“Through faith we understand that the worlds were framed by the Word of God, so that things which are seen were not made of things which do appear.”(A) But of course faith was not good enough, so in 1927 a Belgium George Lemaître came up with the idea that in the beginning, there was no matter, just nothingness.(B) Then this nothingness condensed by gravity into a single, tiny spot, and voila, it exploded, and this big bang created a universe expanding at incredible speeds through empty space.(B) And of course that made sense to scientists because Lemaître had read Einstein’s theory, and 2 yrs. later Hubble noticed the galaxies were racing away from some center pt. …And so I begin this article on anti-gravity which is intended to stimulate your interest & curiosity…and I wonder how many scientists in the military-industrial complex have gag orders & secrecy oaths preventing full disclosures of what is known??? Let’s continue with my discussion…
THE BIG BANG CREATED MORE QUESTIONS THAN ANSWERS. And it seemed that while the emperor scientists had no clothes on, few wanted to question them, because scientists are scientists, the ones with answers, our new priests of truth….So no one asked how nothingness packs itself together, produces heat, and gets dense when it had no density to begin with. A total vacuum has no density. And according to the theory, no atoms existed, so there certainly was no nuclear or chemical explosion. Well to be exact not everyone bought this big bang theory; Roger L. St. Peter came up with the equation that showed the Big Bang would have fallen in on itself & created a black hole. Well, there turns out there are hundreds of questions & events that don’t line up with the theory. But Lemaître’s theory did get people thinking, incl. asking what is the energy density of empty space??? And by the way, some people were shocked when the world’s leading cosmologist Steven Hawkings put God back into the equation when he wrote A Brief History of Time. Later, I will quote a Macedonian researcher into anti-gravity who used that book as a resource into his research.
ENERGY HAS NEGATIVE PRESSURE. The density of matter (both regular & dark) decrease as the universe expands, but the density of energy remains constant, and has a negative pressure…in other words it sucks. Put gas under compression, and it pushes out. But energy’s negative pressure does the opposite…positive pressure generates gravity as we know it…negative pressure generates a repulsive gravitational force. When we take this in, and apply the concept of basic symmetry (of general relativity), we are faced with the realization that the density of energy does not dilute as the universe expands. And all this time we were thinking that the nothing of empty space had no energy. But not so. Once quantum physics examined the nothing of a vacuum, they discovered it is incredibly busy!! Pairs of particles & antiparticles pop in & out constantly. So yes, empty space has energy, and can be a source of gravity. Hmmm. The German chemist Walther Nernst in 1916, had proposed that a vacuum had large amounts of energy, but since he was interested in chemistry, he did not apply it to cosmology. Another German scientist soon afterwards realized that the energy of any field is not zero. And George Lemaître did apply this to cosmology: “Everything happens as though the energy in vacuo [vacuum] would be different than zero”. He even realized this meant energy in a vacuum created a negative pressure (& repulsive gravity). But over the years, this factoid caused problems in equations, so where the energy of a vacuum (represented by lambda) occurs, university level formulas simply use zero for lambda. But designating something zero, when they know it is something else, does bother many physicists.
NO SLOWING DOWN. So the model scientists work from is that the universe is expanding, sort of like 2 pts. on a balloon surface which get further away as the balloon is blown up. But gravity as we know it slows things down…so the expansion of the universe should be slowing down…but measurements show it has been speeding up for the last 6 billion years. They measured this acceleration from the study of Type 1a supernovae. They had accidently bumped into discovering repulsive gravity again which is found in vacuums…something which keeps obnoxiously showing up. So they calculate now that dark energy (the energy in the vacuum of space) constitutes about 73% of the universe’s energy density. But having no reasonable explanation for why it is exactly this way, leads some to wonder if there are not multiverses that have other values. So where have we gone with all this? basically to this…the more answers scientists get, the more questions are raised. Instead of making things clearer, it seems things get more mysterious. Which also raises the question, how many of the answers are being suppressed?! Maxwell’s 1868 equation showing scalar energy is an example of something hidden on purpose.
