P2.4.1. Why the Magnocraft's principles could not be formulated 40 years earlier
#1
@ Dr. Ing. Jan Pająk

P2.4.1. Why the Magnocraft's principles could not be formulated 40 years earlier
Motto of this subsection: "There are no bigger enemies of the progress from these ones who take money for implementing it" (even better the same is expressed by Malaysian proverb "Padi makan pagar" meaning "Your fences eat your rice" what should be interpreted that "these ones whom you trust to protect you, actually harm you").

The wealth of evidence accumulated continually since the first modern UFO manifestations, consistently confirms that the propelling devices of many UFOs work on the principle of magnetic attraction and propulsion. Means that UFOs work exactly as in 1980 I theoretically designed this for my first Magnocraft. This in turn leads to asking the persisting question: why the principle of operation of the Magnocraft was not discovered 50 years earlier, e.g. soon after the World War Two, when on 24 June 1947 Kenneth Arnold made his first observation of the formation of 9 discoidal UFOs? (For more details about this historic observation of Kenneth Arnold see also subsection P5.) The answer to this question is very interesting, because it provides a further confirmation to the discovery presented in subsection A3 and in chapters U to VB /?/, that "our planet is secretly occupied by UFOnauts who manipulate peoples' views in order to hold back the technical progress of humanity". This subsection presents the justification for this disturbing discovery.
When the first observations showed the link between UFOs and magnetic phenomena, some UFO investigators started to speculate that these extraterrestrial vehicles probably utilize magnetic propulsion systems. But these early speculations were quickly extinguished by "experts", who on every opportunity condemned the possibility of such purely magnetic propulsion - see [2P2] p. 219. Thus even if someone considered the use of magnetic field for propelling purposes, he/she did it only indirectly - e.g. consider the -magneto-hydro-dynamic propulsion system developed in France in 1970s by Dr Jean-Pierre Petit. The arguments of "experts" damning the purely magnetic propulsion of UFOs has been based on the following (for more details see also the history of this monograph presented in subsection A4):
#1. The physical dimensions of UFOs are too small for a sufficient gradient of the Earth's uniform magnetic field to be encompassed within the vehicle's size. Therefore the magnetic field of UFOs, whatever powerful it would be, in the opinion of such "experts" should not be able to produce a significant net lifting force - see [2P2] p. 219.
#2. If UFOs used purely magnetic propulsion systems, then in the opinion of these "experts", such UFOs should attract all ferromagnetic objects from their environment (acting like huge magnetic cranes). But no such attraction has been observed.
#3. There are numerous UFO observations reported, which are not accompanied by the effects which our contemporary science could recognize as "magnetic".
Although this monograph demonstrates conclusively that NONE of the above arguments has any merit, in the past they were sufficiently strong to destroy all attempts to proceed with the formulation of a magnetic explanation for UFO manifestations. Thus, the correct line of thinking, which could have led to the devising of the Magnocraft's principles already around 50 years earlier, was unnecessarily abandoned because of the effect of these negative "expert" interventions. In turn, if this line was not abandoned, probably by today we would already have first prototypes of the Magnocraft completed. So the popular statement that "there are no bigger enemies of progress than orthodox scientists themselves" again is confirmed.
When I developed the Theory of the Magnocraft, it proved that all the above arguments of orthodox experts completely missed the point. Reasons why each one of them has no merit is explained below.
Refer to #1. The geometric size of UFOs would only be relevant, if the field produced by them would have the strength comparable to the strength of the Earth's field. But the field of UFOs has its strength more than 1012 times greater. Thus the interaction of UFOs with the Earth's magnetic field is dependent on the so-called "effective length" of their propulsors, not on any physical length at which orthodox "experts" concentrated their attention - see subsection F5.3. In turn this effective length is so enormously high in UFOs, that it can be compared to the size of Earth. Thus it easily encompasses the gradient of highly uniform magnetic field of Earth, that suffices to produce a net repulsive force having the ability to propel these vehicles (see also subsection F5.3).
Refer to #2. Most of the time UFOs produce a pulsating magnetic field, whose parameters lie on the curve of "interactions in equilibrium" - see Figure C12 /?/. The magnetic field with parameters from this curve, neither attracts nor repels ferromagnetic objects. Therefore, the magnetic field of UFOs behaves like a speculative "antigravitational" field rather than a magnetic one, thereby confusing the majority of "experts" whose knowledge of magnetism does not extend beyond typical textbook cases (for more details refer to subsection C7.3 /?/).
