Gravity and Antigravity

David Pratt
February 2001

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Contents
Part 1
The mass error (revised May 2001)
Electrogravity
Empty space vs. the ether
Gravity anomalies
References
Part 2
Levitation technology (revised August 2001)
Human levitation
Theosophical writings
References
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

The mass error

It is said to have been the sight of an apple falling from a tree that, around 1665, gave
Isaac Newton the idea that the force that pulls an apple to earth is the same as that which
keeps the moon in its orbit around the earth. The reason the moon does not fall to earth is

because of the counteracting effect of its orbital motion. If the moon were to cease its
orbital motion and fall to earth, the acceleration due to gravity that it would experience at
the earth's surface would be 9.8 m/s -- the same as that experienced by an apple or any
other object in free fall.
Newton's universal law of gravitation states that the gravitational force between two
bodies is proportional to the product of their masses and inversely proportional to the
square of the distance between them. To calculate the gravitational force (F), their masses
(m1 and m2) and the gravitational constant (G) are multiplied together, and the result is
divided by the square of the distance (r) between them: F = Gm1m2/r. The newtonian
theory is accepted by most scientists today without question.
However, it involves a contradiction. On the one hand it states that the gravitational
force between two or more bodies is dependent on their masses, and on the other it
admits that the gravitational acceleration of an attracted body is not dependent on its
mass: if dropped simultaneously from a tower, and if air resistance is ignored, a tennis
ball and a cannonball will hit the ground simultaneously. Furthermore, although
gravitational force and gravitational acceleration are the same phenomenon, and force is
proportional to acceleration, no symbol for the earth's surface gravity (g) or a term for
acceleration appears in the gravitational equation.
In the conventional approach, the above contradiction is overcome by invoking
Newton's second law of motion, which states that the force applied to a body equals the
mass of the body multiplied by its acceleration (F = ma); this implies that gravity pulls
harder on larger masses. However, as several physicists, mathematicians, and
philosophers have pointed out, this law is not based on experiment; it is an arbitrary
definition -- a convention. Experiments cited in its support involve the identification of
weight and force; they prove only that the weight of a body is equal to its mass times the
acceleration (W = ma), and do not measure or define force per se [1].
Newton himself certainly believed that the gravitational force was due to and
proportional to the quantity or density of matter. But it is a historical fact that to deduce
from the earth-moon system that gravity obeys an inverse-square law (i.e. that its strength
diminishes by the square of the distance from the attracting body), he did not need, nor
did he estimate, the masses of the earth and moon. He needed to know only the
acceleration due to gravity at the earth's surface, the radius of the earth, the orbital speed
of the moon, and the distance between earth and moon. As Pari Spolter points out, 'there
is no basis for inclusion of the term "product of the two masses (m1m2)", or for that
matter, for inclusion of any term for mass in the equation of the gravitational force' [2].
Combining Newton's two equations for force, i.e. the equation for gravitational force
and the second law of motion, gives: F = ma = Gm1m2/r. It can then be deduced that, for
the equation to balance, the gravitational constant (G) must have the dimensions m/kg.s
(volume divided by mass multiplied by time squared). Clearly G is a rather weird
constant!

