on 21 March 2008
I'll confess that I haven't quite finished reading my way through this book yet. However, in summary, I can say that:
- On the one hand the book introduces a number of very interesting topics presented in a free and independent-thinking manner (which is always healthy and refreshing), but the items often seem to have nothing to do with building anti-gravity devices;
- On the other hand it is largely written by people who seem to have very little basic knowledge of physics or mathematics.
As an example of my second point, the opening chapter doesn't leave the door open to the reader's confidence in the writer. I found myself writing critiques in the margins, as a teacher would do when marking an assignment submitted by a student! Such wording as "... the product of mass multiplied by ..." is not from the pen of someone with much knowledge of even basic college mathematics. Furthermore, he states that half an object's mass multiplied by the square of its velocity is its MOMENTUM, whereas every half-awake college physics student will tell you that that's the object's KINETIC ENERGY! He also bases much of his opening arguments on the statement that gravity is an acceleration downwards (i.e. towards the centre of the Earth) whereas gravity is actually a force, acting towards the centre of the Earth, which causes objects to undergo acceleration downwards when not prevented from doing so by some other force. Likewise, he claims that anti-gravity is an acceleration upwards, although, of course, anti-gravity would actually be a force opposing the force of gravity. Not quite the same thing. Einstein's Principle Of Equivalence suggests that, were we to find ourselves in a closed system, we would be hard-pushed to tell the difference between being acted on by a gravitational force and undergoing a constant acceleration. Not quite the same thing physically, however.
Elsewhere, he claims that an electron has a zero rest mass!! This is clear rubbish!
He also refers to the use of a handheld-sized Betatron. However, apart from the fact that you need very high powered electromagnetic devices to keep the electrons in such a tightly-bending path, you'd also have to deal with the fact that electrons forced to move in such a tight path would emit hard x-rays in the whole plane or motion!
There is also an equation presented in a later chapter; an interpretation of the Biefield-Brown Anti-Gravity Equation. This is written in a way that not even a college physicist or mathematician would write it. Firstly, the mass m cancels out completely in the form as written! Secondly, the equation can be written in a simpler form. Just odd, in my view.
There are other things I could mention but I think that's enough. My point is, if I'm reading something with a basis in mathematics and the sciences (particularly physics) then I'm not instilled with confidence when I see basic stuff being stated incorrectly or written unscientifically.
After some time, though, I realised that I should stop reading it as a scientific book but as a bit of pure entertainment instead. I suggest you do the same if you ever find it in your hands one cold, stormy night. (I'd recommend you also accompany it with a malt whisky too!)