Refer to #3. The Cyclic Principle (see Table B1) indicates that only a small number of UFOs (i.e. those which originate from the least developed out of numerous civilizations that occupy us) always operate in a strictly magnetic convention. In turn the majority of UFOs actually implement the principles of the Magnocraft of the third generation, or at least the Magnocraft of the second generation - see subsections M6, L1 /?/, B1, T2, and T3. Therefore, the majority of discoidal UFOs use the magnetic convention of flight only sometimes, and they mostly operate in the conventions of telekinetic operation or time travel. For the above reason, although these vehicles implement very advanced versions of magnetic propulsion (see subsections L1 /?/ and M6), their magnetic effects extend beyond the categories recognizable by contemporary orthodox science. As such, these effects cannot be detected and identified by our present equipment for measuring magnetic field.
As it is shown in the above explanations, the "anti-magnetic" campaign of orthodox "experts" claiming that UFOs do not utilize magnetic propulsion, has no merit at all in the light of the Theory of the Magnocraft. It is unfortunate, to say the least, that in the name of knowledge the hollow arguments of these undereducated people have prevented the advancement of properly directed UFO research for over 50 years.
Of course, the additional question which we should ask, is: why these undereducated orthodox "experts" so viciously attacked and destroyed everyone who tried to propose the development of a purely magnetic propulsion system for flying vehicles? Although for this question many "armchair" replies can be invented, only one answer agrees with all empirical evidence. Namely: because these orthodox "experts" were manipulated into such vicious attacks by UFOnauts who programmed their views and philosophy, and who also "set" them up against unfortunate progress makers. Why and how UFOnauts did this, is explained in more details in subsections A3, VB5.2.1 /?/, U4.4, H10, and V3, on the occasion of discussing UFO collaborators, traitors, and the activities of UFOnauts aimed at holding humanity in slavery and darkness. It turns out, that these orthodox "experts" who so viciously attacked Magnocraft and any other magnetic propelling devices, were just UFO collaborators, and traitors of humanity, who served their cosmic masters from UFOs.
At this point, similarly as I am doing this myself, also readers probably would like to know, how it happens that the Magnocraft overcome this suppression. How it happens that in spite of these vicious attacks, which sometimes went as far as removing me from my job and pushing me twice out of the country in which I lived, the invention of the Magnocraft has not fallen to these orthodox "experts" and has not been abandon. Why the Magnocraft has not share the fate of all other developments to-date on magnetic propulsion systems of our future. As I partially explained this in subsection A4 and in chapter V, there is many reasons for this. For example, the intellectual reason is that I carried out my discoveries in a theoretical manner, coming from completely different premises than empirical observations of UFOs. (I.e. I started my research not from UFO observations, but from the Cyclic Table described in chapter B, from the Concept of Dipolar Gravity described in chapters H and I, from the Telekinetic Effect, etc.) Thus my invention of the Magnocraft was based on very solid theoretical foundations, which have nothing to do with UFOs. These foundations provided me with the comfort of absolute certainty, that my inventions and technical developments are absolutely correct. (The well-known folk wisdom that originates from the scientific circles states that: "in theories no- one believes - with the exception of their authors, while in the empirical observations believes everyone - with the exception of their authors".) This my intellectual certainty was additionally supported with my moral certainty that stemmed from claims of totalizm. My absolute certainty of the correctness of the Magnocraft idea, and of the necessity of dissemination of this idea amongst people, no-one and nothing was able to undermine. Thus, because of the standing on such sound theoretical and moral foundations, the invention of the Magnocraft was not allowing to be ruined by wrong opinions postulated by these orthodox "experts" manipulated by UFOs. I was unmoved by their denying screams relating to UFO propulsion, nor by their unjustified criticism, nor by their administrative pressures and persecution. How unjustified and simultaneously authoritative and destructive this criticism could sometimes be, the reader may realise from examples, one of which was published in the American Journal [1P2.4.1] OMNI magazine, February 1984, V.1. No. 6, page 87, other one in subsection K4 of this monograph. (Interesting, that actions which coincide with interests of UFOnauts seems to become lately almost a habit of Americans - see also publication [1VB5.2.1] and subsection P2.14.2.)

=> P2.5.
Antworten to top



Gehe zu:


Benutzer, die gerade dieses Thema anschauen: 1 Gast/Gäste