<!DOCTYPE HTML PUBLIC "-//W3C//DTD HTML 4.0 Transitional//EN">
<HTML><HEAD>
<META http-equiv=Content-Type content=text/html;charset=ISO-8859-1>
<META content="MSHTML 6.00.6000.16809" name=GENERATOR></HEAD>
<BODY text=#000000 bgColor=#ffffff>
<DIV><SPAN class=507552816-13032009><FONT face=Arial color=#0000ff size=2>Hi
Michael, et al.</FONT></SPAN></DIV>
<DIV><SPAN class=507552816-13032009><FONT face=Arial color=#0000ff
size=2></FONT></SPAN> </DIV>
<DIV><SPAN class=507552816-13032009><FONT face=Arial color=#0000ff size=2>It's
fair to say that most of the readers of this list have an abiding
interest</FONT></SPAN></DIV>
<DIV><SPAN class=507552816-13032009><FONT face=Arial color=#0000ff size=2>in
your results, positive or negative. Of most value would be your
practical</FONT></SPAN></DIV>
<DIV><SPAN class=507552816-13032009><FONT face=Arial color=#0000ff
size=2>experience with the FOG's and accelerometers; what are the
cheapest</FONT></SPAN></DIV>
<DIV><SPAN class=507552816-13032009><FONT face=Arial color=#0000ff size=2>and
most sensitive tools currently available and what sort of artifacts
are</FONT></SPAN></DIV>
<DIV><SPAN class=507552816-13032009><FONT face=Arial color=#0000ff size=2>the
most problematic? </FONT></SPAN></DIV>
<DIV><SPAN class=507552816-13032009><FONT face=Arial color=#0000ff
size=2></FONT></SPAN> </DIV>
<DIV><SPAN class=507552816-13032009><FONT face=Arial color=#0000ff size=2>Look,
unless the universe is particularly perverse, there ought to
be</FONT></SPAN></DIV>
<DIV><SPAN class=507552816-13032009><FONT face=Arial color=#0000ff
size=2>gravitomagnetic waves. We are currently stuck without the
gravitomagnetic</FONT></SPAN></DIV>
<DIV><SPAN class=507552816-13032009><FONT face=Arial color=#0000ff
size=2>equivalent of a permeable material (such as iron) as we work
with in</FONT></SPAN></DIV>
<DIV><SPAN class=507552816-13032009><FONT face=Arial color=#0000ff
size=2>electromagnetics. While it's nice to imagine it might pop
out</FONT></SPAN></DIV>
<DIV><SPAN class=507552816-13032009><FONT face=Arial color=#0000ff size=2>of a
theory, in all likelihood the discovery will come first and</FONT></SPAN></DIV>
<DIV><SPAN class=507552816-13032009><FONT face=Arial color=#0000ff size=2>the
theory later. With the right tools, perhaps we can make some</FONT></SPAN></DIV>
<DIV><SPAN class=507552816-13032009><FONT face=Arial color=#0000ff
size=2>headway here. We have the advantage that the whole of
electromagnetics</FONT></SPAN></DIV>
<DIV><SPAN class=507552816-13032009><FONT face=Arial color=#0000ff size=2>is
available to us by analogy, by application of that analogy
we</FONT></SPAN></DIV>
<DIV><SPAN class=507552816-13032009><FONT face=Arial color=#0000ff size=2>ought
to be able to experiment our way into gravito-magnetics.</FONT></SPAN></DIV>
<DIV><SPAN class=507552816-13032009></SPAN><SPAN class=507552816-13032009><FONT
face=Arial color=#0000ff size=2></FONT></SPAN> </DIV>
<DIV><SPAN class=507552816-13032009><FONT face=Arial color=#0000ff size=2>Keith
Nagel.</FONT></SPAN></DIV>
<BLOCKQUOTE dir=ltr style="MARGIN-RIGHT: 0px">
<DIV class=OutlookMessageHeader dir=ltr align=left><FONT face=Tahoma
size=2>-----Original Message-----<BR><B>From:</B>
newcandle-bounces@ipdiscover.com
[mailto:newcandle-bounces@ipdiscover.com]<B>On Behalf Of </B>Michael
Ibison<BR><B>Sent:</B> Wednesday, March 11, 2009 12:42 PM<BR><B>To:</B> John
Winterflood<BR><B>Cc:</B> New energy for the new world.; Scott Little; George
Hathaway<BR><B>Subject:</B> Re: [NewCandle] Martin Tajmar
update<BR><BR></FONT></DIV>Thanks for copying me on this John. <BR><BR>Yes,
unfortunately our website is not up to date. Our interest in the Tajmar
project has indeed been mothballed. If there is sufficient interest outside of
Martin's lab we may try to publish our assessment of his experiment and
results. The decision is largely up to George Hathaway, who has been leading
our efforts.<BR><BR>- Michael Ibison<BR><BR><BR><BR>John Winterflood wrote:
<BLOCKQUOTE cite=mid:49B70FF3.1080701@cyllene.uwa.edu.au type="cite">Hi
Keith, All, <BR><BR>Sorry for my lack of involvement, there have been quite
a few things I would have liked to comment on, but I just don't have enough
time these days. <BR><BR>Keith wrote: <BR>
<BLOCKQUOTE type="cite">Still catching up on my xxx.lanl.gov reading. I
noticed that <BR>Martin Tajmar had published something last June; here's
<BR>the abstract. <BR><BR><A class=moz-txt-link-freetext
href="http://lanl.arxiv.org/abs/0806.2271">http://lanl.arxiv.org/abs/0806.2271</A>
<BR><BR>He seems to be recanting on the earlier claim that the
superconductor is the active agent in his gravitomagnetism
<BR>experiments. From the experiments presented in this paper <BR>he
concludes the effect is being caused by the vortex of <BR>rotating liquid
helium created by the rotating ring. <BR><BR>Unfortunately, Earthtechs
website does not seem to update <BR>with new information about their
replication attempt... <BR><BR><A class=moz-txt-link-freetext
href="http://www.earthtech.org/experiments/tajmar/">http://www.earthtech.org/experiments/tajmar/</A>
<BR><BR>Anyone know what's going on there? <BR> </BLOCKQUOTE>Yes I
have heard from both Scott and Michael recently very briefly on this
topic. I am sure there was nothing confidential in our exchange and so
I will pass on the gist of it. They were very interested and excited
about the experiment at the start but as they delved into it they found the
data inconsistent and unconvincing. They seem to have mothballed the
experiment until Martin (Tajmar) can provide them with better data that
seems worth the effort of replication. Michael's dim recollection is
that the "Tajmar effect" apparently diminished by around an order of
magnitude with improvements in equipment - and Martin's "Predictions" have
adjusted to match the reduced signal (again as best Michael can
remember). I have copied both Scott and Michael in this post so that
they may correct me in case I have misrepresented. <BR><BR>John
<BR><BR><BR></BLOCKQUOTE><BR><BR>
<DIV class=moz-signature>-- <BR><IMG src="cid:507552816@13032009-288d"
border=0></DIV></BLOCKQUOTE></BODY></HTML>