Engineering Gravity, Antigravity & Inertial Warp Drives | Ioannis Xydous

Transcript

So uh thanks for having me Tim and hello everyone. I'm really excited to be here. It's my first time at age 50 attending a conference and meeting a like-minded group of hobbyists, experimenters, engineers, physicists and enthusiasts who share an interest in extraordinary alternative propulsion energy technologies. Um public speaking isn't my strong skill. So I would like to apologize in advance but uh let's see how it goes.

Um please follow the Zenod link on the at the um left bottom side of the slide uh if you would like to to download the presentation itself and um and the walk through in case you are interested in um so um I'm originally from Greece and hold a degree in electronics. I worked for about five years as an electronic engineer in a small company in Athens and later worked for about 17 years here in Switzerland as a software system test engineer and right now I'm unfortunately unemployed. Um what has always inspired me even since childhood is a fascination with extraordinary technologies. That same curiosity still drives me today to explore them and work with them creatively. Um [clears throat] sorry uh my journey began in a more systemic way when I bought my first PC around 1996.

One of the first things I did was search online for patents, websites, online forums and papers about uh unusual technologies in alternative propulsion and energy. By around 2000 I came across with team and others through Yahoo groups. I believe there was more interest in these topics during the 90s and early 2000. though I might be wrong. Um, the theory I'm about to share starts with classical mechanics and expands to electromagnetics, gravity and the consistent extension of special relativity.

It also includes proposed experiments to test these ideas as well as a demonstrator demonstration I recorded back in 2009. Um over the past 20 years and even more I repeatedly explored released and later removed part of the ideas and a couple of experiments on personal websites and in papers though at the time they were based on flawed concepts and mathematics. Uh still my tuition kept telling me that there was something real behind it. Uh the first slide shows the destination of this presentation actually but the real question is how do we get there? So uh the best way is to start with something familiar classical mechanics. So when we talk about propellant propulsion we are really asking whether an isolated system one not influenced by external forces can gain momentum through internal means.

at to separate the idea of a reactionless drive which is impossible uh by definition from a self-contained system and isolates a system. That distinction eventually show me why the term reactionless was used through the years. In the drawing, two counterrotating uh orbiting masses um orbit along its cyclic path. The linear inertial action and reaction according to Newton's third law always cancel out. But when one mass moves clockwise, the rest of the system gains counterclockwise angular momentum.

Here we speak not about linear moment but about angular momentum. When the other mass moves counterclockwise, the system gains clockwise um sorry yes the system gains clockwise angular momentum. If both orbit symmetrically um if both orbit symmetrically the net angular inertial reaction cancels to zero. Um and that is I believe the the reason about um uh that is also may justify mathematically why it was called through the years as any reaction drive. Here we speak that the the angular reaction of the system uh is u the net angular reaction of the system is goes to zero but the inertial forces still exist but they are balanced each other.

They balance each other. That's the idea. Uh as a result, the isolated system expected to be propelled only by inertial angular forces since the angular inertial reaction is effectively as we just mentioned. Um the expressions on this slide and on the next one are rigorously derived from a classical mechanics. The full derivation is included in the first section of this work.

Over the years I tried many times but without success to find a rigorous online der ations that included angular components to show whether an isolated system could be propelled by internal miss most derivations relied only on Newton's third law using colinear forces as justification and often misunderstood the challenge itself as the result they completely failed to account for the role of angular components um yeah okay exactly yes um the main result of the derivation that it includes oh sorry I think I I went oh no it's number three no it's okay the main result of the derivation is that it includes tangential force or acceleration if you ask most physicists or online forums about this they will immediately respond that this is nonsense if you if your model includes tangential acceleration or force it means external forces are acting so the system is not isolated in my view this is a misunderstanding in mainstream physics. So I could be also wrong. I'm not a physicist. I'm just an engineer. But uh yeah, I will explain later about this.

From my perspective, an isolated system means that uh all power and force generation occur entirely within the system frame itself. Mainstream physics still resist this idea largely because of how tangential acceleration is defined in textbooks. In the force expression we see two terms um that together account for the total action force. The first is the net cipedal force along the yaxis a ben force that sustains the orbitic motion. The second is the net tagensia force shown here along the x-axis which represents uh the real thrust force.