The value of the gravitational constant was first measured directly by the Cavendish
torsion balance experiment in 1798. However, a Cavendish-type experiment is not a
proof of Newton's equation: on the contrary, such experiments assume that the equation is
correct. In Spolter's view, it has not yet been ruled out that the very small angle of
deflection of the torsion balance used in these experiments (or the very small change in
its period of oscillation) is due to electrostatic attraction of the metallic spheres used; in
one experiment in which the small mass of platinum was coated with a thin layer of
lacquer, consistently lower values of G were obtained [3]. Spolter has written to several
mainstream journals proposing further experiments to test this possibility, but her letters
have been rejected.
On the assumption that gravity is proportional to mass, the value of G can be used to
estimate the earth's mass, and also its mean density, which turns out to be 5.5 g/cm. This
value is of course purely theoretical. All we know from actual measurements is that the
mean density of the earth's outer crust is 2.75 g/cm. Scientists have concluded that to
obtain an overall figure of 5.5 g/cm the density of the inner layers of the earth must
increase substantially with depth. Spolter points out that the currently accepted earth
model is inconsistent with the law of sedimentation in a centrifuge. The earth has been
rotating for several billion years, and if it was originally molten and rotated faster than
today, the highest-density matter should have migrated to the outer layers. Also, heavy
elements are rare in the universe, so it is hard to see how such large quantities of them
could have become concentrated in the earth's interior.
The 17th-century astronomer Johannes Kepler discovered the remarkable fact that the
ratio of the cube of the mean distance (r) of each planet from the sun to the square of its
period of revolution (t) is always the same number (r/t = constant). This relationship is
known as Kepler's third law of planetary motion. Pari Spolter has made the major
discovery that Kepler's third law can be derived from a new, simple equation for
gravitational force: F = a.A , where a is the acceleration and A is the area of a circle with
a radius (r) equal to the semimajor axis of revolution of the planet, moon, etc. in question
(i.e. its average distance from the body it orbits).* Since A = (pi)r, this equation naturally
implies that the acceleration due to gravity declines by the square of the distance. And
since it includes no term for mass, it implies that neither gravitational force nor
gravitational acceleration depends on the mass of the bodies concerned, thereby
eliminating the contradiction at the heart of the newtonian theory of gravity.
*Spolter argues that force is always independent of mass [4]. It is not force that is equal
to mass times acceleration, but weight. Her equation for linear force is F = a.d
(acceleration times distance). Her equation for circular force is the one given above: F =
a.A.
Using this equation, the gravitational force of the sun is found to be 4.16 x 1020 ms2m2. This quantity is constant for all the planets, asteroids, and artificial satellites
orbiting the sun, and is independent of the mass of the attracted body. The gravitational
force of the sun calculated from Newton's second law of motion, on the other hand, is not
constant, and ranges from 4.16 x 10 newtons for Jupiter to only 0.31 newton for the

satellite Pioneer 5. If we accept Newton's equation, we have to assume that the sun
somehow recognizes each body orbiting it and doles out a specific amount of its
attractive force for each one.
Using Spolter's equation, the gravitational force of the earth is also constant (1.25 x
1015ms-2m2) -- for objects in free fall, for artificial satellites orbiting the earth, and for
the moon. Using Newton's equation, however, the gravitational force ranges from 0.2
newton for the satellite ERS 12 to 1.98 x 1020 newtons for the moon. Similar results are
obtained for all the planets in our solar system [5].
Newton's theory of gravity (and Einstein's too) ignores the rotation of the central body
and the torque generated by the rotation. Spolter suggests that it is the rotation of a star,
planet, etc. that generates the gravitational force and causes other bodies to revolve
around it. This idea was also advanced by Johannes Kepler, and is supported by a number
of other researchers [6]. Spolter shows that the mean distances of each successive planet
from the centre of the sun are not random but follow an exponential law, which indicates
that gravity is quantized, just as electron orbits in an atom are quantized. For planets
orbited by several moons, she shows that here too gravity is quantized.
The figures given for the masses and densities of all planets, stars, etc. are purely
theoretical; nobody has ever placed one on a balance and weighed it! The masses of
celestial bodies are calculated from what is known as Newton's form of Kepler's third
law, which arbitrarily assumes that Kepler's constant ratio of r/t is equal to the inert
mass of the body multiplied by the gravitational constant. However, this equation is
dimensionally inconsistent: it implies that mass is equal to volume divided by time
squared! The equation can be made to balance if G is assigned the weird dimensions
mentioned above: volume divided by mass multiplied by time squared. But a constant
such as G is only a proportionality number, and cannot be used to introduce the missing
dimensions into an equation.
The circular reasoning on which the newtonian theory of gravity is based is nicely
summed up in The Devil's Dictionary, which defines gravitation as follows: 'The
tendency of all bodies to approach one another with a strength proportioned to the
quantity of matter they contain -- the quantity of matter they contain being ascertained by
the strength of their tendency to approach one another' [7].

