Invention: Action Device To Generate Unidirectional Force.

(Abhi) wrote in message om...
Om...
Sarve bhavantu sukhinah
Sarve santu niramayah
Sarve bhadrani pasyantu
Ma kaschit dukha bhag bhavet!

I am giving below mechanism of Action device to generate
unidirectional force. As figures are necessary to understand what I am
saying, please visit my homepage
http://www.geocities.com/action_device


The "Dean Drive" was patented in the early 1960's by Norman Dean.

http://www.jerrypournelle.com/science/dean.html

http://www.npl.washington.edu/AV/altvw83.html

You can see the copies of the patent papers of the Dean Drive at

http://groups.msn.com/AntigravityRes...ss/nldean.msnw

It was US patent # 2,886,975

Arf!
Arfur

Oh, by the way, the patent papers have been freely available to anyone
for the last 40 years. In that time no one has actually built a working
prototype that could pass a REAL test. Dean's original prototypes showed
small weight loss on a bathroom scale showing that vibrations lead to bad
readings on bathroom scales. One of his prototypes "lifted" far enough
of a table (and on national television too!) to slide a piece of paper under
it. I was reminded of this "demonstration" once when I was able to slide
a piece of paper under a switched-on belt sander. Same principle. The
vibrating mechanism is making many quick "micro-jumps" off the table each
second. During the "up" part of the jumps the paper moves. Since there
are so many of the jumps per second the movement seems smooth and continuous
much like a 24-frame per second motion picture.

To actually test a "unidirectional force" machine (or, as others call it
a "reactionless drive" I quote the method given at Jerry Pournelle's site
(the first of the URL's I gave above):


"If anyone does have a candidate device for producing reactionless acceleration
-- that is, linear acceleration without throwing mass overboard and without
reacting with a medium such as air or water -- the first test is to suspend it
on two wires attached so that the plane of the two wires is normal to the
direction of thrust-- that is, make a swing and put your gadget on it facing
in the normal direction of travel of the swing. Now turn it on. If it will
hang non-vertically, get interested. Now cover it with a plastic garbage bag
and see if it will still hang non-vertically. If it will still do so, turn it
off, and if it settles to a vertical angle, and you can do this repeatedly,
and it hasn't lost any mass during the experiments, call your local physics
professor. Or call me. I'll take care of notifying the Swedish Academy. But
until it will do that, I don't need to look at it…"





Or please email me at or
to get doc files.

Patent pending at Govt. of India patent office Mumbai
branch(Application No. 715/MUM/2003 and 754/MUM/2003)

I am indeed emotionally drained to extent of crashing.

Thanks.


[patent details deleted to conserve bandwidth]

-Abhi.

"Arfur Dogfrey" wrote in message
m...
(Abhi) wrote in message
om...
Om...
Sarve bhavantu sukhinah
Sarve santu niramayah
Sarve bhadrani pasyantu
Ma kaschit dukha bhag bhavet!

I am giving below mechanism of Action device to generate
unidirectional force. As figures are necessary to understand what I am
saying, please visit my homepage
http://www.geocities.com/action_device


The "Dean Drive" was patented in the early 1960's by Norman Dean.

http://www.jerrypournelle.com/science/dean.html

http://www.npl.washington.edu/AV/altvw83.html

You can see the copies of the patent papers of the Dean Drive at

http://groups.msn.com/AntigravityRes...ss/nldean.msnw

It was US patent # 2,886,975

Arf!
Arfur

Oh, by the way, the patent papers have been freely available to anyone
for the last 40 years. In that time no one has actually built a working
prototype that could pass a REAL test. Dean's original prototypes showed
small weight loss on a bathroom scale showing that vibrations lead to bad
readings on bathroom scales. One of his prototypes "lifted" far enough
of a table (and on national television too!) to slide a piece of paper
under
it. I was reminded of this "demonstration" once when I was able to slide
a piece of paper under a switched-on belt sander. Same principle. The
vibrating mechanism is making many quick "micro-jumps" off the table each
second. During the "up" part of the jumps the paper moves. Since there
are so many of the jumps per second the movement seems smooth and
continuous
much like a 24-frame per second motion picture.

