Hi Kyle, > Classical spacetime is not recognized as a medium, just some mathematics > and tensors.
And that means what? Do you really think the Universe is made out of dimensionless math equations? > It will probably be eventually recognized that there is a physical > "something" to the vacuum, but what it is, I don't know, and I doubt > anyone else knows for sure either. You are wrong about that, too. I have fully quantified exactly what the "physical something" of the vacuum is. I have written a white paper on it and delivered it before the PIRT 2006 conference in London last fall. I have also written a book on the topic (Secrets of the Aether) and last weekend presented the theory before a group of scientists in Memphis, Tennessee. If you want to know what the vacuum is, just ask or read the paper. http://www.16pi2.com/files/NewFoundationPhysics.pdf > Whether or not you can push against it, well, I > am not saying you cannot. I am saying you can, and I am not alone. General Relativity also says you can. > I am just saying it looks as if the "lifter" isn't > pushing against anything but a normal dielectric medium of air or a > liquid. I don't deny it looks that way to you. The physics of ion thrust are valid, but they are inapplicable to the lifter. Have you built a thruster device? http://www.fw.hu/bmiklos2000/unipolar.htm > I really have little else to say on this subject, I've done the > experiments > and found that, to my knowledge and experience, the Lifters do not produce > anomalous, unconventional thrust. I have about a dozen other projects to > work on which may be promising, but if I continue to waste time with > things that I know don't work, I am not going to get anywhere. I posted my > findings, and that is all. It is one thing to get a negative result, it is another thing to assume you have fully understood the result. I can't blame you for wanting to do other projects, however. There is not enough thrust in the lifters or thrusters for me to continue with them at this time, either. Dave