Electrogravity
Both gravity and electromagnetism obey the inverse-square law, i.e. their strength
declines by the square of the distance. In other respects, however, gravity and
electromagnetism seem to be very different. Electric and magnetic forces are bipolar, i.e.
they attract and repel, whereas gravity is commonly believed to have only one polarity -attraction. The presence of matter can modify or shield electric and magnetic forces and
electromagnetic radiation, whereas no weakening of gravity has allegedly been measured

by placing matter between two bodies, and it is assumed that this is true whatever the
thickness of the matter in question.
However, some experiments have found evidence of gravitational shielding. In the
course of a series of very sensitive experiments over a period of 10 years, Q. Majorana
found that placing mercury or lead beneath a suspended lead sphere acts as a screen and
slightly decreases the earth's gravitational pull; other experimenters have found similar
evidence of gravity absorption [1]. Erwin Saxl and Mildred Allen measured significant
variations in the period of a torsion pendulum during a solar eclipse in 1970, implying
that solar gravity was being shielded by the moon. Saxl also detected unexpected daily
and seasonal variations [2]. Attempts to explain away these results in terms of poor
experimental design are unconvincing [3].
Pendulum anomalies incompatible with newtonian gravity have also been detected by
other investigators. During solar eclipses in 1954 and 1959, Maurice Allais (who won the
Nobel Prize in Economics in 1988) detected anomalous disturbances in the azimuth of a
paraconical pendulum (i.e. one suspended on a ball) [4]. In the course of observations
conducted since 1987, Shu-wen Zhou and his collaborators have confirmed the
occurrence of an anomalous force of horizontal oscillation when the sun, moon, and earth
are aligned, and have shown that it affects the pattern of grain sequence in crystals, the
spectral wavelengths of atoms and molecules, and the speed rate of atomic clocks [5].
During the total solar eclipse in 1997, a group of scientists detected gravity variations
with a high-precision gravimeter [6]. Tom Van Flandern has suggested that anomalies in
the motions of certain artificial earth satellites during eclipse seasons may also be caused
by shielding of the sun's gravity [7].
The existence of gravity shielding was given further support by experiments conducted
by E. Podkletnov and his coworkers at Finland's Tampere University of Technology in
1992. When a disk of superconducting material was magnetically levitated and rotated at
high speed, up to several thousand revolutions per minute, in the presence of an external
magnetic field, it was found that objects placed above the rotating disk showed a variable
but measurable weight loss* of up to 2% [8]. Related research is being funded as part of
NASA's Breakthrough Propulsion Physics Program. The effect discovered by Podkletnov
is about 10 billion times greater than allowed for in general relativity theory!
Nevertheless, it is tiny compared with the gravitational shielding/antigravity effects
apparently achieved by some alternative researchers in the fields of free energy and
electrogravitics; weight losses of up to 100% have been reported, often involving
spinning objects [9].
*The weight of a body is equal to its mass multiplied by acceleration. Strictly speaking,
an object with a mass of 1 kg weighs 9.8 newtons on earth. However, weights are
commonly given in kilograms, with the gravity acceleration of 9.8 m/s at the earth's
surface being taken for granted. If the force of gravity acting on a body is reduced, its
weight and inertia are likewise reduced, while its mass (in the sense of 'quantity of
matter') remains the same.

