265 lines
11 KiB
Plaintext
265 lines
11 KiB
Plaintext
|
|
||
|
|
|
||
|
|
|
||
|
|
|
||
|
|
(word processor parameters LM=8, RM=75, TM=2, BM=2)
|
||
|
|
Taken from KeelyNet BBS (214) 324-3501
|
||
|
|
Sponsored by Vangard Sciences
|
||
|
|
PO BOX 1031
|
||
|
|
Mesquite, TX 75150
|
||
|
|
|
||
|
|
April 21, 1991
|
||
|
|
|
||
|
|
GRAVITY7.ASC
|
||
|
|
--------------------------------------------------------------------
|
||
|
|
This is a letter to the Editor of the now defunct
|
||
|
|
Flying Saucer magazine of January 1963.
|
||
|
|
--------------------------------------------------------------------
|
||
|
|
Dear Ray (Palmer - Editor);
|
||
|
|
|
||
|
|
I postulate, here, an hypothesis, or possible explanation for
|
||
|
|
the numerous plane (particularly jet) crashes. By correlating
|
||
|
|
several theories I come to this general hypothesis.
|
||
|
|
|
||
|
|
The first theory is that there exists, in certain areas,
|
||
|
|
NEGATIVE ENERGY or, perhaps better stated, REVERSE GRAVITY "fields".
|
||
|
|
|
||
|
|
By this I mean that within the perimeter, extending upward,
|
||
|
|
gravity operates IN REVERSE. I refrain from further explanation, by
|
||
|
|
quoting examples and such, for fear of "contradicting" statements to
|
||
|
|
follow, thus ridding this discussion of needless confusion.
|
||
|
|
|
||
|
|
This second theory is basically that of Shaver with regard to
|
||
|
|
gravity. First, says Shaver's theory, gravity is NOT A PULL FROM
|
||
|
|
WITHIN, but A PUSH FROM WITHOUT.
|
||
|
|
|
||
|
|
This push is accomplished by the planetward flow of "exd".
|
||
|
|
This "exd", for those unfamiliar with Shaver's theories, is the
|
||
|
|
intermediate stage in the TRANSFORMATION OF MATTER INTO ENERGY
|
||
|
|
(called integrance).
|
||
|
|
|
||
|
|
EXD, by the way, is ex-disintegrance. (Which came first, the
|
||
|
|
proverbial chicken or the egg - disintegrance or integrance?)
|
||
|
|
|
||
|
|
The exd particle is the ash of transformation. The fall or
|
||
|
|
condensation of exd into matter, CAUSING FRICTION, PRODUCES the
|
||
|
|
force we call gravity.
|
||
|
|
|
||
|
|
Now, I postulate, by correlating these two theories, that there
|
||
|
|
is some electro-magnetic force set up (responsible for the reverse
|
||
|
|
gravity) that COUNTERACTS THE INFLUX OF EXD (responsible for
|
||
|
|
gravity), thus producing a ZONE OF ZERO GRAVITY.
|
||
|
|
--------------------------------------------------------------------
|
||
|
|
Vangard note..
|
||
|
|
|
||
|
|
We must bring up two items of interest at this juncture,
|
||
|
|
|
||
|
|
1) EXD can be thought of as TACHYON energy, AETHER or
|
||
|
|
ZPE,
|
||
|
|
2) Friction as used here can be translated into modern
|
||
|
|
terms as interference since this energy moves in
|
||
|
|
waves and can be "collided" against itself to
|
||
|
|
generate resistance and therefore matter.
|
||
|
|
|
||
|
|
Page 1
|
||
|
|
|
||
|
|
|
||
|
|
|
||
|
|
|
||
|
|
|
||
|
|
We suggest you download NEUTRAL1 to get an idea of the Vangard
|
||
|
|
approach to trying to understand the Universe.
|
||
|
|
|
||
|
|
--------------------------------------------------------------------
|
||
|
|
|
||
|
|
This zone of zero gravity extends, probably, to the extremity
|
||
|
|
of the electro-magnetic force's influence, more than likely
|
||
|
|
DECREASING as the distance from the Earth INCREASES.
|
||
|
|
|
||
|
|
Further, the negative area's effect IS VARIABLE, that is, it is
|
||
|
|
regular or irregular.
|
||
|
|
|
||
|
|
(Let me clarify the last statement in paragraph three. If, for
|
||
|
|
example, I had said that when gravity works in reverse, objects
|
||
|
|
WOULD NOT BE PULLED DOWN, but would BE PUSHED UP, this would
|
||
|
|
contradict a statement, as an example, in the following paragraph.