To actually test a "unidirectional force" machine (or, as others call it
a "reactionless drive" I quote the method given at Jerry Pournelle's site
(the first of the URL's I gave above):


"If anyone does have a candidate device for producing reactionless
acceleration
-- that is, linear acceleration without throwing mass overboard and
without
reacting with a medium such as air or water -- the first test is to
suspend it
on two wires attached so that the plane of the two wires is normal to the
direction of thrust-- that is, make a swing and put your gadget on it
facing
in the normal direction of travel of the swing. Now turn it on. If it will
hang non-vertically, get interested. Now cover it with a plastic garbage
bag
and see if it will still hang non-vertically. If it will still do so, turn
it
off, and if it settles to a vertical angle, and you can do this
repeatedly,
and it hasn't lost any mass during the experiments, call your local
physics
professor. Or call me. I'll take care of notifying the Swedish Academy.
But
until it will do that, I don't need to look at it."

That means that you did not study radiation pressure.
There is a company that makes a Laser propulsion systems
and it demonstrated lifting small discs on NOVA TV series.
The principal works in vacuum as well!

Sincerely,

Mathew Orman
www.ultra-faster-than-light.com
www.radio-faster-than-light.com

(Arfur Dogfrey) wrote in message om...
(Abhi) wrote in message om...
Om...
Sarve bhavantu sukhinah
Sarve santu niramayah
Sarve bhadrani pasyantu
Ma kaschit dukha bhag bhavet!

I am giving below mechanism of Action device to generate
unidirectional force. As figures are necessary to understand what I am
saying, please visit my homepage
http://www.geocities.com/action_device


The "Dean Drive" was patented in the early 1960's by Norman Dean.

http://www.jerrypournelle.com/science/dean.html

http://www.npl.washington.edu/AV/altvw83.html

You can see the copies of the patent papers of the Dean Drive at

http://groups.msn.com/AntigravityRes...ss/nldean.msnw

It was US patent # 2,886,975

Arf!
Arfur

Oh, by the way, the patent papers have been freely available to anyone
for the last 40 years. In that time no one has actually built a working
prototype that could pass a REAL test. Dean's original prototypes showed
small weight loss on a bathroom scale showing that vibrations lead to bad
readings on bathroom scales. One of his prototypes "lifted" far enough
of a table (and on national television too!) to slide a piece of paper under
it. I was reminded of this "demonstration" once when I was able to slide
a piece of paper under a switched-on belt sander. Same principle. The
vibrating mechanism is making many quick "micro-jumps" off the table each
second. During the "up" part of the jumps the paper moves. Since there
are so many of the jumps per second the movement seems smooth and continuous
much like a 24-frame per second motion picture.

To actually test a "unidirectional force" machine (or, as others call it
a "reactionless drive" I quote the method given at Jerry Pournelle's site
(the first of the URL's I gave above):


"If anyone does have a candidate device for producing reactionless acceleration
-- that is, linear acceleration without throwing mass overboard and without
reacting with a medium such as air or water -- the first test is to suspend it
on two wires attached so that the plane of the two wires is normal to the
direction of thrust-- that is, make a swing and put your gadget on it facing
in the normal direction of travel of the swing. Now turn it on. If it will
hang non-vertically, get interested. Now cover it with a plastic garbage bag
and see if it will still hang non-vertically. If it will still do so, turn it
off, and if it settles to a vertical angle, and you can do this repeatedly,
and it hasn't lost any mass during the experiments, call your local physics
professor. Or call me. I'll take care of notifying the Swedish Academy. But
until it will do that, I don't need to look at it?"





Or please email me at or
to get doc files.

Patent pending at Govt. of India patent office Mumbai
branch(Application No. 715/MUM/2003 and 754/MUM/2003)

I am indeed emotionally drained to extent of crashing.

Thanks.


[patent details deleted to conserve bandwidth]

-Abhi.




Douglas Eagleson




The Dean Device is unrelated to the one announced in this thread
idiot.

A patent is not an invention when it does something that this one
in this thread was designed to do. Making the unidirectional
force the invention's capacity to be original in total.

SO go back to school and try to live like a real inventor
and do something that is required by one.

"Douglas Eagleson" wrote in message
om...

The Dean Device is unrelated to the one announced in this thread
idiot.

A patent is not an invention when it does something that this one
in this thread was designed to do. Making the unidirectional
force the invention's capacity to be original in total.

SO go back to school and try to live like a real inventor
and do something that is required by one.

Although the Dean drive used an eccentric cam arrangement while Abhijit's
contraption uses a flapper, the basic idea is almost identical: namely that
nonlinear accelerations can somehow be exploited to extract net thrust from
a closed loop system.

