshall Space Flight Center is studying the possibility of harnessing zero-point energy for spacecraft propulsion as part of its Breakthrough Propulsion Physics Program [7]. *H.P. Blavatsky writes: 'It is impossible to conceive anything without a cause; the attempt to do so makes the mind a blank' (The Secret Doctrine, 1:44). This implies that there must be a great many scientists walking round with blank minds! Whereas the conventional theory (known as quantum electrodynamics) derives the zero-point field (ZPF) -- sometimes called the 'quantum ether' -- from quantum theory and assumes that it is generated by physical matter-energy, there is a competing approach (stochastic electrodynamics) which regards the ZPF as a very real, intrinsic substratum of the universe. Such a view is closer to the traditional concept of the ether, as held by researchers and experimenters such as Baron von Reichenbach (who called it 'odic force'), John Keely, Nikola Tesla, Wilhelm Reich (who called it 'orgone energy'), and a large number of more recent investigators in the field of ether physics. One of them, Dan Davidson, estimates that there are 2000 to 3000 experimenters worldwide conducting unorthodox research into technologies beyond the currently accepted paradigms of science, including gravity control, superluminal energy transfer, and 'free energy' devices [8]. Some scientists have argued that mass, inertia, and gravity are all connected with the fluctuating electromagnetic energy of the ZPF [9]. Inertia (a body's resistance to a change in its state of motion) is said to be an acceleration-dependent, electromagnetic drag force stemming from interactions between a charged particle and the ZPF. The fluctuations of the ZPF are also said to cause charged particles to emit secondary electromagnetic fields, which give rise to a residual attractive force -- gravity. In this theory, then, gravity is seen as a manifestation of electromagnetism. It is thought that by reconfiguring the ZPF surrounding a body, it may be possible to modify its inertia, or 'inertial mass', and to control gravity. Some ZPF researchers suggest that there is no such thing as mass -- only charges, which interact with the all-pervasive electromagnetic field to create the illusion of matter [10]. However, since they do not go on to present a concrete picture of what they understand by 'charge', or 'charged particle', this theory does not get us very far. In the standard model of particle physics, 'fundamental' charged particles such as electrons and quarks are modelled as infinitely small particles with no internal structure -- which is clearly a physical impossibility. Researchers in the field of ether physics have developed a variety of more concrete models to explain the structure of matter and the forces of nature [11]. Such theories are already 'unified' in the sense that physical matter and forces are all derived from the activity of the underlying ether. Subatomic particles are often modelled as self-sustaining vortices in the ether; this means that masses continuously radiate and absorb flows of ether. Inertia can be pictured as the drag force exerted by the disturbed ether as a body accelerates through it. Electric charge may represent a difference in ether concentration, while magnetic forces may involve circular flows of ether. Some researchers, such as Dan Davidson, say that just as electric charge is a gradient in ether, the gravitational force is a gradient of electric charge. This means that if the etheric gradient is changed around an atom, the gravity force will also change, as demonstrated by the Biefeld-Brown effect. The effect can be amplified by synchronizing ether flows through the nucleus of a given mass, and this can be achieved either by rotation or movement or by sonic stimulation, which causes all the atoms to resonate together [12]. Paul LaViolette has developed a theory known as 'subquantum kinetics', which replaces the 19th-century concept of a mechanical, inert ether with that of a continuously transmuting ether [13]. Physical subatomic particles and energy quanta are regarded as wavelike concentration patterns in the ether. A particle's gravitational and electromagnetic fields are said to result from the fluxes of different kinds of etheric particles, or etherons, across their boundaries, and the resulting etheron concentration gradients. Positively charged particles such as protons generate matter-attracting gravity wells whereas, contrary to conventional theory, negatively charged particles such as electrons generate matter-repelling gravity hills; this would explain the Biefeld-Brown effect. Electrically neutral matter remains gravitationally attractive because the proton's gravity well marginally dominates the electron's gravity hill. In Joseph Cater's model of 'soft particle physics', ether particles combine to form light-photons of different frequencies, which in turn combine to form denser particles. Physical matter particles ('hard' particles) are said to be composed of gamma-ray photons, whereas lower-frequency photons form subtler ('softer') particles. Gravity effects are said to be produced by highly penetrating electromagnetic radiation located between the lower portion of the infrared and the radar band [14]. The energies emitted by the sun are transformed into ever lower frequencies as they penetrate the earth, and a small amount is transformed into gravity-inducing radiations, which hold the earth in its orbit. The earth's own gravity is said to arise mainly from the thermal agitation of atoms and molecules, as the resulting radiation is most readily transformed into gravity-inducing radiations. Cater argues that what are usually regarded as electrically neutral atoms and molecules actually have a small positive charge (as does the earth as a whole). Positively charged matter is attracted by gravity, whereas negative charges are repelled by gravity, so that if matter is impregnated with sufficient quantities of negative charges (especially soft electrons) it will lose weight and even levitate. It is sometimes theorized that gravity is caused by the bombardment of physical matter by gravity particles. Tom Van Flandern, for example, argues that the universe is full of tiny particles ('classical gravitons') moving at extremely high speed in all directions, and that the collisions of these particles cause bodies to be 'attracted' (i.e. pushed) towards one another, since bodies screen one another from a certain proportion of counteracting collisions [15]. While it is logical to suppose that all attractive forces ultimately arise from pushes at some level,* the impact theory of gravity is too simplistic to account for all the relevant facts. *If we reason by analogy (as above, so below), the microscopic world is a vastly scaled-down and speeded-up version of the macroscopic world (see The infinite divisibility of matter). At the macroscopic level, it is impossible to find an attractive or pulling force that is not really a push. For instance, a person who is 'sucked' out of a pressurized cabin if the door opens while the aircraft is in flight is really pushed out by the greater number of molecular bombardments 'behind' them. If an object immersed in an elastic fluid emits waves of condensation and rarefaction, other bodies will be attracted or repelled depending on whether the