TESLA. There is no question much of Tesla’s discoveries and research has been suppressed. So recently a gentleman shared with me about Tesla based weaponry. What he discussed is described on the Internet at a couple of Romanian websites,(C) in Romanian by the way. The following seems to be a good example of suppressed technology. In previous articles, I have discussed how Romania’s contribution to the Axis in WW 2 has been basically ignored. Along that line, back then they had invented/produced their own fighters…I mention this just to bring out the fact that Romania has plenty of intelligent engineers. The story goes that inventor Henri Coandă got ahold of some of Tesla’s info and with Romanian engineers finished Tesla’s “death ray” and designated it as “Romteleghid”. What gives this credibility is Nicolae Ceaușescu’s speech of 21 August 1968 given in the Palace Square in front of 100,000 Romanians, & broadcast to the world, and the immediate Soviet reaction to it. Nicolae Ceaușescu was Romania’s communist dictator. On the night of 20-21 AUG, ’68, the USSR and 4 of its eastern European satellite nations sent armies into Czechoslovakia to put down an 8-month old reform movement (“socialism with a human face”) within the Czechoslovakian communist regime. Of course, the Czechs had a few surprises for them. Immediately, the next day Ceausescu (who refused to add his military to the invasion) publicly (for world consumption) denounced what he called the “social imperialism” of Russia. The Russians set out to give him the same treatment they gave Czechoslovakia.
THE REST OF STORY. We know the soviets retreated from their invasion. Private writings of Romanian generals & others tell the story of the Tesla weapon being used. According to these sources, the first echelon of the Soviet military which was about to cross the border was completely evaporated by the “Romteleghid”. Soviet tanks were heated up to between 15,000 *C to 20,000 *C and their armor melted worse than butter. At such temperatures, metal turns to gas, and the tanks simply evaporated. The USSR censored any details, & cancelled their Romanian invasion. The fact that Ceausescu got away with not participating & condemning the Soviet invasion of Czechoslavakia lends credibility to what the Romanian generals privately wrote down.
ANTI-GRAVITY DEVICES. I have come under flak for saying that our govt. has anti-gravity flying saucers. But like the Romanian Tesla weapon, the circumstantial evidence & eye-witnesses supports that statement. In 1954, you see the anti-gravity research disappear from the public eye.
I thought it was interesting when researching anti-gravity technology that most of what is out there that is labeled “anti-gravity” has nothing to do with the subject–for instance, “anti-gravity yoga”…but I found a paper by a Macedonian researcher on the subject where he proves by physics’ formulas that anti-gravity exists and could be harnessed.(D) (Macedonia by the way is next to Romania.) I quote a little of the article, which pts. out that in certain events we see anti-gravity at work: “The hypothetical element with Z = 145 is… unique among all elements whose nucleus has only anti-gravity property. It is proposed that this element be named Hawking, in honour of Stephen W. Hawking….How could a big star exists [sic] and still support itself against its own gravity after it had used all of its fuel? In all these approaches, the main idea was to apply the Pauli Exclusion Principle. When the matter particles get very near each other, the star maintains constant radius by a balance between the attraction of gravity and repulsion that arises from the Exclusion Principle. The mass, which would not be able to support itself against its own gravity, is now known as the Chandrasekhar limit. A similar discovery was made by Landau. Landau thought that according to the Exclusion Principle, repulsion is supported between neutrons and protons, rather than between electrons, as a contrast to Chandrasekhar’s views. These theories, as well as some others which appear later on, have used the Pauli Exclusion Principle to explain what prevents catastrophic gravitational collapse to take place in the cosmic objects with extreme density and extreme inward gravitation.” In other words, large stars that should collapse don’t, showing us that anti-gravity is at work.
CONCLUSION. I hope that from all of this I have excited your curiosity & faith. I ask: Why do the controllers want to keep their anti-gravity devices secret? Think of all the advantages humanity could accrue if Tesla’s research and anti-gravity devices were shared with humanity. I maintain (& others who are informed) that it is because of their evil lust for power and their diabolical agendas that they have to suppress all this.
(A) HEB 11:3 (B) Lemaître, George. Ann. Soc. Sci. Brux. A 47, 49–59 (1927). (C) Departmental Zamelxe Românin (D) Anastasovski, Petar K. ” The Superheavy Elements and Anti-Gravity”. Paper written in the Republic of Macedonia, he uses the following source as well as others: ). Evans, M. W., Anastasovski, P. K., et al., AIAS Group Paper, “Anti-gravity Effects in the Sachs Theory of Electrodynamics,” Found. Phys. Lett. 14, 601 (2001)