Minor Crank

Richard Herring ] wrote in message ...

Unfortunately, as with most of Al's polemics, he's talking through
the
wrong orifice.

I did a quick web search and found
http://www.lboro.ac.uk/departments/c...reprints/Roy.p
df

without looking very hard:

1991 census: number of households with toilets in rural areas [of
India]: 10.7 million. In a decade it's probably improved somewhat.

I won't bore you with the other figures.

Yep. Uncle Al is a dog and pony show ... what the hell _is_ a dog and
pony show, anyway!?

In sci.physics, Edward Green

wrote
on 4 Aug 2003 13:44:25 -0700
:
Richard Herring ] wrote in message ...

Unfortunately, as with most of Al's polemics, he's talking through
the
wrong orifice.

I did a quick web search and found
http://www.lboro.ac.uk/departments/c...prints/Roy.pdf

without looking very hard:

1991 census: number of households with toilets in rural areas [of
India]: 10.7 million. In a decade it's probably improved somewhat.

I won't bore you with the other figures.

Yep. Uncle Al is a dog and pony show ... what the hell _is_ a dog and
pony show, anyway!?

No doubt it's a show with a dog and pony. :-) However, I'll
admit I do wonder.

It appears that the Indians now have the right number of flush toilets,
anyway.

--
#191,
It's still legal to go .sigless.

The Ghost In The Machine wrote:

No doubt it's a show with a dog and pony. :-) However, I'll
admit I do wonder.

The dog is trained to hop up on the pony's back and ride him like a
little jockey.


It appears that the Indians now have the right number of flush toilets,
anyway.

a quarter of a billion crappers? I doubt it. They still use the Ganges
for that purpose.

Bob Kolker

(Douglas Eagleson) wrote in message . com...
(Arfur Dogfrey) wrote in message om...
(Abhi) wrote in message om...
Om...
Sarve bhavantu sukhinah
Sarve santu niramayah
Sarve bhadrani pasyantu
Ma kaschit dukha bhag bhavet!

I am giving below mechanism of Action device to generate
unidirectional force. As figures are necessary to understand what I am
saying, please visit my homepage
http://www.geocities.com/action_device


The "Dean Drive" was patented in the early 1960's by Norman Dean.

http://www.jerrypournelle.com/science/dean.html

http://www.npl.washington.edu/AV/altvw83.html

You can see the copies of the patent papers of the Dean Drive at

http://groups.msn.com/AntigravityRes...ss/nldean.msnw

It was US patent # 2,886,975

Arf!
Arfur

Oh, by the way, the patent papers have been freely available to anyone
for the last 40 years. In that time no one has actually built a working
prototype that could pass a REAL test. Dean's original prototypes showed
small weight loss on a bathroom scale showing that vibrations lead to bad
readings on bathroom scales. One of his prototypes "lifted" far enough
of a table (and on national television too!) to slide a piece of paper under
it. I was reminded of this "demonstration" once when I was able to slide
a piece of paper under a switched-on belt sander. Same principle. The
vibrating mechanism is making many quick "micro-jumps" off the table each
second. During the "up" part of the jumps the paper moves. Since there
are so many of the jumps per second the movement seems smooth and continuous
much like a 24-frame per second motion picture.

To actually test a "unidirectional force" machine (or, as others call it
a "reactionless drive" I quote the method given at Jerry Pournelle's site
(the first of the URL's I gave above):


"If anyone does have a candidate device for producing reactionless acceleration
-- that is, linear acceleration without throwing mass overboard and without
reacting with a medium such as air or water -- the first test is to suspend it
on two wires attached so that the plane of the two wires is normal to the
direction of thrust-- that is, make a swing and put your gadget on it facing
in the normal direction of travel of the swing. Now turn it on. If it will
hang non-vertically, get interested. Now cover it with a plastic garbage bag
and see if it will still hang non-vertically. If it will still do so, turn it
off, and if it settles to a vertical angle, and you can do this repeatedly,
and it hasn't lost any mass during the experiments, call your local physics
professor. Or call me. I'll take care of notifying the Swedish Academy. But
until it will do that, I don't need to look at it?"





Or please email me at or
to get doc files.

Patent pending at Govt. of India patent office Mumbai
branch(Application No. 715/MUM/2003 and 754/MUM/2003)

I am indeed emotionally drained to extent of crashing.

Thanks.


[patent details deleted to conserve bandwidth]

-Abhi.