wavelength is very large or very small compared with their dimensions (Encyclopaedia Britannica, 9th ed., 1898, p. 64). This case therefore involves both attractive and repulsive forces, and both are ultimately reducible to pushes, but the situation is far more complex than in the aircraft example. The impact theory cannot explain why all the planets orbit the sun in planes which form only small angles to the sun's equatorial plane, or why all the planets circle the sun in the same direction as the sun's sense of rotation. It also ignores the evidence that gravitation is bipolar and is linked with electromagnetism. Another problem is that gravity-particle impacts would heat all material bodies to an enormous temperature. Defenders of the theory reply simply that this heat must be re-radiated isotropically into space. However, there is no clear evidence to support this in the case of the earth. Further evidence against the theory was discovered by Q. Majorana, who found that placing a lead mass between a lead sphere and the earth reduced the earth's gravitational pull on the sphere very slightly, whereas placing the lead mass above the sphere did not [16]. He concluded that this contradicted Le Sage's theory; it is also inconsistent with newtonian theory, which does not allow gravitational shielding. Van Flandern argues that if the sun's force propagated at the speed of light, it would accelerate the earth's orbital speed by a noticeable amount; he calculates from binary-pulsar data that gravity must propagate at least 20 billion times faster than light [17]! Pari Spolter argues that since the sun's gravitational force is constantly spread in all directions, and since the angular velocities of the sun and planets remain constant for long periods of time, it is immaterial what the speed of gravity is. The lag period would be important only at the beginning and end of a planet's evolution [18]. Gravity anomalies In theory, all freely falling bodies -- individual atoms as well as macroscopic objects -- should experience a gravitational acceleration (g) of 9.8 m/s² near the earth's surface. In reality, the value of g varies all over the earth owing to its departure from a perfect sphere (i.e. the equatorial bulge and local topography) and -- in the conventional theory -- to local variations in the density of the crust and upper mantle. These 'gravity anomalies' are believed to be fully explicable in the context of newtonian theory. We have seen, however, that there is no empirical basis for the assumption that gravity is proportional to inert mass. Rather than being a direct function of the quantity of matter, the strength of the gravitational force appears to depend on the electrical and other properties of matter. The local gravity field may vary due to the ability of negatively charged particles and ions to screen or counteract the attractive force of gravity, and to the capacity of different types of rock to emit and absorb gravity-inducing radiation under different conditions. There may also be huge caverns in the earth's outer shell. This would be impossible if the newtonian theory were correct and gravity had unlimited penetrability, since pressures would increase all the way to the earth's centre. Even a few miles beneath the earth's surface the immense pressures would cause any large cavities to collapse. But if the orthodox assumptions are wrong, many interesting possibilities open up. On the basis of the newtonian theory of gravity, it might be expected that gravitational attraction over continents, and especially mountains, would be higher than over oceans. But this is not the case. In fact, the gravity on top of large mountains is less than expected on the basis of their visible mass while over ocean surfaces it is unexpectedly high. To explain this, the concept of isostasy was developed: it was postulated that low-density rock exists 30 to 100 km beneath mountains, which buoys them up, while denser rock exists 30 to 100 km beneath the ocean bottom. However, this hypothesis is far from proven. Maurice Allais commented: 'There is an excess of gravity over the ocean and a deficiency above the continents. The theory of isostasis provided only a pseudoexplanation of this' [1]. The standard, simplistic theory of isostasy is contradicted by the fact that in regions of tectonic activity vertical movements often intensify gravity anomalies rather than acting to restore isostatic equilibrium. For example, the Greater Caucasus shows a positive gravity anomaly (usually interpreted to mean it is overloaded with excess mass), yet it is rising rather than subsiding. While scientists know the value of many 'fundamental constants' to eight decimal places, they disagree on the gravitational constant (G) after only three; this is regarded as an embarrassment in an age of precision [2]. And if certain highly anomalous results are taken into account, scientists disagree even about the first decimal place. In 1981 F.D. Stacey and G.J. Tuck published a paper in which they showed that measurements of G in deep mines, boreholes, and under the sea gave values about 1% higher than that currently accepted [3]. Furthermore, the deeper the experiment, the greater the discrepancy. However, no one took much notice of these results until 1986, when E. Fischbach and his colleagues reanalyzed the data from a series of experiments by Eötvös in the 1920s, which were supposed to have shown that gravitational acceleration is independent of the mass or composition of the attracted body. Fischbach et al. found that there was a consistent anomaly hidden in the data that had been dismissed as random error. On the basis of these laboratory results and the observations from mines, they announced that they had found evidence of a short-range, composition-dependent 'fifth force'. Their paper caused a great deal of controversy and generated a flurry of experimental activity in physics laboratories around the world [4]. The majority of the experiments failed to find any evidence of a composition-dependent force. But one or two did. Is it safe to simply dismiss these results as 'experimental error', or is there a genuine unexplained anomaly which only experimental setups of the right design and sensitivity are capable of detecting? Several earlier experimenters have detected anomalies incompatible with newtonian theory, but the results have long since been forgotten. For instance, Charles Brush performed very precise experiments showing that metals of very high atomic weight and density tend to fall very slightly faster than elements of lower atomic weight and density, even though the same mass of each metal is used. He also reported that a constant mass or quantity of certain metals may be appreciably changed in weight by changing its physical condition [5]. Experiments by Victor Crémieu showed that gravitation measured in water at the earth's surface appears to be one tenth greater than that computed by newtonian theory [6]. Donald Kelly has demonstrated that if the absorption capacity of a body is reduced by magnetizing or electrically energizing it, it is attracted to the earth at a rate less than g [7]. Physicists normally measure g in a controlled manner which includes not altering the absorption capacity of bodies from their usual state. Bruce DePalma discovered that rotating objects falling in a magnetic field