Gravitational Field Generation: A Third Possible Contender in New Physics for Energy Generation (Gregory Daigle)

The following post has been submitted by Gregory Daigle

A hypothesis is just a hypothesis until it has some observational or experimental confirmation. So it is with great interest that I recently read that Prof. Martin Tajmar, known for his testing of the EmDrive, has set his laboratory upon the task of performing experiments featuring a different potential energy generation technology that like Steorn and LENR also is an outlier in the realm of “new physics”.

You may recall that Tajmar is the Professor and Chair for Space Systems at the Dresden University of Technology’s Institute of Aerospace Engineering who confirmed some of the initial positive results of the EmDrive device for propellantless propulsion, as described in the International Business Times.  Dr. Tajmar has also published other studies this year attempting to replicate previous research involving propellantless propulsion including experiments by E. Podkletnov and G. Modanese and Henry Wallace in the 1970s. However, in one replication he found only an anomaly ascribed to vibrational artifacts, and in the other found inconclusive results due to mechanical vibration, acoustic effects and unexpected destruction of the apparatus support structure.

So what does this have to do with energy generation? Tajmar himself published several articles beginning more than a decade ago that reported generation of a gravitational anomaly (see the listing at the conclusion of this article). These studies led to Tajmar filing a patent on a gravity generator, which if it ever worked might have been used to generate electricity: (WO/2007/082324) METHOD FOR GENERATING A GRAVITATIONAL FIELD AND GRAVITATIONAL FIELD GENERATOR.

One notable aspect of any gravity field generator employing rotational components and producing an axial gravity-like force would be a second force component in an azimuthal direction (tangential in the plane of rotation) producing torque on the rotor. In such a configuration energy need not to be supplied to keep the angular velocity constant. In other words, it becomes a generator suitable for electrical power production. Unfortunately, in his original experiments Tajmar’s configuration was designed to produce a field acting in the circumferential direction of the rotating ring, opposing its origin, not an axial field. However, there is an axial design soon to be tested by Tajmar that could be a candidate for a power generator.

Enter the work of Jochem Hauser and Walter Droescher’s models expanding general relativity to include two additional gravity-like forces that interact with electromagnetism to produce gravity-like fields. Jochem Hauser is a computer simulation consultant to ESA and professor emeritus in Germany. He and Martin Tajmar, who have been in communication with each other since about 2005, have agreed to collaborate on a “bench test” of Hauser’s designs involving the rotation of selected materials to produce an axial gravity-like field.  A grad student has been assigned to it and will be performing tests in the next few months.

Just weeks ago a new book by Hauser and his collaborator Walter Droescher entitled, “Introduction to Physics, Astrophysics, and Cosmology of Gravity-Like Fields,” became available and in it those upcoming tests are mentioned. Their book is the most complete presentation of their work to date. If Hauser is correct, one outcome of generating an axial gravity-like field would be a tangential force on the rotating components that could generate a self-sustaining rotation.  This secondary force would be the gravitational analog of a homopolar electric motor by translating axial and radial flows of current into an azimuthal rotation of a magnetic rotor. The force in the case of a homopolar motor is called the Lorentz force. In the case of this bench test it has been termed the Heim-Lorentz force, a nod to Burkhard Heim on whose foundation (but not the mathematics) the work of Hauser and Droescher are based.

As Hauser admits, he could be wrong and none of this might work (though I hope that is not the case after having written a book about him and his efforts). He has proposed two versions of the experiment for producing axial fields. The first is the older approach described in his and Droescher’s early papers. That version comprises a superconducting Pb coil with a rotating Nb disk operating at the temperature of liquid He (4-6º K). The second is a much simpler experimental configuration consisting of an external ring, comprising a mixture of two elements, and an embedded disk of special nonmetallic material. The rotating ring-disk assembly should have the advantage of working at the temperature of liquid N (75º K).

If positive results are obtained this spring, then both the E-Cat (with results due out early in 2016) and Steorn (independent confirmations also expected in early 2016) may have some competition.

Publications on gravity field generation by Tajmar. Although his earliest studies indicated significant anomalous results, later studies show lesser effects.
M. Tajmar and C. J. de Matos. Gravitomagnetic field of a rotating super- conductor and of a rotating superfluid. Physica C, 385:551–554, 2003.
C. J. de Matos and M. Tajmar. Gravitomagnetic London moment and the graviton mass inside a superconductor. Physica C, 432:167–172, 2005. Doi: 10.1016/j.physc.2005.08.004
M. Tajmar and C. J. de Matos. Extended analysis of gravitomagnetic fields in rotating superconductors and superfluids. Physica C, 420:56–60, 2005. Doi: 10.1016/j.physc.2005.01.008.
M. Tajmar, F. Plesescu and K. Marhold. Measurement of gravitomagnetic and acceleration fields around rotating superconductors. AIP Conf. Proc. 880, p. 1071-1082 (2007).

Gregory Daigle

  • GreenWin

    Unbalanced Lorentz magnetic field effects suggests propulsion AND energy can be harvested from a superconductor and permanent magnet system. The differential in magnetic fields theoretically produces energy – harvestable as propulsion or (potentially) energy.

