Here's Mathis' take on Superconductors from the Majorna paper. It appears that there is a lot of "news" of late on high-temperature superconductors.
-----------------------
The Allais Effect and Majorana
(modern pendulum experiments)
by Miles Mathis
(snip)
These superconducting disks and magnets are not blocking fields, they are accelerating fields. That is clear from the first look at the data and the tools. It is also clear from the by-products. Podkletnov has told of dangerous radiation from the backside of his disks, as one example. What is happening, in the first instance, is that the superconductor is allowing the E/M field of the Earth, which is already going straight up, to go straight up faster than it was. The E/M field I am talking about is emitted radially out from the Earth, in a summed sense. It is a real field made up of real particles. These particles are photons, not electrons, but they have real momenta. They bombard and cause real forces of repulsion. Under normal conditions, this field has to move through the atmosphere, and this slows the field. What happens with the superconductor (without spin) is that a small portion of the atmosphere is cooled to near zero. This allows the E/M field to move through it with less resistance. This is precisely what “superconducting” means. Resistance gets very small, and it is because the motion of the particles in the atmosphere or object has been stopped, or nearly stopped. So you have fewer collisions. Fewer collisions means greater transparency. The E/M field meets less resistance, so it moves more quickly through the atmosphere or object. Quite simple, really. Since it is moving more quickly, it has greater momentum. And so it causes a greater force. It pushes any non-supercooled mass it does meet with a greater force. So the object rises. This is what was happening with Podkletnov’s smoke, above his superconductor. The E/M field was pushing it up.
Under normal circumstances, the E/M field doesn’t cause smoke to rise, because under normal circumstances, all objects, including smoke, have reached a place of balance with the E/M field and gravitational field. The gravitational field impels them down, the E/M field impels them up, and they seek a level of balance. For most objects, this level is on the ground. For smoke, it is some level in the atmosphere, based on the weight of the smoke.
But Podkletnov’s superconductor changes this balance. The E/M field is suddenly moving faster in that vicinity, and things begin to move, seeking a new level of balance. Smoke rises, objects lose weight, and so on. Straightforward mechanics.
Now, in the second instance, Podkletnov adds spin to his superconductor. The effect is increased. What is happening? Any field being blocked now? No. The E/M field is simply being accelerated once more. The superconductor acts like a large fan, blowing the field up. Why up? The old right hand rule of electricity. Every object emits an E/M field, and transmits an E/M field. The E/M field is ubiquitous, as plasma research and other modern research has shown. I assume Podkletnov’s superconductor was spinning CCW, which creates a force up.
This would be the first assumption, but the force can be explained even without the right hand rule. For instance, it may be that the photon field does not act precisely like the electron field. We have no hard-and-fast knowledge that the foundational E/M field obeys a right hand rule. We may have to come up with other rules, based on experience, by looking at experiments like this. We do know, from QED, that we have orthogonal spins creating orthogonal fields, even with the foundational E/M field. This is what Schrodinger’s equations are telling us, among other things. Therefore it is no great difficulty explaining an orthogonal force from a spinning field. We would expect a spinning field to create a force either up or down, and we must look to nature to tell us how things actually work. We spin Podkletnov’s superconductor both directions, collect the data, and then we know. But I hope you can see that it is much easier, not to say much more logical, to propose the mechanics I have proposed here, rather than to propose mysterious and non-mechanical blocking of fields. Besides, blocking the gravitational field breaks so many Newtonian and Einsteinian rules. I am not one for obeying rules for no reason. But I am not one for breaking rules for no reason, either. Einstein’s rule of equivalence is a lovely rule, one that is both logical and backed by a century of data. Why break it when you can keep it by a simple mechanical manipulation?
1Majorana, Q., (1920). "On gravitation. Theoretical and experimental researches", Phil. Mag. [ser. 6] 39, 488-504.
2Russell, H.N. (1921). “On Majorana’s theory of gravitation”. Astrophys. J. 54, 334-346.
3Russell actually proposed a change in mass due to the presence of other mass, to answer Majorana’s evidence.
4Beatty, Millard F., “Principles of Engineering Mechanics, Vol. 2”, p. 184, Springer, 2005.
5Webster, John G., "The Measurement, Instrumentation and Sensors Handbook", p. 15.2. Springer, 1999.
6See my paper on Entropy.
7books.nap.edu/html/gpb/summary.html
8science.nasa.gov/newhome/headlines/ast06aug99_1.htm
9science.nasa.gov/newhome/headlines/ast17jun99_1.htm
10space.com/businesstechnology/technology/anti_grav_000928.html
11See, for example, Murray Gell-Mann's The Quark and the Jaguar, where he and Pauli discuss the fact that Mars is a probability.
Pasted from <
http://milesmathis.com/allais.html>
On the Windhexe: ''An engineer could not have invented this,'' Winsness says. ''As an engineer, you don't try anything that's theoretically impossible.''