accelerate faster than g [8]. As already mentioned, measurements of gravity below the earth's surface are consistently higher than predicted on the basis of Newton's theory (which includes a universal gravitational constant and the inverse-square law) [9]. Sceptics simply assume that hidden rocks of unusually high density must be present. However, measurements in mines where densities are very well known have given the same anomalous results, as have measurements to a depth of 1673 metres in an homogenous ice sheet in Greenland, well above the underlying rock. Instead of inventing new forces to explain such results, it would be better to reexamine the fundamental assumption that gravity is proportional to inert mass. Like Pari Spolter, Stephen Mooney believes that the Cavendish torsion balance experiment actually measures electrostatic attraction rather than gravitational attraction [10]. He argues that the mechanism of this attraction is the same as that for the gravitational attraction between macro-scale bodies -- namely, the absorption of radiation. Repulsion, on the other hand, involves bodies pushing away from each other due to the equivalence of their radiation. He also points out that when Cavendish first conducted the torsion balance experiment, he discovered, but did not understand, that the attraction increased when he heated the larger of the two bodies. Mooney suggests that this is due to the increased exchange of radiation between the bodies. He believes that experiments to measure G actually measure the radiation density at the earth's surface, which is not absolutely constant. Similarly, he attributes the increased gravitational attraction in a deep mine shaft to the fact that the decay of the surrounding rocks increases the density of the radiation impacting on the bodies. Newtonian gravity theory is challenged by various aspects of planetary behaviour in our solar system. The rings of Saturn, for example, present a major problem [11]. There are tens of thousands of rings and ringlets separated by just as many gaps in which matter is either less dense or essentially absent. The complex, dynamic nature of the rings seems beyond the power of newtonian mechanics to explain. The gaps in the asteroid belt present a similar puzzle. Another major anomaly concerns the deviations in the orbits of the outer planets (Jupiter, Saturn, Uranus, and Neptune) [12]. A 'Planet X' beyond Pluto has been hypothesized, but despite extensive searches no such planet has been found. Alternatively, the deviations may point to defects in the current theory of gravitation. References The mass error [1] Pari Spolter, Gravitational force of the sun, Granada Hills, CA: Orb Publishing, 1993, pp. 137-138. [2] Ibid., p. 18. [3] Ibid., p. 117. [4] Ibid., pp. 231-238. [5] Ibid., pp. 195-198. [6] Johannes Kepler, Epitome of Copernican astronomy (1618-21), in Great books of the western world, Chicago: Encyclopaedia Britannica, Inc., 1952, vol. 16, pp. 895-905; Stephen Mooney, 'From the cause of gravity to the revolution of science', Apeiron (http://redshift.vif.com), v. 6, no. 1-2, pp. 138-141, 1999. [7] Quoted in Meta Research Bulletin, 5:3, p. 41, 1996. Electrogravity [1] Q. Majorana, 'On gravitation. Theoretical and experimental researches', Phil. Mag., v. 39, pp. 488-504, 1920; Q. Majorana, 'Sur l'absorption de la gravitation', Comptes Rendus de l'Académie des Sciences, v. 173, pp. 478-479, 1921; Teodor Schlomka, 'Über die Abhängigkeit der Schwerkraft vom Zwischenmedium', Zeit. fur Geophys., 1927, pp. 397-400; Q. Majorana, 'Quelques recherches sur l'absorption de la gravitation par la matière', Journal de Physique et le Radium, I, pp. 314-324, 1930. [2] E.J. Saxl, 'An electrically charged torque pendulum', Nature, v. 203, pp. 136-138, 1964; E.J. Saxl and M. Allen, '1970 solar eclipse as "seen" by a torsion pendulum', Physical Review D, v. 3, pp. 823-825, 1971; Rho Sigma (Rolf Schaffranke), Ether-technology: A rational approach to gravity control, Lakemont, GA: CSA Printing & Bindery, 1977, pp. 23, 50-3. [3] Journal of Scientific Exploration (http://www.scientificexploration.org), 10:2, pp. 269-279, and 10:3, pp. 413-416, 1996. [4] M.F.C. Allais, 'Should the laws of gravitation be reconsidered?', parts 1 and 2, Aero/Space Engineering, v. 18, pp. 46-52, September 1959, and v. 18, pp. 51-55, October 1959 (http://allais.maurice.free.fr/English/Science.htm). [5] Shu-wen Zhou, 'Abnormal physical phenomena observed when the sun, moon, and earth are aligned', 21st Century Science and Technology, Fall 1999, pp. 55-61. [6] Qian-shen Wang et al., 'Precise measurement of gravity variations during a total solar eclipse', Physical Review D, v. 62, 041101, 2000; for abstract, see http://users.telemail.it/gmodanese/rei.htm. [7] Tom Van Flandern, 'Possible new properties of gravity', Astrophysics and Space Science, v. 244, pp. 249-261, 1996. [8] The Gravity Society, http://www.gravity.org; Quantum Cavorite, http://inetarena.com/~noetic/pls/gravity.html. [9] Jeane Manning, The coming energy revolution: The search for free energy, NY: Avery, 1996, pp. 66, 75; Dan A. Davidson, 'Free energy, gravity and the aether', 1997, http://216.60.190.54/davidson/npap1.htm; Dan A. Davidson, Shape power, Sierra Vista, AR: RIVAS, 1997; Antigravity News and Space Drive Technology, http://www.padrak.com/agn. [10] Laurence Hecht, 'Rethinking the laws of gravitation', 21st Century Science and Technology, Fall 1998, pp. 2-3 (http://allais.maurice.free.fr/English/media9-1.htm). [11]Ether-technology, p. 42. [12] Ibid., pp. 40, 43. [13] E.J. Saxl, 'An electrically charged torque pendulum', Nature, v. 203, pp. 136-138, 1964. [14] The Home of Primordial Energy (Bruce DePalma), http://www.depalma.pair.com; Manning, The coming energy revolution, pp. 82-86. [15] Paul LaViolette, 'The U.S. antigravity squadron', in Thomas Valone (ed.), Electrogravitic systems: Reports on a new propulsion methodology, Washington, DC: Integrity Research Institute, 1999, pp. 82-101; Paul LaViolette, Subquantum kinetics: The alchemy of creation, Schenectady, NY, 1994, pp. 168-183 (http://www.etheric.com); Ether-technology, pp. 25-49; Thomas Townsend Brown Website, http://www.soteria.com/brown. [16] 'The U.S. antigravity squadron', pp. 84-85. [17] Ibid., p. 82. [18] Ether-technology, pp. 73-82, 87-88, 108; John Davidson, The secret of the creative vacuum, Saffron Walden, Essex: Daniel Company, 1989, pp. 200-216; Joseph H. Cater, The ultimate reality, Pomeroy, WA: Health Research, 1998, pp. 359-369; The Searl Effect, http://www.searleffect.com. [19] V.V. Roschin and S.M. Godin, 'Experimental research of the magnetic-gravity effects', http://www.watchersnet.com/nightwatch/antigrav_paper.html. Empty space vs. the ether [1] Quoted in G. de Purucker, The esoteric tradition, Pasadena, CA: Theosophical University Press, 2nd ed., 1940, pp. 443-444fn; H.P. Blavatsky, The secret doctrine, Pasadena, CA: Theosophical University Press, 1977 (1888), 1:490-491. [2] The esoteric tradition, 901-902fn. [3] See Space, time, and relativity (Einstein's fallacies), http://ourworld.compuserve.com/homepages/relativ.htm. [4] Brian Greene, The elegant universe: Superstrings, hidden dimensions, and the quest for the ultimate theory, London: Vintage, 2000, p. 19. [5] Ibid., pp. 287-288, 379. [6] R. Forward, 'Mass modification experiment definition study', Journal of Scientific