The gravitational force between two electrons is 42 orders of magnitude (1042) weaker
than their electrical repulsion. The reason the electromagnetic force does not completely
overwhelm gravity in the world around us is that most things are composed of an equal
amount of positive and negative electric charges whose forces cancel each other out. On
the other hand, it is believed that gravity is always attractive and that consequently there
are no analogous cancellations. However, although it is usually assumed that electrons
are attracted by gravity, this has not been verified experimentally due to the difficulty of
the measurement. As we shall see, there is evidence that such an assumption is wrong.
As long ago as 1830, O.F. Mossotti hypothesized that gravitational attraction resulted
from the very slight excess of the force of attraction between unlike electrical particles
over the force of repulsion between like electrical particles [10]. In the 20th century,
physicist Max Born stated that once we had a more complete knowledge of the
interaction of the forces in the atomic nucleus we might find that gravitation was the
result of 'something left over, a sort of incomplete compensation' [11]. And nuclear
physicist Lucien Gerardin suggested that gravitational attraction may be due to 'kinetic
electromagnetic phenomena within the atomic nuclei', 'a very small residue of interaction
between electricized particles' [12]. Mainstream science has not pursued such ideas, and
is as far away as ever from understanding gravity.
Various experimental results point to a link between electromagnetism and gravity. For
instance, Erwin Saxl showed that gravity and electricity interact under dynamic
conditions. He found that when a torsion pendulum was positively charged, it took longer
to swing through its arc than when it was negatively charged [13]. Bruce DePalma
conducted numerous experiments showing that rotation and rotating magnetic fields can
have anomalous gravitational and inertial effects [14]. Podkletnov's experiments seem to
confirm this.
One of the most important early figures in electrogravitics research was physicist and
inventor T. Townsend Brown [15]. Beginning in the mid-1920s, he discovered that it is
possible to create an artificial gravity field by charging an electrical capacitor to a high
voltage. He built a capacitor which utilized a heavy, high charge-accumulating dielectric
material between its plates and found that when charged with between 75,000 and
300,000 volts it would move in the direction of its positive pole (this is known as the
Biefeld-Brown effect). When oriented with its positive side up, it would lose about 1% of
its weight. He attributed this motion to an electrostatically-induced gravity field acting
between the capacitor's oppositely charged plates. By 1958, he had succeeded in
developing a 15-inch-diameter model saucer that could lift over 110% of its weight. He
obtained many patents for his devices.
Brown succeeded in arousing the interest of the US Air Force:
As early as 1952, an Air Force major general witnessed a demonstration in which
Brown flew a pair of 18 inch disc airfoils suspended from opposite ends of a rotatable

arm. When electrified with 50,000 volts, they circuited at a speed of 12 miles per hour.
About a year later, he flew a set of 3 foot diameter saucers for some Air Force officials
and representatives from a number of major aircraft companies. When energized with
150,000 volts, the discs sped around the 50 foot diameter course so fast that the subject
was immediately classified. Interavia magazine later reported that the discs would attain
speeds of several hundred miles per hour when charged with several hundred thousand
volts.
Brown's discs were charged with a high positive voltage on a wire running along their
leading edge and a high negative voltage on a wire running along their trailing edge. As
the wires ionized the air around them, a dense cloud of positive ions would form ahead of
the craft and a corresponding cloud of negative ions would form behind the craft.
Brown's research indicated that, like the charged plates of his capacitors, these ion clouds
induced a gravitational force directed in the minus to plus direction. As the disc moved
forward in response to its self-generated gravity field, it would carry with it its positive
and negative ion clouds with their associated electrogravity gradient. Consequently, the
discs would ride their advancing gravity wave much like surfers ride an ocean wave. [16]
Skeptics claimed that the discs were propelled by more mundane effects such as the
pressure of negative ions striking the positive electrode, but Brown later carried out
vacuum chamber tests which proved that a force was present even in the absence of such
ion thrust. It is interesting to note that the occupants of one of Brown's saucers would feel
no stresses at all, no matter how sharply it turned or how fast it accelerated, because the
ship and occupants would respond equally to the distortion of the local gravitational field.