|
||
|
|
|
||
|
|
This statement would have been that objects are PUSHED DOWN
|
||
|
|
TOWARD the planet, rather than BEING PULLED DOWN. You can see the
|
||
|
|
confusion and contradiction set up.)
|
||
|
|
|
||
|
|
We are to assume that the force of exd is INFINITELY LONG-
|
||
|
|
LIVED, because of the CONTINUOUS TRANSFORMATION of energy/matter.
|
||
|
|
Thus, if the negative energy "source" was cut (or turned?) off, the
|
||
|
|
exd would AGAIN FLOW DOWNWARD.
|
||
|
|
|
||
|
|
Thus, if any object happened into this area AS THE EXD WAS
|
||
|
|
FLOWING BACK, it would be carried, or PUSHED, downward at once to be
|
||
|
|
stopped by the earth, or any other planet, for that matter.
|
||
|
|
|
||
|
|
This is the theory; that planes happen into these areas,
|
||
|
|
resulting in this inevitable doom.
|
||
|
|
|
||
|
|
A point to ponder would be the application of this effect in an
|
||
|
|
artificial manner for propulsion of saucers.
|
||
|
|
|
||
|
|
Of course, as was hinted in a previous paragraph, this coud be
|
||
|
|
the work of the DERO of Shaver's caves. They could control the
|
||
|
|
apparatus to counteract the INFLOW OF EXD.
|
||
|
|
|
||
|
|
It is stated as fact, through fictional surroundings, in "I
|
||
|
|
REMEMBER LEMURIA" that this was a form of transportation, that of
|
||
|
|
counteracting the force of INFLOWING EXD and being PROPELLED UPWARD
|
||
|
|
by some SECONDARY FORCE.
|
||
|
|
|
||
|
|
(Let me comment on this theory and others in general. First,
|
||
|
|
let me say that I am a major (in school) in Mathematics and Science
|
||
|
|
(particularly Physics). Through studying Mathematics, I have
|
||
|
|
learned a few facts other than those presented in the texts (if at
|
||
|
|
all they ARE facts).
|
||
|
|
|
||
|
|
Everyone knows, if they have studied Mathematics at all, that
|
||
|
|
the whole scheme is based upon unknowns and assumptions. By using
|
||
|
|
common sense, anyone should be able to see that the scheme itself is
|
||
|
|
an assumption or unknown.
|
||
|
|
|
||
|
|
Mathematicians say they can prove their statements. I say they
|
||
|
|
CANNOT. There is a form of "proof" known as Mathematical INDUCTION
|
||
|
|
that is used extensively to "prove" their statements. The
|
||
|
|
|
||
|
|
Page 2
|
||
|
|
|
||
|
|
|
||
|
|
|
||
|
|
|
||
|
|
|
||
|
|
perplexing discovery here is that they CANNOT PROVE that
|
||
|
|
Mathematical induction is foolproof, without, of course, using some
|
||
|
|
other form of "proof" which cannot be proved without, of course,
|
||
|
|
using some other form of "proof" which - ad infinitum!
|
||
|
|
|
||
|
|
(This whole scheme called Mathematics is enigmatic and
|
||
|
|
sometimes paradoxical. Of course, no one will doubt the handiness
|
||
|
|
of this system. We would be, most assuredly, lost without it.
|
||
|
|
|
||
|
|
This brings us to the question asked so many times, namely,
|
||
|
|
"What, in this universe of ours, is PROVED?" I say, with grateful
|
||
|
|
reassurance, that there are systems or schemes which ARE PROVED.
|
||
|
|
|
||
|
|
Take, for example, Chemistry. It is possible to take two
|
||
|
|
chemicals and combine them, by using some action, into a compound,
|
||
|
|
COMPLETELY DIFFERENT from either of the two initial components.
|
||
|
|
|
||
|
|
This compound is seen to be formed each time these two
|
||
|
|
chemicals are combined in this manne. This is impossible with
|
||
|
|
Mathematics. You can SAY two plus two is four you will be right.
|
||
|
|
But wouldn't it be just as much possible to say two plus two is
|
||
|
|
three or any other number?
|
||
|
|
|
||
|
|
These mathematical quantities we call numbers are INTANGIBLE,
|
||
|
|
thus, they CANNOT be explored and combined in a tangible way, as
|
||
|
|
with chemicals. It is, however, possible to associate tangible
|
||
|
|
quantities with the intangible numbers. Two, for example, could be
|
||
|
|
associated with the quantity of wings a bird has.
