Blog

Sep 22, 2012

Debunking Laithwaite’s Critics

Posted by in category: physics

Pervious blog post in this debunking series

Recently I had an interesting discussion about Laithwaite’s Big Wheel demonstration.

Note that the late Professor Eric Laithwaite was Professor of Heavy Electrical Engineering at Imperial College, and inventor of the linear motor, and the maglev train technology which Germany and China have taken the lead. The poor Brits they missed out on their own invention.

The Big Wheel experiment is basically this. Attach a wheel to the end of a 3-ft (1 m) rod. Spin this wheel to 3,000 rpm or more. Then rotate this rod with the spinning wheel at the other end. The technical description is, rotate the spin vector.

The Ni fields solves the Big Wheel experiment to give acceleration a=ωrωs√h is governed by the rotation ωr, spin ωs, and the physical structure √h, and shows that both weight loss and gain are observable. If the spin and rotation are of like sense to the observer, the force is toward the observer. If unlike then the force is away from the observer.

Then somebody pointed me to link at Imperial College that said that the late Prof Laithwaite had “coming to a series of false conclusions”. I was very surprised, especially since I did both my undergraduate and post graduate at UK Universities.

All this ‘exotic’ mathematics to prove Laithwaite was ‘wrong’. What arrogance. If Imperial College had asked very simple and obvious question they would not have posted such nonsense. How can the human wrist carry a 50lb (approximately 23 kg) weight at the end of a 3 ft ( 1 m) rod? Obviously this Imperial College ‘research’ was conducted by someone who had no idea how to do emperical validation.

This raises the question, are British Universities into closing off the minds of future generations or are they about empowering their future industry leaders to find the … truth?

—————————————————————————————————

Benjamin T Solomon is the author & principal investigator of the 12-year study into the theoretical & technological feasibility of gravitation modification, titled An Introduction to Gravity Modification, to achieve interstellar travel in our lifetimes. For more information visit iSETI LLC, Interstellar Space Exploration Technology Initiative.

Solomon is inviting all serious participants to his LinkedIn Group Interstellar Travel & Gravity Modification.

3

Comments — comments are now closed.

  • Martin Kask on September 25, 2012 2:02 am

    What arrogance it is to try to sell the quackery book on this site.

    The only worthwhile posts on this blog were recently made by Gary Michael Church. And when he posted a post for the quacksmiths to “buzz off” the post got deleted. Here is the repost:
    “Go away.…GO AWAY!

    From American Anti-gravity; “Creative ideas from unique innovators across society, including psychic powers, social activism, UFO’s, and more”

    This garbage does not belong on this blog any more than Benjamin the gravity modifier and his quackery;

    “There is a new formula for gravitational acceleration I discovered in 2007 that doesnt require mass. It’s g = (tau)c^2, where c is the velocity of light and tau is short for te change in time dialation divided by the distance over time dialation. It works for gravitational fields, it works for mechanical forces: if you tie a stone to a string and rotate it it will give you the exact acceleration and it also works for electromagnetic fields, that is why we can use electromagnetic fields to modify gravity.”

    You are a goofball quack and need to go somewhere else. This blog is about safeguarding humanity and transhumanism– not UFO’s and Anti-gravity pseudo-science. Idiots like you and Mad Otto make a joke out of this site and disappoint the people coming here looking for information. You disgust me.

    Go away. GET OUT! Take Mad Otto with you.”

    It is obvious that the goal of Solomon and Otto is not to save humankind but to make money writing about whatever captures the minds of the audience. Be it horribly wrong or not.

    Go away and shut up already indeed!

  • Benjamin T. Solomon on September 27, 2012 7:19 am

    Martin Kask & Gary Church, thanks for “liking” my post.

    If you don’t appreciate the power of mathematics and its essential nature for the progress of science and engineering, let me explain some more.

    What Imperial College did not do was put numbers into their formula and check if it matched Laithwaite’s Big Wheel experiment.

    Gyroscopic precession is off by 2 orders of magnitude. That is the reason why Imperial College is incorrect. Very sloppy of them.

    Therefore, if Imperial College can make that sort of mistakes, I am not surprised that lesser beings such as yourselves make the same mistake, too.

  • Sandro on November 15, 2012 12:15 pm

    Dear Adam,My name is Gabrielle Pedriani, and I work at CBS News in Washington, DC. I’ve been conducting some reeacrsh into helium-3 on the moon, and I’ve noticed that you have some very strong viewpoints concerning this matter. I would love to speak with you about what you know, and about why you believe that mining the moon for helium-3 is not yet economically feasible. I would also be interested in hearing what you believe to be the next best thing: how can we utilize space most efficiently?You can reach me by e-mail at , or by telephone at 202−457−1526. I look forward to hearing from you soon,Best,Gabrielle