Um okay so at first glance uh this may seem incorrect may you have may seen some YouTube videos that uh the propeller propulsion appears on the yaxis that needs to be discussed later if anyone is interested about it. Uh that is partly true and partly not as I will explain next. If angular velocity is constant um for example the phase second derivative is zero only the net centrial force remains the system simply oscalates along the y-axis around the center of mass and in outer space it would never gain momentum. This is the case when we don't have tangential acceleration and only center pedal. Um the other illustration shows how a real uh how real thrust can be modeled in terms uh of changes in systems inertia.

As long as the orbiting mass is experienced against acceleration, the system behaves as though it has reduced inertia which in turns leads to acceleration of the system as a whole. Um okay. Yes, exactly. So now uh that the industrial drive model has been introduced, let's consider how a mechanical version could work. In this setup, two orbiting masses move in parallel planes.

This arrangement lets them orbit continuously with angular velocity constant or varying controlled by phase modulation. The outcome is sustained thrust in one direction. At first, studying waves may seem unrelated to a mechanical Nessia drive, but if you look closer, each orbitic mass acts like a cedoidal oscalation along the y-axis. Moving in opposite directions, they resemble two sine waves on the same line that combine into a standing wave. uh Yurin Nikolai Ivanov's work uses a simple trigonometric function and observes that the nodes can move along the x-axis along with an entrapped mass when phase modulation is applied or when angular velocity or frequency changes that observation is valid.

However, uh such a system cannot produce acceleration of the whole system because the action is linear and this is my view. uh this produces a colinear reaction throughout the rest of the system consistent with Newton's third law and the conservation of momentum. Consecutively, a non-moving standing wave reflects the situation in the mechanical inertia drive where two orbiting masses move with constant angular velocity producing no real thrust along the x-axis. When phase modulation or change in angular velocity is introduced, the standing wave gains acceleration and its nodes shift along the x-axis mirroring the behavior of the mechanical inertial drive. Regarding the mathematical expression shown, this work derives tangential acceleration from the curved path uh followed by by the orbiting masses.

By contrast, Uni Nikolai Vanov's approach though based on trigonometic functions seems to assume curved paths only implicitly and deres his acceleration expression from the standing wave itself. Uh the aim here is not to compare the two theories but to acknowledge Ivanov's idea and to incorporate the concept of moving stand waves into our framework while explicitly introducing the requirement of cuator. As we will see in the following slides, we propose using moving standing waves as massless entities with confined energy that when accelerated exhibit inertial effects, an aspect not addressed in Ivanov's work. Furthermore, we will show that moving standing waves are central to both the acceleration and the shielding mechanisms of the inertial warp drive which will be introduced at the end of the pres of this presentation. Uh to understand how our how our model behaves before attempting a real mechanical initial drive, you can run simulations such as the one shown here.

In this idolized case, the resulting thrust along the x-axis appears as a rectified waveform. It approaches zero but never becomes but never becomes negative. Uh compared to the net centrial force, the tangential force is about 4.6 times greater. To reach this efficiency, angular velocity must cross zero and reverse as shown by the Kan dust curve curve. In practice, I have never seen this done likely because controlling large one direction acceleration is difficult.

Sustained thrust would require require repeatedly reversing the orbit. um holding constant velocity slowing to zero then switching direction that demands precise timing and not only another reason why such implementations do not exist is a common misconception which will be addressed in the next two slides I'm really awful impressation I know [laughter] [sighs] anyway this simulation reflects um so we are on slide six this simulation reflects how most implementation should work though in reality they appear to fail. to keep the orbitic masses moving in the same direction one clockwise and other counter count counterclockwise with reversing their motion to achieve thrust in one direction for example to the right we introduce an angular velocity offset and adjust the amplitude of the phase modulation these two parameters are tuned to maximize efficiency along the thrust axis resulting in equal magnitudes for the net center pedal and aensia forces as shown the angular velocity nearly touches zero but never becomes negative ensuring that the orbiting directions remain unchanged. Okay. So here this slide highlights the misunic in mechanicals in mechanical initial drives developed so far in my view in YouTube demonstration of these propellers systems with rotating masses thrust is usually is usually a zoom along the y axis while I argue the true thrust axis should be the x-axis.