Exploration, 10:3, pp. 325-354, 1996. [7] Breakthrough Propulsion Physics, http://www.lerc.nasa.gov/WWW/bpp/summ.htm. [8] Dan A. Davidson, 'Free energy, gravity and the aether', 1997, http://216.60.190.54/davidson/npap1.htm; Jeane Manning, The coming energy revolution: The search for free energy, NY: Avery, 1996; Rho Sigma (Rolf Schaffranke), Ether-technology: A rational approach to gravity control, Lakemont, GA: CSA Printing & Bindery, 1977; Elektromagnum, www.newphys.se/elektromagnum; KeelyNet, http://www.keelynet.com. [9] B. Haisch and A. Rueda, 'The zero-point field and the NASA challenge to create the space drive', Journal of Scientific Exploration, 11:4, pp. 473-485, 1997; 'Questions and answers about the origin of inertia and the zero-point field', http://www.calphysics.org/questions.html. [10] B. Haisch, A. Rueda and H.E. Puthoff, 'Beyond E=mc²', The Sciences, 34:6, pp. 26-31, 1994. [11] E.g. Caroline H. Thompson, 'Phi-waves and forces', December 2000, http://users.aber.ac.uk/cat/Papers/phi-waves.htm. See also refs. 8, 12, 13, 14. [12] Dan A. Davidson, Shape power, Sierra Vista, AR: RIVAS, 1997, pp. 1-7. [13] Paul LaViolette, Beyond the big bang: Ancient myth and the science of continuous creation, Rochester, VE: Park St Press, 1995, pp. 309-314; Paul LaViolette, Subquantum kinetics: The alchemy of creation, Schenectady, NY, 1994, pp. 168-183. [14] Joseph H. Cater, The ultimate reality, Pomeroy, WA: Health Research, 1998, pp. 73-82, 167-181. [15] Tom Van Flandern, Dark matter, missing planets & new comets, Berkeley, CA: North Atlantic Books, 1993, pp. 27-57. [16] Q. Majorana, 'Quelques recherches sur l'absorption de la gravitation par la matière', Journal de Physique et le Radium, I, pp. 314-324, 1930. [17] Tom Van Flandern, 'The speed of gravity -- what the experiments say', Meta Research Bulletin, 6:4, 1997, pp. 49-62. [18] Pari Spolter, pers. com., 2001. Gravity anomalies [1] M.F.C. Allais, 'Should the laws of gravitation be reconsidered?', part 2, Aero/Space Engineering, v. 18, October 1959, p. 52. [2] D. Kestenbaum, 'The legend of G', New Scientist, 17 January 1998, pp. 39-42. [3] F.D. Stacey and G.J. Tuck, 'Geophysical evidence for non-newtonian gravity', Nature, v. 292, pp. 230-232, 1981. [4] Rupert Sheldrake, Seven experiments that could change the world, London: Fourth Estate, 1994, pp. 174-176; Pari Spolter, Gravitational force of the sun, Granada Hills, CA: Orb Publishing, 1993, pp. 146-147. [5] Charles F. Brush, 'Some new experiments in gravitation', Proceedings of the American Philosophy Society, v. 63, pp. 57-61, 1924. [6] Victor Crémieu, 'Recherches sur la gravitation', Comptes Rendus de l'Académie des Sciences, Dec. 1906, pp. 887-889; Victor Crémieu, 'Le problème de la gravitation', Rev. Gen. Sc. Pur. et Appl., v. 18, pp. 7-13, 1907. [7] Stephen Mooney, 'From the cause of gravity to the revolution of science', Apeiron, v. 6, no. 1-2, pp. 138-141, 1999; Josef Hasslberger, 'Comments on gravity drop tests performed by Donald A. Kelly', Nexus, Dec. 1994-Jan. 1995, pp. 48-49. [8] The Home of Primordial Energy (Bruce DePalma), http://www.depalma.pair.com; Jeane Manning, The coming energy revolution: The search for free energy, NY: Avery, 1996, pp. 82-86. [9] S.C. Holding and G.J. Tuck, 'A new mine determination of the newtonian gravitational constant', Nature, v. 307, pp. 714-716, 1984; Mark A. Zumberge et al., 'Results from the 1987 Greenland G experiment', Eos, v. 69, p. 1046, 1988; R. Poole, ' "Fifth force" update: more tests needed', Science, v. 242, p. 1499, 1988; Ian Anderson, 'Icy tests provide firmer evidence for a fifth force', New Scientist, 11 August 1988, p. 29. [10] Mooney, 'From the cause of gravity to the revolution of science'. [11] W.R. Corliss (comp.), The moon and the planets, Glen Arm, MD: Sourcebook Project, 1985, pp. 282-284. [12] Tom Van Flandern, Dark matter, missing planets & new comets, Berkeley, CA: North Atlantic Books, 1993, pp. 315-325. Gravity and Antigravity: Part 2 Homepage Part 2 Levitation technology Human levitation Theosophical writings References Levitation technology The megalithic structures found at various sites around the world have generated endless controversy as to how they were built. Conventional archaeologists, who dismiss the possibility of highly advanced civilizations in the remote past, insist that they were built solely with the use of primitive tools and brute force. Some of the structures, or parts of them, could have been built in this way. However, a number of engineers have stated that some features would be difficult if not impossible to duplicate today, even using the most advanced technology. The sheer weight and size of some of the stone blocks have prompted several researchers to wonder whether the ancient builders had mastered some form of levitation technology.* *The acoustic and magnetic levitation techniques currently under development by mainstream scientists create a physical lifting force stronger than the force of gravity and are not designed to modify gravity or generate an antigravitational force. The pre-Incan fortresses at Ollantaytambo and Sacsayhuaman in the Peruvian Andes consist of cyclopean walls constructed from tight-fitting polygonal stone blocks, some weighing 120 tonnes or more. The blocks used at Ollantaytambo were somehow transported from a quarry located on another mountaintop 11 km away, the descent from which was impeded by a river canyon with 305-metre vertical rock walls. The ruins of Tiahuanaco near Lake Titicaca in Bolivia include a number of blocks weighing around 100 tonnes, which were transported from quarries 50 km away [1]. According to the local Aymara Indians, the complex was built at the 'beginning of time' by the founder-god Viracocha and his followers, who caused the stones to be 'carried through the air to the sound of a trumpet'. An alternative theme is that they created a 'heavenly fire' that consumed the stones and enabled large blocks to be lifted by hand 'as if they were cork'. According to a Mayan legend, the temple complex of Uxmal in the Yucatan Peninsula was built by a race of dwarfs who were able to move heavy rocks into place by whistling [2]. Legends of sound being used to lift and transport stone blocks are in fact universal. For instance, according to early Greek historians, the walls of the ancient city of Thebes were built by Amphion, a son of Jupiter, who moved the large stones 'to the music of his harp', while his 'songs drew even stones and beasts after him'. Another version claims that when he played 'loud and clear on his golden lyre, rock twice as large followed in his footsteps'. The 10th-century Arab historian Mas'udi wrote that, to build the pyramids, the ancient Egyptians inserted papyri inscribed with certain characters beneath the stone blocks; they were then struck by an instrument, producing a sound which caused them to rise into the air and travel for a distance of over 86 metres [3]. The achievements of the ancient Egyptian builders have caused even some fairly orthodox investigators to wonder whether levitation might have been employed [4]. For instance the roof of the King's Chamber in the Great Pyramid, 200 feet up, consists of huge granite beams weighing up to 70 tonnes. What's more, the major temples on the Giza plateau -- the two next to the Sphinx and those besides the Second and Third Pyramids -- contain colossal