Figure. A side view of one of Brown's circular flying discs showing the location of its ion
charges and induced gravity field.
Early in 1952 Brown submitted a proposal that the military develop a disc-shaped
antigravity combat vehicle with Mach 3 capability. A declassified aviation industry
intelligence report indicates that by September 1954 the Pentagon had launched a secret
government programme to develop a manned antigravity craft of the type proposed. In
the mid-1950s, over ten major aircraft companies were actively involved in
electrogravitics research. Since then no publicity has been given to whatever work in
electro-antigravity the US military has conducted. Paul LaViolette suggests that
electrogravitic technology developed since then may have been put to use in the B-2
Stealth Bomber to provide an auxiliary mode of propulsion. He bases this inference on
the disclosure that the B-2 electrostatically charges both the leading edge of its wing-like
body and its jet exhaust stream to a high voltage.
Positive ions emitted from its wing leading edge would produce a positively charged
parabolic ion sheath ahead of the craft while negative ions injected into its exhaust stream

would set up a trailing negative space charge with a potential difference in excess of 15
million volts. . . . [This] would set up an artificial gravity field that would induce a
reactionless force on the aircraft in the direction of the positive pole. An electrogravitic
drive of this sort could allow the B-2 to function with over-unity propulsion efficiency
when cruising at supersonic velocities. [17]

Figure. A side view of the B-2 showing the shape of its electrically charged Mach 2
supersonic shock wave and trailing exhaust stream. Solid arrows show the direction of
ion flow; dashed arrows show the direction of the gravity gradient induced around the
craft.
Another electrogravitics researcher is John Searl, an English electronics technician
[18]. In 1949 he discovered that a small voltage (or electromotive force) was induced in
spinning metal objects. The negative charge was on the outside and the positive charge
was around the centre of rotation. He reasoned that free electrons were thrown out by
centrifugal force, leaving a positive charge in the centre. In 1952 he constructed a
generator, some three feet in diameter, based on this principle. When tested outdoors, it
reportedly produced a powerful electrostatic effect on nearby objects, accompanied by
crackling sounds and the smell of ozone. The generator then lifted off the ground, while
still accelerating, and rose to a height of about 50 feet, breaking the connection with the
engine. It briefly hovered at this height, still speeding up. A pink halo appeared around it,
indicating ionization of the surrounding atmosphere. It also caused local radio receivers
to go on of their own accord. Finally, it reached another critical rotational velocity,
rapidly gained altitude, and disappeared from sight. Searl says that since then he and his
colleagues have built over 50 versions of his 'levity disk', of various sizes, and have
developed a form of control. He claims to have been persecuted by the authorities,
resulting in wrongful imprisonment and the destruction of most of his work, so that he
has had to start all over again.
Although he has been dismissed as a con man, there is evidence that the Searl effect is
genuine. Two members of the Russian Academy of Science, V.V. Roschin and S.M.
Godin, carried out an experiment with a Searl-type generator, and observed a 35% weight
reduction, luminescence, a smell of ozone, anomalous magnetic-field effects, and a fall in
temperature. They concluded that orthodox, etherless physics cannot explain these results
[19].

Empty space vs. the ether

In newtonian gravity theory, it is assumed that gravity propagates instantaneously across