The misunderstanding arises because experimenters lacked a guiding theoretical model relying only on classical mechanics and and direct observation. To maximize thrust without reversing the orbiting masses, current designs rely on two assumptions. Thrust is directed along the Y axis while the X-axis contributions are cancelled canceled with rollers constraint to the Yaxis or any small X-axis motion intentionally suppressed as it cannot be utilized and increasing angular velocity in enhances the centripedal force which is often mistakenly referred to as centrifugal force. We know that the centripal force reflects bound motion. So how do this device devices seem to accelerate? They simply exploit surface friction which breaks the actual reaction symmetry.

Uh friction acts like a hysteresis that distracts the principle. Secondly, you may have noticed that such devices accelerate briefly and then decelerate almost immediately ending with only a small final speed that doesn't match the cycle's apparate acceleration. This effect is not caused by friction. Instead, it shows that the motion is bound and the device is misuned. Put simply, such devices will never achieve sustained acceleration outer space again.

according to my view. Okay. Test one. Yes. Simulation.

Yes. Um the test shown on this slide is a proposal not exactly with extreme simulation values presented but intended to introduce what we what we later call the benchmark velocity in the validation protocol. There is a validation protocol later in the slides. uh that I'm going to present you. In practice, to qualify a device as a genuine mechanical initial drive, it should be tested in a lubricated corridor that should achieve at least twice the velocity gain during the first cycle by the end of its translational motion along the corridor.

Um I have always been interested in finding online simulations or calculations that show that uh what would be required for a mechanical inessia drive to overcome gravity but I never came across any. Using the model I developed in my work I decided to attempt the calculations myself by adjusting the frequency. As you see, I have set 15.91 Hz on simulation two and assuming the entire system has a mass of 1 kilogram. The results suggested that it could in principle float in midair. The challenge however lies in the mechanical integrity of the system.

The orbiting masses would need to reach acceleration about 10 times 10 times greater than gravity far beyond the current capabilities of mechanical actuator which are typically limited to around 1g. Although mechanical devices were never my main interest, I would encourage uh experimentalists or anyone curious to try building a small mechanical inertia drive with or without microcontroller base control of angular velocity to test the claim about the true thrust axis. I don't suggest this is a way to validate my own work. I honestly don't mind. But if someone succeeds in replicating the claim, according to my view again, they will have in their hands a genuine model for all types of inertial drives, including electromagnetic versions with massless entities such as confined energy from standing waves or fields.

Okay. Uh we have now worked through nine slides and arrived at the more serious material. The earlier sides were essential. They built the foundation for seeing how the model can be transformed and applied to electromagnetic devices. Here the orbitic masses are replaced by studing waves that find electromagnetic energy.

As in the inertial drive model, we have both clockwise and counterclockwave guides. In this case, I carry out some calculations to outline a relative physible construction using 2 GHz propagating microwaves with a confined energy density about 10 J per cubic meter. By applying an angular velocity shift equal to half of the base angular velocity, the system is expected to acceler accelerate along the x-axis with a force of 6.7 Newton. Um, for an isolated system with a mass of 1 kilogram, this corresponds to an acceleration of approximately 6.7 m/s squared. Another and rather unexpected result is that the corresponding energy density behaves like a massless object exhibiting inertia equivalent to 3.66 multiplied by 10 to the 4th power in kilograms but it's massless with an acceleration of about 91.5 micrometers/s squared.

Multiplying these values gives a maximum thrust that is twice the 6.7 Newton. How can that be possible? These questions also troubled me while writing this paper. Initially I thought the wave itself was responsible but I now believe that was incorrect. What actually induces acceleration and produces inertial effects transferred to the rest of the system is not the wave itself but its confined energy. Therefore, the induced inertial effects and acceleration must be calculated with respect to the confined energy.

Along the same lines, this experimental setup was believe it or not partly and even accidentally recreated back in 2009. I will talk about that in the next slide and also I show you the recordings of the experiment itself. Instead of using tooidal waveguides, this experiment uses maganese zinc ferite toidal cores with their specification shown in the table. The standing wave that forms is mainly magnetic and interacts with the the diples in the ferite core. This creates what I would call a bulk magneetto polariton but I don't uh I don't expand at all you know theoretically in the paper about this as an observation just I have put it in the paper uh basically a mix of the field and dipole working together the calculated frequency comes out uh comes out to about 4.96 kHz which matches closure closely with what's seen on the signal gener generator.