limestone blocks weighing between 50 and 200 tonnes and placed on top of one another. The largest are an incredible 9 metres long, 3.6 metres wide and 3.6 metres high. It is interesting to note that there are only a few cranes in the world today capable of lifting objects weighing 200 tonnes or more [5]. The largest blocks used in any known man-made structure are found in the ancient platform beneath the Roman Temple of Jupiter at Baalbek in Lebanon [6]. The foundation platform is enclosed by a cyclopean retaining wall; in the western side, on the fifth level, at a height of 10 metres, there are three colossal stones known as the Trilithon, each measuring about 19.5 metres long, 4.5 metres high and 3.5 metres deep, and weighing a staggering 1000 tonnes. The stones fit together perfectly and not even a knife blade can be pushed between them. At the quarry, half a kilometre away, there remains a fourth, even larger block, weighing as much as 1200 tonnes, the lower part of its base still attached to the bedrock. The course beneath the Trilithon contains seven mammoth stones weighing about 450 tonnes each. There are no traces of a roadbed leading from the quarry and no traces of any ramp. Nor are there any written records as to how the platform was built. According to local Arab legend, Baalbek's first citadel was built before the Flood, and rebuilt afterwards by a race of giants. The Phoenician historian Sanchoniatho stated that Lebanon's first city was Byblos, founded by the god Ouranus, who designed cyclopean structures and was able to make stones move as if they had a life of their own. Figure. The massive Trilithon at Baalbek. (The silhouetted two-storey house has been inserted for scale.) [7] Figure. The 'Stone of the South' still in the quarry at Baalbek. [8] Evidence that worldwide legends of acoustic levitation might have a basis in fact, was provided by the Swedish engineer Henry Kjellson, who in the 1950s recorded the experiences of two separate western travellers who had allegedly witnessed demonstrations of sonic technology in Tibet [9]. Since neither of the following accounts can be verified, sceptics assume that Kjellson probably made them up himself. During a visit to a Tibetan monastery situated southwest of the capital Lhasa, the Swede Dr Jarl was taken to a meadow where there was a high cliff to the northwest. About 250 metres up the face of the cliff was an entrance to a cave, in front of which was a wide ledge where monks were building a stone wall. Embedded in the ground 250 metres from the foot of the cliff, was a large rock slab with a bowl-shaped depression in it. A block of stone, 1.5 metres long, 1 metre wide, and 1 metre high, was manhandled into the depression. Monks with 19 musical instruments, consisting of 13 drums and 6 very long trumpets, were arranged in an arc of about 90 degrees, 63 metres from the bowl-stone. The drums, open at one end, were aimed at the stone block. Behind each instrument was a line of monks eight to ten deep. A monk in the middle of the arc started chanting and beating out a rhythm on a small drum, and then the other instruments joined in. After four minutes, the large stone block began to wobble and floated into the air rocking from side to side. All the instruments were trained constantly on the stone as it rose upwards at an accelerating rate and finally crashed onto the ledge. The monks continued to perform this feat at the rate of 5 or 6 stones per hour. The role of the 200 or so monks behind the instruments was unclear: one suggestion is that they used some form of coordinated psychokinesis to aid the flight of the stone. Figure. Dr Jarl's sketch showing how Tibetan monks were able to raise stone blocks into the air using the power of sound. The second case involved an Austrian named Linauer, who stated that while at a remote monastery in northern Tibet during the 1930s, he had witnessed the demonstration of two curious sound instruments which, when used in concert, could induce weightlessness in stone blocks. The first was an extremely large gong, 3.5 metres in diameter, composed of a central circular area of very soft gold, followed by a ring of pure iron, and finally a ring of extremely hard brass. When struck, it produced an extremely low dumph which ceased almost immediately. The second instrument was also composed of three different metals; it had a half-oval shape like a mussel shell, and measured 2 metres long and 1 metre wide, with strings stretched longitudinally over its hollow surface. Linauer was told that it emitted an inaudible resonance wave when the gong was struck. The two devices were used in conjunction with a pair of large screens, positioned so as to form a triangular configuration with them. When the gong was struck with a large club to produce a series of brief, low-frequency sounds, a monk was able to lift a heavy stone block with just one hand. Linauer was informed that this was how their ancestors had built protective walls around Tibet, and that such devices could also disintegrate physical matter. A man who appears to have gone a long way to unlocking the secrets of sound was John Ernst Worrell Keely of Philadelphia (1827-1898). He spent 50 years developing and refining a wide variety of devices that used 'sympathetic vibratory force' or 'etheric force' to levitate objects, spin large wheels, power engines, and disintegrate rock. He performed many convincing demonstrations in his laboratory for scientists and other interested observers. He attempted to put his apparatus into commercial production, but this was hampered by the fact that it had to be tuned to the bodily vibrations of the operator and also to the surroundings [10]. Figure. John Keely. Keely built several devices to manipulate gravity [11]. One of them was the 'sympathetic transmitter', a copper globe about one foot (30 cm) in diameter, containing a Chladni plate and various metal tubes, whose position could be adjusted by means of a knob. The globe was held by a metal stand, around the base of which projected small metal rods a few inches long, of different sizes and lengths, which vibrated like tuning forks when twanged by the fingers. In one experiment, the transmitter was connected by a wire made of gold, platinum, and silver to the top of a water-filled glass jar. When the right chord was sounded on the strings of a zither, metal balls, weighing 2 pounds (0.9 kg), rose from the bottom of the jar until they hit the metal cap, and remained there until a different note was played which caused them to sink again. Witnesses relate how, after further experimentation, Keely was able to make heavy steel balls move in the air by simply playing on a kind of mouth organ. Using the same combination of transmitter, connecting cord, and musical instrument, he was able to make a 3.6-kg model of an airship rise into the air, descend, or hover with a motion 'as gentle as that of thistledown'. He was also able to lift extremely heavy weights by connecting them to vibratory appliances worn on his person; several people witnessed him levitate and move a 3-tonne cast-iron sphere in this way, and also make it heavier so that it sank into the ground as if into mud. Keely was able to catalyze the vibratory force necessary to make objects move using a variety of musical instruments, including trumpets, horns, harmonicas, fiddles, and zithers, and