|
||
|
|
|
||
|
|
(What would happen with three wings, or eliminate the
|
||
|
|
intangibility of this statement and say more wings than most birds?
|
||
|
|
Think this isn't possible? Prove it!) As can be seen this
|
||
|
|
possibility nullifies this system of "proof" and it becomes no more
|
||
|
|
a system of proof.)
|
||
|
|
|
||
|
|
Webster says a theory is an explanation based on certain
|
||
|
|
available information, or something to that effect. What puzzles me
|
||
|
|
is that he fails to say that a theory is unproven, which indeed it
|
||
|
|
is. My theory is based on two other theories, EACH UNPROVEN, and is
|
||
|
|
thusly, UNPROVEN.
|
||
|
|
Joe Wright
|
||
|
|
Route 1,
|
||
|
|
Benton, Kentucky
|
||
|
|
|
||
|
|
--------------------------------------------------------------------
|
||
|
|
Vangard note...
|
||
|
|
|
||
|
|
We have had the distinct pleasure of meeting Mr. Walter Wright,
|
||
|
|
THE modern proponent of the PUSH GRAVITY theory which will soon
|
||
|
|
be listed on KeelyNet.
|
||
|
|
|
||
|
|
Mr. Wright has many proofs and excellent models to verify his
|
||
|
|
contentions. Videotapes of his models in operation are
|
||
|
|
excellent and have served to convince many scientists and lay
|
||
|
|
people of the validity of the PUSH GRAVITY model.
|
||
|
|
|
||
|
|
We refer you also to the work of Dr. Hans Nieper, listed on
|
||
|
|
KeelyNet as TACHYON1 and TACHYON2.
|
||
|
|
|
||
|
|
|
||
|
|
Page 3
|
||
|
|
|
||
|
|
|
||
|
|
|
||
|
|
|
||
|
|
|
||
|
|
This article also touches on the many strange disappearances in
|
||
|
|
the Bermuda Triangle, the Devils' Triangle, the Sargasso sea as
|
||
|
|
well as the likes of Judge Crater.
|
||
|
|
|
||
|
|
We can't forget about the mysterious teleportations where a
|
||
|
|
person or object is lifted up and set back down hundreds of
|
||
|
|
miles away from his original location. Many of these have been
|
||
|
|
attributed to UFO's or paranormal causes.
|
||
|
|
|
||
|
|
It is just as reasonable to include the possibility that a
|
||
|
|
NEGATIVE GRAVITY ZONE suddenly appears in which the victim is
|
||
|
|
accidentally caught.
|
||
|
|
|
||
|
|
An unexpected uprising of air and other material in the path of
|
||
|
|
the NEGATIVE GRAVITY FIELD could create a dazed or unconscious
|
||
|
|
state, not to mention the possibility of low level magnetic
|
||
|
|
stimulation to create hallucinatory experiences as researched
|
||
|
|
by Persinger.
|
||
|
|
|
||
|
|
For more on induction of such experiences, refer to the BIOLOGY
|
||
|
|
section on KeelyNet and the files MIND5, MIND6, MIND7, MIND8.
|
||
|
|
|
||
|
|
--------------------------------------------------------------------
|
||
|
|
|
||
|
|
If you have comments or other information relating to such topics
|
||
|
|
as this paper covers, please upload to KeelyNet or send to the
|
||
|
|
Vangard Sciences address as listed on the first page.
|
||
|
|
|
||
|
|
Thank you for your consideration, interest and support.
|
||
|
|
Jerry W. Decker.........Ron Barker...........Chuck Henderson
|
||
|
|
Vangard Sciences/KeelyNet
|
||
|
|
|
||
|
|
--------------------------------------------------------------------
|
||
|
|
If we can be of service, you may contact
|
||
|
|
Jerry at (214) 324-8741 or Ron at (214) 242-9346
|
||
|
|
--------------------------------------------------------------------
|
||
|
|
|
||
|
|
|
||
|
|
|
||
|
|
|
||
|
|
|
||
|
|
|
||
|
|
|
||
|
|
|
||
|
|
|
||
|
|
|
||
|
|
|
||
|
|
|
||
|
|
|
||
|
|
|
||
|
|
|
||
|
|
|
||
|
|
|
||
|
|
|
||
|
|
|
||
|
|
|
||
|
|
|
||
|
|
|
||
|
|
|
||
|
|
|
||
|
|
Page 4
|
||
|
|
|
||
|
|
|