However, this is outside the normal range for the material since it is usually meant to work best between 20 and 200 kHz for power transformers and inductor applications. In other words, you cannot use 4.96 for power transformers and inductors, but you can use it to demonstrate such kind of effects as I will show you later. Here again we see that each bulk tooidal magneetto polaron has an equivalent electromagnetic mass of about 0.4 kilogram with uh which is quite close to twice the mass of one toid the one toid if you see the if you see the u if you see the table the mass of the toid is 0.2 2 kg which corresponds to an acceleration of 0.58 m/s squared. Both values come directly from the energy density rather than from the wave parameters themselves. When we multiply these values together, we obtain again the maximum thrust.

Okay, we now arrive that could represent either a paradigm shift. We speak about an EM initial drive or primitive initial W drive I would say or a delusion maybe it's nothing. Uh the background is this. Back in 2009 while studying the work of professor Fran de Aino I attempted to measure the propagation velocity of the electromagnetic waves through a maganese zinc ferite core using a very low power. My attention however drawn to the noise produced by magneettoriction the slight expansion and contraction of the core when I placed the ferite core on the floor and applied more current without limiting the resistor.

If I recall correctly, it suddenly moved with strong energetic motion in diagonal in a diagonal mo direction with manually increasing frequency. The ferite course apparent self-propulsion was a shocking moment unlike anything I had witnessed before even though the first test in the YouTube video as you are going to see demonstrates a reaction that is about five to 10 times weaker. At that point, the material began to decline in its response. Fortunately, I managed to capture three different different recordings. When I shared them on the NASA spaceflight forum some years ago, they were skeptical.

Some claimed it was a hawk using hidden magnets. Other suggested it was moving cables off camera or that it was simply vibration interacting with the table. A few even said suspend it and see if it moves, which I tried but unsuccessfully. everyone who commended focus only on the first experiment and overlook the other two. The truth is that the material is extremely sensitive to current changes at frequencies below its allowed rates.

So it doesn't behave as one might expect. To see a proper response, one would need a fresh material rather than the degraded one I used about four years ago. I shared both the theory covering various topics uh and the experiment on YouTube but while uh I later removed the theory I chose to keep the experiment available as you are going to see in YouTube is about 4 years online. Um so the first experiment you will see shows the ferite core moving diagonally across the table's surface driven by friction at tag against force without changing the frequency. It's a special condition uh that was discovered accidentally achieved by periodically increasing and decreasing the frequency until the ferite appears to settle into a log state.

So here we go. I hope it will work. Oh, Okay. The second experiment involved a Lego car with a therite core placed on its back. Knowing that the force was tangential and that the material had already begun to degrade, I attempted amplitude modulation using a modulation signal of 100 MHz.

The goal was to illustrate the situation, a situation similar to trying to push a car while riding inside it. Oh, when I you know it stops maybe. I don't know why. Okay, it's very short anyway. And the third experiment focused on controllable rotation.

Around 2009 or perhaps a year earlier, I came across the work of Yuri Kolivanov on rhythm dynamics. I wondered whether I could demonstrate controllable clockwise and counterclockwise acceleration of a standing wave along a curved ferite path thereby supporting Ivanov's claims about moving standing waves. At that time I hadn't yet developed my own theory and it was uh mostly influenced by Aino's work which seems to contradict my observations particularly regarding the high frequencies compared to what one of his papers suggested. In this video, you can see that when I increase uh the frequency, the tooid rotates clockwise and when I decrease it, it rotates counterclockwise. Sorry.

so you see here it's 5.18 kHz the signal generator [sighs] um the calculated force is about 0.24 24 Newton. For a mass of 0 kilogram, the normal force is about 1.9 Newton. With a static friction coefficient of 0.3, the force required to overcome friction is [snorts] 0.58 Newton, nearly 2.4 times greater than the calculated value. Even if we take the maximum force possible force which is about 0.4880 Newton it's still it is still about 1.2 times smaller than the 0.58 Newton needed to overcome static friction. This suggests either that the static friction coefficient is less than 0.3 or that the actual force produced is greater than the calculated value.

Although the deviation is relative small, even under assumed ideal conditions, it's an encouraging result suggesting that the theory is on the right track. But again, you never know. For those interested in replicating the experiment, the material cost about $38 to $40 if you already have an acoustic amplifier rated at 40 watt RMS or higher. I used approximately 70 W RMS for a 4 ohm load. You can wind three to four turns of wire around the ferite to achieve an inductance of about 1 millhenry.