    Hauser and Tajmar seem to be working in the same realm as the Nassikas thruster – Lorentz effect. Producing rotational energy at zero~low resistance via high temp superconduction (e.g. 77 K) induces gravitational anomaly. This in turn can be leveraged into propulsion or an axial field (Tajmar) able to produce electrical energy.

    All of this is made far more interesting with the introduction of room temp super-conductivity via metamaterials that are the focus of nano-matter research. As Dr. Paul LaViolette suggests, these systems blow away fuel-based propulsion systems like NASA’s Xenon-ion thruster.

    • Agaricus
    • georgehants

      Morning, one year at the UK UFO conference in, I think, the early nineties Paul LaViolette gave a lecture on his advanced thinking from those days, I still have a signed copy of one of his books.
      Funny how things go around and around.

      • Zephir

        The first cold fusion experiments are also one century old already – they just were ignored again, again and again…

  • Allan Shura

    The e-cat will definitely will have some competition unless it is soon released. Platinum invests
    claims a 5x over unity compared to 1.2 on their previous generator. Though it appears many
    generators of the first version were manufactured I have not heard of where thy might be in service.
    In short do not count out new generator innovations.

  • gdaigle

    Heim Theory Falsified… as it should have been since Heim got key mathematics wrong. As I noted, their model known as Extended Heim Theory, uses Heim’s name only as a nod to his having developed a polymetric tensor theory. They discarded Heim’s math and began afresh to arrive at this new model.

  • damn_right _man

    No, Tajmar did not confirm the EM-Drive. You are the next person, interpreting his statements blindly to fit Your personal favour. Tajmar said, that he cannot say yes or no definitely. He also added, that more experiments have to be made prior to any real statements. Stick to the facts.

    • Andrew

      No one here made that claim however in the cited article Tajmar did say.

      “Our test campaign cannot confirm or refute the claims of the EmDrive but intends to independently assess possible side-effects in the measurements methods used so far. Nevertheless, we do observe thrusts close to the actual predictions after eliminating many possible error sources that should warrant further investigation into the phenomena,” the researchers wrote in their paper.

      Sounds like initial positive results to me.

      • gdaigle

        For clarity’s sake, Tajmar with Fiedler in “Direct Thrust Measurements of an EM Drive and Evaluation of Possible Side-Effects” stated that:

        “Our measurements reveal thrusts as expected from previous claims… however also in directions that should produce no thrust. We therefore achieved a null measurement within our resolution which is on the order of the claimed thrusts. The purpose of the test program was to investigate the EM Drive claims using improved apparatus and methods. To this end it was successful in that we identified experimental areas needing additional attention before any firm conclusions concerning the EM Drive claims could be made. Our test campaign therefore can not confirm or refute the claims of the EM Drive but intends to independently assess possible side-effects in the measurement methods used so far.”

        So my use of “confirmed” was perhaps misleading, in that the study confirmed results of some of the initial studies of the EM Drive, but leaves it open as to whether other errors not previously identified could be the source of the thrust. The EM Drive is by no means firmly validated.

    • Zephir

      As far I can tell, the EM-Drive design tested by Tajmar was highly suboptimal. The latest Tajmar’s results are actually quite consistent with Shawyer’s theory, which clearly says, the lower resonance coefficient we have, the lower the specific trust will be. From this
      perspective these results non only confirmed the EMDrive effect, they also confirmed its existing theory. Tajmar has been told the max return loss was an estimated 12.5dBs. This is a terrible result with at best 360Ws making it into the cavity and then only if the cavity bandwidth is wide enough to handle the magnetron’s power output bandwidth. If not then even less power gets inside the cavity and even more gets rejected and reflected back to the magnetron to heat it up.

  • Curbina not logged in

    There’s a brazilian company that has built what can’t be described as anything else than a massive prototype of a gravity power generation ‘watchamacallit’. They have some patents, too. Would the Tajmar ideas fit with in this complex machinery?

    • gdaigle

      I don’t know enough about that generator to speculate in detail, but it appears to be strictly mechanical. So I would say no. As a non-physicist I struggle to understand the details of Hauser’s Extended Heim Theory, but it does make predictions that are testable both on a macro scale, as with Tajmar’s experiments, and on a smaller scale with something equivalent to a gravitational double-slit experiment. It does require new physics (forces and particles), does not require an aether, and predicts no supersymmetry particles and no dark matter particles. It does predict more than one Higgs particle. It may be mostly right, just a little bit right, or not right at all. That is why having it tested by someone with Tajmar’s track record as an experimentalist is an important step forward. If it is wrong, he is the right person to test it and prove it so.

    • Zephir

      I would also say not – this device is based on Veljko Milkovic’s pendulum, which I personally consider a bogus.

  • Zephir

    In dense aether model it has also a good meaning. After all, Gregory Hodowanec has used the charged capacitors as a gravitational waves detectors before many years already. In general, every material where the motion of charged particles gets spatially constrained can serve as a reflector or generator for longitudinal waves of vacuum. Note also Tajmar research with charged rotating cylinders – it could explain many gravitational anomalies observed with gyroscopes.