could even operate the equipment just by whistling. One sceptic, however, claimed that Keely did not play on an instrument to set up sympathetic vibration but to signal to a confederate in another part of the building when to turn on or off the compressed air that supposedly powered his 'fraudulent' devices! A man who in more recent times claimed to know the secret of how the pyramids and other megalithic structures were built was Edward Leedskalnin [12]. He lived in a place called Coral Castle, near Miami, Florida, which he built himself from giant blocks of coral weighing up to 30 tons. In 28 years, working alone, without the use of modern construction machinery, he quarried and erected a total of 1100 tons. He was very secretive and usually worked at night, and died in 1952 without divulging his construction techniques, despite visits from engineers and government officials. Some teenagers spying on him one evening claimed they saw him 'float coral blocks through the air like hydrogen balloons'. It is widely thought that he had discovered some means of locally reversing the effects of gravity. From the remaining contents of Leedskalnin's workshop and photographic evidence, engineer Chris Dunn suggests that he generated a radio signal that caused the coral to vibrate at its resonant frequency, and then used an electromagnetic field to flip the magnetic poles of the atoms so that they were repulsed by the earth's magnetic field. Human levitation Over 200 Christian saints are reported to have levitated -- usually involuntarily -- during religious raptures, and some cases are supported by an impressive amount of eyewitness testimony [1]. For instance, the 16th-century mystic St Teresa of Avila was observed on many occasions, typically when deep in prayer, to rise anywhere from a few feet to as high as the ceiling of the room. When she felt an 'attack' coming on she would beg the sisters in her convent to hold her down, though they were not always successful. Once while receiving Holy Communion from the Bishop of Avila, she felt her knees begin to leave the floor so she clutched onto the grille. But after receiving the sacrament, she let go -- with predictable results. The 17th-century Franciscan monk St Joseph of Copertino began levitating during services and was often observed by whole congregations. Once while walking in the monastery grounds, he soared up into the branches of an olive tree and remained kneeling on a branch for half an hour, the thin stem hardly moving under his weight. Unable to glide down, after his ecstasy had passed, he had to wait for a ladder to be brought. For 35 years he was banned from all public services, but he levitated not only before the Pope and his fellow monks but also before Europe's titled heads and the philosopher Leibnitz. The Spanish ambassador to the papal court watched him fly over the heads of a crowd to a statue of the Virgin Mary, where he briefly hovered. After giving his customary shriek, he flew back; the ambassador's wife had to be revived with smelling salts. The duke of Brunswick hid himself in a stairway to observe one of Joseph's levitations. After observing a second levitation, the duke renounced his Lutheran faith and became a Catholic. At Osimo, Joseph flew eight feet into the air to kiss a statue of Jesus then carried it off to his cell and floated about with it. He is also reported to have caught up another friar and carried him in the air around the room. The annals of 19th-century spiritualism contain many references to human levitations, as well as to tables, chairs, and other objects gaining or losing weight, levitating, and moving without human contact [2]. The most famous levitator of all was the medium Daniel Dunglas Home (pronounced: Hume). His first recorded levitation took place at a seance in August 1852. He was suddenly 'taken up into the air . . . He palpitated from head to foot with the contending emotions of joy and fear . . . Again and again he was taken from the floor, and the third time he was carried to the ceiling of the apartment, with which his hands and feet came into gentle contact.' He later became able to levitate at will, and believed he was lifted up by 'spirits'. During a public career lasting 30 years, hundreds of people witnessed his levitations. The most famous of Home's levitations was when in the company of Lord Adare, the Master of Lindsay, and a friend of theirs, he floated out of one window of a London house and in at another. The eminent English scientist Sir William Crookes saw him levitate on several occasions and verified that there was no trickery involved. On one occasion, Crookes' wife, who was sitting beside Home, was raised off the ground in her chair [3]. The magician Harry Kellar, who enjoyed showing audiences how mediums did their tricks, described how during a world tour in the 1870s he was watching a Zulu witch doctor go into a trance when suddenly 'to my intense amazement, the recumbent body slowly arose from the ground and floated upward in the air to the height of about three feet, where for a while it floated, moving up and down'. In 1882 he challenged the medium William Eglinton to perform some feat which no conjuror could repeat. Eglinton then levitated, carrying Kellar, holding his foot, into the air -- an achievement which Kellar had to admit he could not account for [4]. The Italian medium Eusapia Palladino occasionally used to levitate and was also able to increase or decrease the weight of objects. Her paranormal powers were verified in investigations conducted by European scientists around the turn of the 20th century. After witnessing her demonstrations, the French astronomer Camille Flammarion stated that levitation should no longer be any more in question than the attraction of iron by a magnet [5]. Levitations of mediums have frequently been reported since then in spiritualist journals, but no medium has been able to produce them in conditions which could be called fraud-proof. In the mid-19th century, Louis Jacolliot, Chief Justice of Chandernagore, travelled all over India to learn more about wonder-working fakirs. He witnessed many extraordinary phenomena, which he tried to view without prejudice or emotion, as a judge would weigh evidence in a court of law. In Varanasi (Benares) he met a fakir named Covindasamy, who performed various paranormal phenomena for him. On one occasion he crossed his arms on his chest and slowly levitated to a height of ten to twelve inches, remaining in the air more than eight minutes [6]. Another of his levitations is described by Jacolliot as follows: Leaning upon [his] cane with one hand, the Fakir rose gradually about two feet from the ground. His legs were crossed beneath him, and he made no change in his position . . . For more than twenty minutes I tried to see how Covindasamy could thus fly in the face and eyes of all the known laws of gravity; it was entirely beyond my comprehension; the stick gave him no visible support, and there was no apparent contact between that and his body, except through his right hand. [7] A similar display was reported by the American journalist John Keel. While travelling in Sikkim in the 1950s, he met an old lama who demonstrated his ability to levitate. He . . . pressed one hand on top of his stick, a heavy branch about four feet long, frowned a little with effort, and then