For experimentation, it is advisable to include an inline resistor of roughly 4.7 ohm and uh that can withstand about 150 W and to avoid using capacitors for resonance. The um zinc the maganese zinc ferite used here is not suitable for practical applications but serves well for demonstration. I would welcome feedback from anyone who attempts to replicate the experiment with the right laboratory setup. Other ferites or even iron cores could be tested. Using a pair of such materials might reproduce the initial drive model electromagnet electromagnetically and suggest a promising propell propulsion concept for space at least in its early stages.

Um as a side note it is remains unclear whether anchoring the rotating core iron or ferite would transfer the generated momentum through the accelerating standing wave to the rest of the system. This aspect of the theory hasn't yet been experimentally verified although the second experiment with the Lego car appears to support it. Okay, here we have the protocol. [clears throat] The findings of this theory allow us to establish a validation protocol to determine whether um a candidate device qualifies as a genuine inertial drive. We don't need to cover every detail here.

What matters is the main criterion. The device must produce real thrust perpendicular to the excitation. And if the device is treated as a black box, it should demonstrate at least twice the initial acquired speed by the end of a long lubricated corridor. As you may understand and as I said you know earlier the most uh mechanical at least the most mechanical they do not comply with this radiation protocol which is a very good you know um I think um uh we we could discuss it you know later or even offline with with anyone you know interested about it. So we go on this next slide.

Okay. I included a special section as an attempt not a full examination of potlenov's gravity setting experiment. My goal was to see whether I could describe the experiment using the framework I have developed so far applying certain known parameters and making a few assumptions. In the experimental setup, the rotating superconductor gradually decreases its angular velocity according to potlum's parameter values. Under those conditions, a nearby 1 kilogram mass showed the maximum weight reduction of about 2%.

Uh I use 2.4% in my analysis. What happens is this a pulse generates circumferential supercurrens and and in the superconductive state the masonary effect expels the magnetic field from the superconductor creating a poloidal like topology as illustrated. uh the rotating poloidal magnetic field together with the induced motion electric field resembles a mechanical electromagnetic standing wave. While the disc under goes controlled deceleration, the electromagnetic the the mechanical electromagnetic standing wave accelerates in the opposite direction transferring momentum or an inertial field into the surroundings through the accelerating confined energy. Once again, we see that the confined energy behaves as if it has an effective inertia of about 3.83 mg with a corresponding acceleration of roughly 2.05 multiplied by 10 to the second power m/s squared.

These counterintuitive values clearly require further investigation and control experiments to confirm their validity. With the assume reduction in weight and the calculated thrust, the energy density comes out to about 2.9 J per cubic meter. After running the numbers, it looks mechanically feasible to achieve a deceleration lasting around 39.5 seconds. During that time, the system's weight would drop to about 2.4 of its original value. Another unresolved issue is how the setup generates an upward thrust or initial field once the energy is confined around the circumference.

One possible explanation is that the vortex forms when poloidal magnetic field lines couple with aimal with aimal motion. Though the exact uh mechanism is unclear, potlenov suggested this effect might be explained by vortex theory, but that's not something I cover in my work. Up to this point, we have seen that confined energy with standing waves when accelerated or decelerated can transfer momentum to its surrounding. uh neutral mass may interact with the with this momentum resulting in either in acceleration or in apparent reduction of weight depending on the direction of the force produced by the confined energy. This raises an important question.

Does the translation of confined energy exhibit gravitational like or inertial like field properties? In this section, I present what may be the simplest derivation of the coupling between electromagnetic gravity and inertia by equating the thrust force derived from electromagnetic parameters with an equivalent gravitational or in inertial thrust force or by equating the corresponding energy densities. We can establish a theoretical link electricity with gravity and magnetism with inertia by analogy. Setting the gravitational permitivity equal to 4 pi multiplied by the gravitational constant. We can then derive its counterpart the inertial permeability in analogy with the magnetic permeability of electromagnetism uh in Maxwell theory. Furthermore, by defining electromagnetic mass and degrading it with a new expressions dg and di um these two have newton per kilogram or meter/s squared as the units of these two um expressions we arrive at the concept of the electrons or posetrons effective massless electromagnetic mass.