empty space, i.e. it is believed to be a form of action at a distance. However, in a private
letter Newton himself dismissed this idea:
That gravity should be innate, inherent, and essential to matter, so that one body may act
upon another at a distance through a vacuum, without the mediation of any thing else, by
and through which their action and force may be conveyed from one to another, is to me
so great an absurdity, that I believe no man, who has in philosophical matters a competent
faculty of thinking, can ever fall into it. [1]
Newton periodically toyed with the idea of an all-pervading ether (filling his 'absolute
space'), and thought that the cause of gravity must be a spiritual agency, by which he
understood 'God'.
The need to postulate an ether is underlined by G. de Purucker:
We either have to admit the existence of [the] ether or ethers, i.e., of this extremely
tenuous and ethereal substance which fills all space, whether interstellar or interplanetary
or inter-atomic and intra-atomic, or accept actio in distans -- action at a distance, without
intervening intermediary or medium of transmission; and such actio in distans is
obviously by all known scientific standards an impossibility. Reason, common sense,
logic . . . demand the existence of such universally pervading medium, by whatever name
we may choose to call it . . . [2]
Logically, every type of force must ultimately be produced by the activity of material -though not necessarily physical -- agents of some kind, moving at finite, though possibly
superluminal, speeds.
In 1905 Albert Einstein rejected the ether as 'superfluous', preferring the vacuous
concept of 'empty space'. In 1915 he published his general theory of relativity, which is
essentially a theory of gravity. He did not challenge the newtonian notion that inert mass
was the cause of the gravitational force. But whereas Newton attributed gravitational
attraction to the density of matter, Einstein assumed that the same quantity of matter
('gravitational mass') somehow warped the hypothetical four-dimensional 'spacetime
continuum' and that this deformity made the planets orbit the sun. In other words, gravity
is not regarded as a force that propagates but is said to result from masses distorting the
'fabric of spacetime' in their vicinity in some miraculous way. Thus, rather than being
attracted by the sun, the earth supposedly follows the nearest equivalent of a straight line
available to it through the curved spacetime around the sun. However, 'curved spacetime'
is a geometrical abstraction -- or rather a mathematical monstrosity! -- and can in no way
be regarded as an explanation of gravity. Although it is commonly claimed that relativity
theory has been confirmed by observational evidence, there are alternative -- and far
more sensible -- explanations for all the experiments cited in its support [3].
General relativity theory claims that matter, regardless of its electrical charge, produces
only an attractive gravitational force, and allows for only very tiny gravitational shielding

or antigravity effects. Furthermore, it does not predict any coupling between electrostatic
and gravitational fields. In fact, T.T. Brown's pioneering 1929 paper that first reported the
discovery of electrogravity was turned down by Physical Review because it conflicted
with general relativity.
According to quantum field theory, the four recognized forces -- gravity,
electromagnetism, and the weak and strong nuclear forces -- arise from matter particles
constantly emitting and absorbing different types of force-carrying 'virtual' particles
(known as bosons), which are constantly flickering into and out of existence. The
gravitational force is supposedly mediated by gravitons -- hypothetical massless,
uncharged, infinitesimal particles travelling at the speed of light. Since gravitons would
apparently be identical to their antiparticles, this theory, too, appears to rule out
antigravity, and it also fails to explain electrogravity.
Experimental support for these particle-exchange theories is completely lacking, and it
is not clear how they can account for attractive as well as repulsive forces. It is
sometimes said that bosons carry a 'message' telling matter particles whether to move
closer or move apart -- but this explains nothing at all. Moreover, in the standard model,
force-carrying particles, like fundamental matter particles, are regarded as infinitely
small, zero-dimensional point-particles -- which is clearly absurd. As a result of these
idealized notions, quantum calculations tend to be plagued with infinities, which have to
be done away with by a trick known as 'renormalization'.
Einstein spent the last 40 years of his life attempting to extend the geometrical notions
of general relativity to include electromagnetic interactions, and to unite the laws of
gravitation and the laws of electromagnetism in a unified field theory. Many other
mathematicians also worked on this subject, and some of these theories introduced a
fourth, curled-up dimension. None of these attempts was successful, and the search for a
unified theory continues. Some scientists believe that string (or superstring) theory, which
first emerged in the 1970s, is a major step towards a 'theory of everything'.
String theory postulates that all matter and force particles, and even space (and time!)
as well, arise from vibrating one-dimensional strings, about a billion-trillion-trillionth a
centimetre (10-33 cm) long but with zero thickness, inhabiting a ten-dimensional
universe in which the six extra spatial dimensions are curled up so small that they are
undetectable! This theory has no experimental support; indeed, to detect individual
strings would require a particle accelerator at least as big as our galaxy. Moreover, the
mathematics of string theory is so complicated that no one knows the exact equations,
and even the approximate equations are so complicated that so far they have only been
partially solved [4].
Some scientists believe that beyond string theory lies M-theory, which postulates a
universe of 11 dimensions, inhabited not only by one-dimensional strings but also by
two-dimensional membranes, three-dimensional blobs (three-branes), and also higherdimensional entities, up to and including nine dimensions (nine-branes). It is even
speculated that the fundamental components of the universe may be zero-branes [5]. Such