slowly lifted his legs up off the floor until he was sitting cross-legged in the air! There was nothing behind him or under him. His sole support was his stick, which he seemed to use to keep his balance. I was astounded. The lama then conducted the rest of the conversation 'sitting there in empty space' [8]. In July 1916, P. Muller, a German veterinarian stationed in Turkey, attended a gathering of the Rufai dervishes. He described a large hall in which white-robed dervishes wearing tall black caps 'moved in a circle with sideways steps and curious jerking motions'. About an hour into the ceremony, the music and dancing and cries of the dancers intensified, when suddenly one of them bounded into the middle of the circle. He stood still, with his arms upraised, palms facing the sky: And now the incomprehensible happened . . . [S]lowly the whole tense body of this man elevated itself about eighteen inches off the floor and remained there, floating in the air with the toes pointing down. The ecstatic man remained suspended for about a minute [9]. Tibetans speak of a power of fast-walking known as lung-gom. An eye-witness account was provided by Alexandra David-Neel, an early 20th-century explorer, journalist, and Buddhist. While in northern Tibet, she saw a man approaching with an 'unusual gait' and 'extraordinary swiftness'. I could clearly see his perfectly calm impassive face and wide-open eyes with their gaze fixed on some invisible far-distant object situated somewhere high up in space. The man did not run. He seemed to lift himself from the ground, proceeding by leaps. It looked as if he had been endowed with the elasticity of a ball and rebounded each time his feet touched the ground. His steps had the regularity of a pendulum. [10] The native American Indians apparently knew of a similar method of magical running. In the 1920s anthropologist Carobeth Laird reported on one of the last men to travel 'the old way': the tracks left by his feet were very faint and far apart, as if his feet had barely touched the ground [11]. In 1984 a German film crew filmed the levitation of an African witch-doctor, Nana Owaka, in Togo. After meditating for a full day, he placed dry leaves and twigs in a circle and sat in the middle. Just as the sun was setting, Owaka started to stir. A villager lit the circle of twigs and flames shot up. Drums began beating wildly -- then we were hardly able to believe our eyes as Owaka stood and rose straight upward! It was as if he were being lifted on a pillow of air. He simply hung as if suspended, with nothing above or below him. After about a minute, Owaka fell back to earth. He was filmed from two angles, and no one who has examined the film has been able to detect any signs of trickery [12]. Theosophical writings As already mentioned, Kepler believed that the rotation of the sun generated its gravitational force. A disciple of Pythagoras and Plato, he believed in an ether of subtler matter and that stars and planets were animated by souls. He took the view that it was solar magnetism that held the planets in their orbits, and he conceived magnetism to be a form of vortical motion. More recent theosophical writers such as H.P. Blavatsky, W.Q. Judge, and G. de Purucker have also highlighted the link between gravity and electromagnetism, along with the bipolar nature of gravity, as the following quotations show. [T]here is no gravitation in the Newtonian sense, but only magnetic attraction and repulsion; . . . it is by their magnetism that the planets of the solar system have their motions regulated in their respective orbits by the still more powerful magnetism of the sun, not by their weight or gravitation. [1] Gravitation . . . depends entirely on electrical law, and not on weight or density. [2] [The theosophical adepts] reject gravity as at present explained. They deny that the so-called 'impact theory'* is the only one that is tenable in the gravitation hypothesis. They say that if all efforts made by the physicists to connect it with Ether, in order to explain electric and magnetic distance-action have hitherto proved complete failures, it is again due to the race ignorance of the ultimate states of matter in nature, foremost of all the real nature of the solar stuff. Believing but in the law of mutual magneto-electric attraction and repulsion, they agree with those who have come to the conclusion that 'Universal gravitation is a weak force,' utterly incapable of accounting for even one small portion of the phenomena of motion. [3] *This refers to the idea that gravity is caused by bombardment (as in Van Flandern's theory). [T]he phenomenon of gravitation or 'falling' does not exist, except as the result of a conflict of forces. It can only be considered as an isolated force by way of mental analysis . . . [4] [G]ravitation [is] the same fundamentally as cosmic electro-magnetism. [5] [G]ravitation is: Vital Cosmic Magnetism; the efflux or outflow of cosmic vitality from the heart of the celestial bodies . . . It is this Vital Electricity or Vital Magnetism in the Cosmic Structure which attracts in all directions, thus uniting all things into the vast body corporate of the Cosmos. Furthermore, some day it will be discovered that this Cosmic Magnetic Vitality contains or includes in itself as powerful and as greatly functional an element of repulsion as it does of attraction; and that behind all its phenomenal workings, in fact, behind and within itself, lie the still higher and incomparably more potent principles or elements of the inner and invisible Universe which thus infallibly guide its activities everywhere. [6] [Einstein's] ideas with regard to the nature of gravitation as being . . . a warping or distortion of space in the proximity of material bodies seem to be a mathematical pipe-dream, purely and simply, although doubtless very creditable indeed to the gentleman's mathematical ability . . . [7] The earth is a magnetic body . . . It is charged with one form of electricity -- let us call it positive -- which it evolves continuously by spontaneous action, in its interior or centre of motion. Human bodies, in common with all other forms of matter, are charged with the opposite form of electricity -- negative. That is to say, organic or inorganic bodies, if left to themselves will constantly and involuntarily charge themselves with, and evolve the form of electricity opposed to that of the earth itself. . . . [T]here is an attraction between our planet and the organisms upon it, which holds them upon the surface of the ground. But the law of gravitation has been counteracted in many instances, by levitations of persons and inanimate objects . . . [T]he action of our will . . . can produce . . . a change of this electrical polarity from negative to positive; the man's relations with the earth-magnet would then have become repellent, and 'gravity' for him would have ceased to exist. It would then be as natural for him to rush into the air until the repellent force had exhausted itself, as, before, it had been for him to remain upon the ground. The altitude of his levitation would be measured by his ability, greater or less, to charge his body with positive electricity. This control over the physical forces once obtained, alteration of his levity or gravity would be as easy as breathing. [8] Until gravitation is understood to be simply