Remarkably, when this electromagnetic mass is divided by plank's mass and squared as a ratio, it unexpect unexpectedly yields the fine structure constant. I'm very awful. I think it was a bad idea to make [laughter] anyway. Um, I couldn't leave this out of the presentation since it directly relates to the link between electromagnetism and gravity. The link at the bottom title hidden geometries in Maxual Suations and the force flux route to unified static fields builds on a on a work I developed a few months ago following an earlier paper titled classic unification of electromagnetics and gravity.

In fact, the paper extending Maxwell seuation should have carried the unification title, but the idea only emerged later. A physics journal reviewer of the first paper rejected it, saying he saw no connection between my proposal and Maxwell's equations since I was discussing uh gravitational charges using the concept of a general gravitational potential. That comment made me think why hadn't I consider Maxwell secious from the start. So I began writing the new paper and dur during the process I discovered expression inspired by Gaus's uh field flu the first of the fourations. In my view, if Maxwell around 1860 had introduced a force flux law, it wouldn't have described a new field, but would have allow him to replace electromagnetic constants such as electric permitivity and electric charge with gravitational permitivity and gravitational charge.

The result would be the same globe force but now expressed in terms of gravitational parameters. In that speculative framework, Maxwell could have uncovered a link between electromagnetisms and gravity even though no experiments at the time were available to confirm such a connection. This work suggests it calculates the existence of three additional emergent charges associated with the electron itself. How can that be you may ask? Uh given that the electron is treated as a single purely electric entity. Consider a spinning electrically charged metallic spherical surface.

The motion of the static charges generates as a musthial current which in turn produce a magnetic field. That magnetic field can be understood as an emergent magnetic dipole charge which disappears once the rotation stops. By analogy, gravitational and inertial charges could also arise as emergent entities created through the acceleration or deceleration of a spinning electrically charged metallic sphere. Ultimately this uh work derives through a Maxwellian approach the link between electromagnetics and gravity yielding the same electrogravity and magneetto inertia expressions shown earlier. In simple terms, changing the polarity or direction of electric or magnetic field can create or can create a a counter effect and add gravity response that opposes Earth's field lines producing a locally weaker gravity zone or even reversing them.

By integrating a Lawrence like field into Maxual situations and combining it with the force flu with the force flux law, we obtain an expression resembling the lawren force but now describing the unified field for example of the electron in practice if we select electromagnetic constants we recover the electron's total electromagnetic field if instead we select the gravity inertial constants we obtain its total gravitio inertial field here the gravitational field is expressed in units of kilogram per meter per meter That means you know in in if you in place of volt we have kilograms per meter the gravitational field the units uh while the gravitational displacement field is measured in meters/s squared as illustrated in the plot at a distance of 0.12 nanometer the electric field is approximately -1.13 multiplied by 10 11th power volt per meter while the gravitational displayment displacement at the same distance is - 9.81 m/s squared equivalent to uh minus1g. Um I chose to plot gravitational displacement rather than the gravitational field itself since its units and magnitude is more familiar and directly relatable to our everyday experience of fierce gravity. something I have written in an older paper that I didn't include or even removed in any of the papers I have released so far and this is because a reviewer was disagreeing with my proceedings and said that it was wrong and this regards the Kashmir force. I believe the second part part of the elector on total field seems to have to do with the Kashmir Kashmir force. Thus, gladum fluctuations shouldn't have any relations with the force in general.

Again according to my view in 2004 physicist B fa Ivanov it's not the same Ianov as in the beginning this Ivanov is from the institute for for nuclear research and nuclear energy in Bulgaria published a paper on the link between electromagnetism and gravity which he called root gravity. His work produced the same formulas using natural rather than SI units that predict the exact electric field and magnetic induction needed to generate 1G. In the discussion section of his paper, Ivanov Ivanov points out that the connection between electromagnetism and gravity could have been identified many times, eight times in fact over the past 880 years counting from 2004. His approach relies on advanced mathematics such as tensors, general relativity and wium papu spacetime solutions. While my proposal use only high school level math applied to classical electronamics and maxual situations.

Okay. Um in this work I include a section on the Alcuba warp drive not to introduce a new metric which I'm not capable of doing but uh to examine the energy requirements using specific values and later compare them with my proposed inertial warp drive concept. For this purpose I use an energy scaling estimate expression. It is dimensionally correct though not an exact solution and I expect to remain within an order of magnitude of the true result. Importantly, it doesn't assume a specific bubble geometry.