Douglas Eagleson




The Dean Device is unrelated to the one announced in this thread
idiot.


Geeze, I post some interesting stuff about a previously patented
invention that claims to do the same thing and I get called an
"idiot." The civility level here sure has dropped.



A patent is not an invention when it does something that this one
in this thread was designed to do. Making the unidirectional
force the invention's capacity to be original in total.

SO go back to school and try to live like a real inventor
and do something that is required by one.

I'm not an "inventor." Never claimed to be. Just sharing something
that seemed to be of interest. Ask your mother to teach you some
manners.

Arf!
Arfur

"Jeff Root" wrote in message
om...

I didn't read the original poster's web page closely enough to
ferret out the mechanism of its supposed operation. But he did
say something about turning the nut on the central screw "very
slowly".

I had stopped reading the patent after the first couple of "embodiments" and
didn't get to the part where he talked about turning the nut very slowly.

The Dean Drive requires fast action to get an apparent
effect. What I saw on the original poster's web page didn't
indicate any fast action. So it seems like quite a different
mechanism.

My initial impression was that it was based on similar principles, but now I
see that I was wrong.

However crazy the Dean Drive was, Abhi's antigravity device is even crazier.

I got (vaguely) that it has something to do with applying a
force in one direction which causes motion in a different
direction, so that action and reaction are no longer exactly
opposite, and gravity is no longer a problem. :-)

That's pretty much it, which is why I initially thought it was the same as
the Dean drive.

The Dean drive at least had some semi-plausible pseudoscience backing it up.
Abhi's device is just plain STUPID.

Can you explain it any better?

I don't know how to explain why 2+2 equals 5.

Minor Crank

"Minor Crank" wrote in message . net...
"Jeff Root" wrote in message
om...

I didn't read the original poster's web page closely enough to
ferret out the mechanism of its supposed operation. But he did
say something about turning the nut on the central screw "very
slowly".

I had stopped reading the patent after the first couple of "embodiments" and
didn't get to the part where he talked about turning the nut very slowly.

The Dean Drive requires fast action to get an apparent
effect. What I saw on the original poster's web page didn't
indicate any fast action. So it seems like quite a different
mechanism.

My initial impression was that it was based on similar principles, but now I
see that I was wrong.

However crazy the Dean Drive was, Abhi's antigravity device is even crazier.

I got (vaguely) that it has something to do with applying a
force in one direction which causes motion in a different
direction, so that action and reaction are no longer exactly
opposite, and gravity is no longer a problem. :-)

That's pretty much it, which is why I initially thought it was the same as
the Dean drive.

The Dean drive at least had some semi-plausible pseudoscience backing it up.
Abhi's device is just plain STUPID.

It is indeed STUPID.

Everything began way back in 1988 when I was studying in first year of
college. I came across a book on origin of universe and Glimpses of
the world history. After reading these books, I came to know that the
world does not know cause of big-bang! What's big deal! I have got 100
out of 100 in mathematics. I can solve this big-bang problem. I began
to think over that singularity from where our universe originated.
And it triggered a chain reaction, which I was finding unable to
control.

In matter of few days or weeks, I was finding myself without caste,
religion, patriotism and even God. Instead of big-bang, I was looking
at my hands and thinking where I will go if I die and my dead body is
burned down to ashes. At the age of 18, I was thinking why should I
live at all if I am going to die some day. Money, fame, power was no
more motivation for me to live. I was completely shattered at that
time. But my love towards my parents forced me to live.

Five years after, I was finding myself in heaven with all the
happiness in universe. Six months after, I was losing it. I was
fighting battle for about nine months but lost. My happiness is gone.
Now trap began. If I die, then it "proves" that I am coward. If I just
sit back in sadness, it "proves" that I never had ability to earn
respect, money in society. So only option was that, just do it somehow
without any motivation. Just keep dragging myself.

Now eight years after, I have this "Action Device" which will change
your world dramatically. But what about my world? I lost it eight
years ago. Understanding God and life, stars, galaxies, Newton,
Einstein, millions of dollars, fame all over world, people calling me
genius etc. these things does not motivate me. I knew it way back in
1988.

I "know" that this Action Device works. Some day, you people will see
it in action. It is just matter of time. It is very simple. I just
need to take one little step. But staring at God, I just want to know
why should I take that one little step.

This is standoff between God and me. Why should I take that one little
step to change your world if it is not going to change my world?

This is my reaction to God.

-Abhi.