magnetic attraction and repulsion, and the part played by magnetism itself in the endless correlations of forces in the ether of space . . . it is neither fair nor wise to deny the levitation of either fakir or table. Bodies oppositely electrified attract each other; similarly electrified, repulse each other. Admit, therefore, that any body having weight, whether man or inanimate object, can by any cause whatever, external or internal, be given the same polarity as the spot on which it stands, and what is to prevent its rising? [9] Levitation of the body in apparent defiance of gravitation is a thing to be done with ease when the process is completely mastered. It contravenes no law. Gravitation is only half of a law. The Oriental sage admits gravity, if one wishes to adopt the term; but the real term is attraction, the other half of the law being expressed by the word repulsion, and both being governed by the great laws of electrical force. Weight and stability depend on polarity, and when the polarity of an object is altered in respect to the earth immediately underneath it, then the object may rise. . . . The human body . . . will rise in the air unsupported, like a bird, when its polarity is thus changed. [10] Blavatsky says that the flight of birds and swimming of fishes, including the rapid sinking of whales, involve changes in polarity and gravity not yet admitted by science. Animals can do this instinctively, while humans can learn to do so by will [11]. Mainstream scientists have occasionally speculated on whether the 'gravitational constant' is truly constant over very long periods of time, but no conclusive evidence of a gradual increase or decrease has been found [12]. Theosophy asserts that during the life-period of a planet or star, gravitational forces do not in fact remain constant. The first half of a planet's life (the 'descending arc') is said to be characterized by the condensation of matter from a primordial, ethereal state, implying an increase in the attractive and cohesive forces. It is followed by the reverse process of etherealization and spiritualization (the 'ascending arc'), when the attractive and cohesive forces weaken and matter becomes increasingly radioactive [13]. References Levitation technology [1] Paul LaViolette, Beyond the big bang: Ancient myth and the science of continuous creation, Rochester, VE: Park Street Press, 1995, p. 320; Ian Lawton and Chris Ogilvie-Herald, Giza: The truth, London: Virgin, 1999, p. 201. [2] Andrew Collins, Gods of Eden: Egypt's lost legacy and the genesis of civilisation, London: Headline, 1998, pp. 58-62. [3] Ibid., pp. 35-37, 62-63. [4] Giza: The truth, pp. 198-210. [5] Robert Bauval and Graham Hancock, Keeper of genesis, London: Heinemann, 1996, pp. 28-29. [6] Andrew Collins, 'Baalbek Lebanon's sacred fortress', http://www.andrewcollins.net/page/articles/baalbek.htm; Collins, Gods of Eden, pp. 63-64; David Hatcher Childress, Lost cities of Atlantis, ancient Europe & the Mediterranean, Stelle, IL: Adventures Unlimited Press, 1996, pp. 31-36, 48-50; Christian and Barbara Joy O'Brien, The shining ones, Kemble, Cirencester: Dianthus Publishing, 2001, pp. 265-82. [7] The shining ones, p. 269. [8] http://www.lessing4.de/megaliths/non_europ.htm. [9] Gods of Eden, pp. 66-72. [10] H.P. Blavatsky, The secret doctrine, Pasadena, CA: Theosophical University Press, 1977 (1888), 1:554-566. [11] Theo Paijmans, Free energy pioneer: John Worrell Keely, Lilburn, GA: IllumiNet Press, 1998, pp. 58, 144, 200, 207-212; Clara Bloomfield Moore, Keely and his discoveries: Aerial navigation, London: Kegan Paul, Trench, Trübner & Co., 1893, Mokelumne Hill, CA: Health Research, 1971, pp. 106, 122-123; Dale Pond, Universal laws never before revealed: Keely's secrets, Santa Fe, NM: Message Company, 1996, pp. 54-60, 214-217, 232-234, 257 (http://www.svpvril.com); Dan A. Davidson, Energy: Breakthroughs to new free energy devices, Greenville, TE: RIVAS, 1990, pp. 12-13. [12] Christopher Dunn, The Giza power plant: Technologies of ancient Egypt, Santa Fe, NM: Bear & Co, 1988, pp. 109-119; Frank Joseph, 'Mysteries of Coral Castle', Fate, 1998, http://www.parascope.com/en/articles/coralCastle.htm; Kathy Doore, 'The enigma of Coral Castle: a geomantic wonder', http://www.labyrinthina.com/coral.htm. Human levitation [1] Rodney Charles and Anna Jordan, Lighter than air: Miracles of human flight from Christian saints to native American spirits, Fairfield, IO: Sunstar Publishing, 1995, pp. 155-180; Stuart Gordon, The paranormal: An illustrated encyclopedia, London: Headline, 1992, p. 395; Brian Inglis, The paranormal: An encyclopedia of psychic phenomena, London: Paladin, 1985, pp. 159-160; Richard S. Broughton, Parapsychology: The controversial science, New York: Ballantine Books, 1991, pp. 52-53. [2] William Crookes, Researches in the phenomena of spiritualism, London: J. Burns, 1874, Pomeroy, WA: Health Research, n.d., pp. 9-19, 21-43, 88-91; H.P. Blavatsky, Isis unveiled, Pasadena, CA: Theosophical University Press, 1972 (1877), 1:202-204, 358-359. [3] Researches in the phenomena of spiritualism, pp. 89-90; Gordon, The paranormal, pp. 395-396; Inglis, The paranormal, p. 161. [4] Inglis, The paranormal, pp. 161-162. [5] Brian Inglis, Natural and supernatural: A history of the paranormal, Bridport, Dorset: Prism Press, Lindfield, NSW: Unity Press, 1992, p. 425. [6] Louis Jacolliot, Occult science in India and among the ancients, NY: University Books, 1971, p. 257. [7] Ibid., pp. 237-238. [8] Lighter than air, pp. 64-65. [9] Ibid., p. 132. [10] Alexandra David-Neel, With mystics and magicians in Tibet, London: Penguin Books, 1937, p. 186. [11] Lighter than air, pp. 98-99. [12] D. Hatcher Childress (ed.), The anti-gravity handbook, Kempton, IL: Adventures Unlimited Press, 1993, p. 171. Theosophical writings [1] H.P. Blavatsky, Isis unveiled, Pasadena, CA: Theosophical University Press, 1972 (1877), 1:271. [2] William Q. Judge, Echoes of the orient, San Diego, CA: Point Loma Publications, 1975, 1:336. [3] H.P. Blavatsky collected writings, Wheaton, IL: Theosophical Publishing House, 1950-91, 5:152-153. [4] Blavatsky collected writings, 10:391. [5] G. de Purucker, The esoteric tradition, Pasadena, CA: Theosophical University Press, 2nd ed., 1940, p. 441. [6] Ibid., pp. 860-861. [7] Ibid., p. 861fn. [8] Isis unveiled, 1:xxiii-iv; 1:497-498. [9] Blavatsky collected writings, 1:244. [10] W.Q. Judge, The ocean of theosophy, Pasadena, CA: Theosophical University Press, 1973 (1893), p. 154. [11] Blavatsky collected writings, 4:167-169. [12] Rupert Sheldrake, Seven experiments that could change the world, London: Fourth Estate, 1994, pp. 176-178. [13] H.P. Blavatsky, The secret doctrine, Pasadena, CA: Theosophical University Press, 1977 (1888), 1:159, 2:68fn, 250, 308fn; The esoteric tradition, pp. 324-327, 453-454, 760; G. de Purucker, Studies in occult philosophy, Pasadena, CA: Theosophical University Press, 1945, pp. 450-451; A.T. Barker (comp.), The mahatma letters to A.P. Sinnett, Pasadena, CA: Theosophical University Press, 2nd ed., 1926, pp. 98-99. Gravity and Antigravity: Contents

i miei link ( my link )

pics
hold home page
resume safety n
hold home page
resume safety n
hold home page
resume safety n
hold home page
resume safety n
hold home page
resume safety n
hold home page
resume safety n

enrico valbonesi

mail Enrico Valbonesi


Italia