As shown for the chosen parameter values and a bubble thickness of 1 meter, the energy requirements are enormous. As a teaser, I suggest the possibility of using electromagnetic fields to create massless inertial fields that could achieve the same goal without distorting spaceime. However, as we will see in the following slides, the electromagnetic energy we speak about the confined energy associated with massless electromagnetic mass cannot be equated to rest energy as described by Einstein's famous relation mc² which reflects the conversion of an elated mass into energy. And finally we arrive at the ultimate destination the inertial warp drive. In the this concept an inertial shielding effect is incorporated into metric the so-called flat space time through the reduction of the local propagation rate.

This effect arises from a pair of counterpropagating accelerating standing waves which essentially isolate the systems inertia from the rest of the universe. This is an assumption. Of course, the velocity of the system is determined by the net tangential velocity of the standing waves. In this framework, the system's mass is not its bare mass, but an electromagnetic mass similar to the magneto polariton concept. Put differently, the system mass doesn't exhibit ordinary inertial properties.

Instead, it reflects an electromagnetic inertia that can be controlled through time varying phase modulation. As a result, the system energy is no longer governed by Einstein's relation MC². The concept of the initial warp drive requires a broadening of special relativity which I term inertial relativity. In this framework, special relativity becomes a subset that describes relativistic motion driven by external forces. The three plots illustrated how illustrate how relativistic inertia, velocity and momentum behave in comparison with both the broadened framework and classical special relativity.

In inertial relativity, inertial can reach a minimum of zero, producing a transparency effect where the system becomes essentially undetectable. Velocity on the other hand may cross and even exceed the speed of light barrier since the final velocity depends on the amount of confined energy available per cycle. Uh finally momentum in inertial relativity rises to a maximum value before decreasing back down to zero. Um it's worth noting that when we set ns equal to one in the new relativistic inertia expression from inertial relativity we recover the formulation of Dr. Karazani an Agentinian physicist who introduced autodnamics around 1951.

Although Karazani didn't invoke inertial shielding, his approach of reducing inertial frames leads to an outcome that coincides with the inertial frame aligning with a wave field. Another important observation is that all tyon or supernumal propagation theories that treat say as a strict lower bound in both special relativity and these theories there is a discontinuity at the velocity equal to say. In contrast inertial relativity and caranis relativistic expression do not exhibit such a discontinuity. A possible technical approach. So it requires special materials is the use of surface waves similar to the ground waves employed in long wave radio communication which follow the curvature of the earth.

In this case the inertial web drive would operate with surface standing waves most of their confined energy lying outside the spherical cell yet still capable of accelerating by falling the cubator off. for example of a spaceships hole. When we apply when we apply the same parameter values used for the alub aluba warp drive to the inertial warp drive treating the bubble dimensions as a spherical cell of equal radius we uncover a working frequency of 238.8 8 kilohertz which lies in the long wave radio spectrum. Because standing waves can never be perfectly confined, some energy will leak into outer space. This leakage could be used to identify the propulsion or shielding frequency or even estimate a spaceship's dimensions with a custom softwaredefined radio receiver.

I added this uh what I'm going to um to address is uh something that I don't include in my work. I just I put it here you know as a teaser for those who would like to explore this uh as a project. So uh the idea is the following. If extraterrestrial spaceships principle as the initial warp drive, their propulsion and size might be detectable. Though as with any radio receiver, distance and sensitivity remain central by directly converting the received signal without demodulation into digital data.

A deeper investigation becomes possible. Based on the findings of this work, the inertial W drive is expected uh to operate by changing the angular velocity of standing waves. This creates a frequency shift similar to FM modulation but without a carrier. While such carrierless FM isn't possible in a radio broadcasting, it's comparable to SSB single sideb AM where AM modulation without a carrier carrier is feasible. For spaceship objects with radi between 1 and 1,000 mters, the working frequency of a single standing wave for propulsion or shielding is expected to fall between 80 kohz and 80 meghertz as carrierless FM modulated signal.

What I found extremely interesting is that the ter radio broadcasting band from 80 kHz to 80 MHz uses AM modulation not FM. So if we capture signals in this band and convert them directly into digital form without first demodulating we can store this data on a PC. Then by applying softwarebased digital signal processing, we could filter out the AM content a scan for frequency shifts virtual carrier through the processing software. We could even demodulate carrierless FM signals, opening the way to detect otherwise hidden modulation patterns. It would resemble handing for ghostlike SSBFM signals which in reality they do not exist.

Uh but if you know this uh spaceships use this principle as the initial warp drive there is a good chance that we could probably you know um uh receive such kind of signals. So uh besides the frequency shift both shielding and speed are proportional to the confined energy. This means the carrier less FM signal could reveal speed only speeds only up to the speed of light but not beyond. For the same frequency, the final velocity may fall below or appear above light speed as shown in the work through the NS energy factor. I imagine such a detection setup could work like a non-rotating passive rad uh radar antenna that only receive signals like a typical radio.

For now, this remains speculative, but I as I wrote this presentation, I became so absorbed in the idea that it struck me as an exciting and fully feasible exploration project combining RF electronics, ADC conversion, PCbased singular processing software and machine learning algorithms for automatic detection. It would be a thrilling moment if at an upcoming APEC conference someone presented the equipment as also genuine not faked recordings of signals that might be coming from potential extraterrestrial spaceship sources. Such a discovery could mark a new chapter for the conference itself. So uh returning back to the presentation, the expressions linking gravity and inertia with electromagnetis allows us to calculate the required energy density. From this we can determine the energy needed for a spaceship of given dimensions to accelerate almost instantaneously within 48 microsconds from rest to 10 times the speed of light.

By considering the electromagnetic volume through which the standing waves propagate, we arrive at an energy requirement that is many orders of magnitude lower than the estimate derived from the alcuber warp drive. The inertial warp drive section concludes with an attempt to reconcile LQBS energy requirements with inertial cell dynamics. Put simply, the question is what must change in the alubary warp drive model for it to become an inertial warp drive? Instead of warping or distorting spaceime itself, the inertial warp drive applies a warping or bedding of systems inertial response achieved by influencing the local propagation rate through electromagnetic means. By multiplying and dividing with 4 pi and the square of the wave period, we can transform the energy requirements of the alub energy estimate. Two adaptations make this possible.

First, we define the velocity to time ratio as the tangential velocity of a single standing wave rather than the pair. Second, we replace the thickness with the product of the spin of light and the wave period. This substitution allow to be reexpressed as an electromagnetic volume. While calculating the equivalent electric field strength associated with the required energy density, we find that it exceeds the swinkering limit, the threshold at which the vacuum becomes nonlinear. It begins producing electron posit pairs according to vadum electronamics.

This implies a natural limit to acceleration roughly one/ird oneird the speed of light per second. that is equivalent to 11.6 million times Earth's gravitational acceleration. In addition, this poses an energy density limit for confined energy that must not exceed approximately 1.5 multiplied by 10 to 25th power J per cubic meter. A big answer question is how the spaceship keeps moving once phase modulation for acceleration stops at constant speed. The inertial seeding both for propulsion for protecting the crew switch is off because it only works during acceleration.

This means separate shielding would be needed for propulsion and for inner cell as also adaptable phase waveforms uh phase waveform control based on the current acceleration and velocity of the spaceship. Here you will find the papers I have released so far uh brought to a satisfac satisfactory conclusion and which I do not plan to remove in the future. The last three were detected by physics journals and in the coming days I plan to submit the new paper titled engineering the lip to initial web drive uh web drives to the MDPI aerospace journal specials breakthrough propulsion for spacecraft. The this issue is guest edited by Martin Tagmar of Dresden University of Technology and Les Johnson of NASA's Space Flight Center with a submission submission deadline of June 30 June 13th uh 2026. However, publishing is costly and based on my experience and the many rejections I have already received the last 10 years, I doubt this paper will be accepted.

Furthermore, I recommend a few resources that I think should be uh part of everyone's toolkit. I strongly suggest downloading the JLN labs website for offline use. It's one of the richest collection collections of open experiments in alternative energy and propulsion technologies and it's also one of the oldest sites on the web dating back in 1997. You can also find me listed in the system G section as John Cidus dating back to around 2003 sharing my analysis about the system G. It is an anti-gravity device from professor Aino.

You can use um Sciotech web copy or any similar tool to download the entire website while it's still online. I have already done this myself. I also recommend the work of professor Aino. Nearly all of his papers are experimental proposers in alternative energy and propulsion and they can be a great source of inspiration both for those already working in the field and for new enthusiasts. Thank you for your attention.

Okay.