crazy ideas do nothing to advance our understanding of the real world and merely show
how surreal, if not grotesque, pure mathematical speculation can become. There are,
however, several more promising approaches that link gravity and electromagnetism.
According to quantum theory, electromagnetic fields (and other force fields) are
subject to constant, utterly random* fluctuations even at a temperature of absolute zero (273C), when all thermal agitation should cease. As a result, 'empty space' is believed to
be teeming with zero-temperature energy in the form of fluctuating electromagnetic
radiation fields (the zero-point field) and short-lived virtual particles (the 'Dirac sea') [6].
Formally, every point of space should contain an infinite amount of zero-point energy. By
assuming a minimum wavelength of electromagnetic vibrations, the energy density of the
'quantum vacuum' has been reduced to the still astronomical figure of 10108 joules per
cubic centimetre!
The reason we do not normally notice this energy is said to be because of its uniform
density, and most scientists are happy to ignore it altogether. However, many experiments
have been carried out whose results are widely regarded as consistent with the existence
of zero-point energy. The presence of surfaces changes the density of vacuum energy and
can result in vacuum forces, an example being the Casimir effect -- an attractive force
between two parallel conducting plates. However, far more experimental work is needed
to test the theory and alternative explanations. NASA's Marshall Space Flight Center is
studying the possibility of harnessing zero-point energy for spacecraft propulsion as part
of its Breakthrough Propulsion Physics Program [7].
*H.P. Blavatsky writes: 'It is impossible to conceive anything without a cause; the attempt
to do so makes the mind a blank' (The Secret Doctrine, 1:44). This implies that there must
be a great many scientists walking round with blank minds!
Whereas the conventional theory (known as quantum electrodynamics) derives the
zero-point field (ZPF) -- sometimes called the 'quantum ether' -- from quantum theory
and assumes that it is generated by physical matter-energy, there is a competing approach
(stochastic electrodynamics) which regards the ZPF as a very real, intrinsic substratum of
the universe. Such a view is closer to the traditional concept of the ether, as held by
researchers and experimenters such as Baron von Reichenbach (who called it 'odic
force'), John Keely, Nikola Tesla, Wilhelm Reich (who called it 'orgone energy'), and a
large number of more recent investigators in the field of ether physics. One of them, Dan
Davidson, estimates that there are 2000 to 3000 experimenters worldwide conducting
unorthodox research into technologies beyond the currently accepted paradigms of
science, including gravity control, superluminal energy transfer, and 'free energy' devices
[8].
Some scientists have argued that mass, inertia, and gravity are all connected with the
fluctuating electromagnetic energy of the ZPF [9]. Inertia (a body's resistance to a change
in its state of motion) is said to be an acceleration-dependent, electromagnetic drag force
stemming from interactions between a charged particle and the ZPF. The fluctuations of
the ZPF are also said to cause charged particles to emit secondary electromagnetic fields,

which give rise to a residual attractive force -- gravity. In this theory, then, gravity is seen
as a manifestation of electromagnetism. It is thought that by reconfiguring the ZPF
surrounding a body, it may be possible to modify its inertia, or 'inertial mass', and to
control gravity.
Some ZPF researchers suggest that there is no such thing as mass -- only charges,
which interact with the all-pervasive electromagnetic field to create the illusion of matter
[10]. However, since they do not go on to present a concrete picture of what they
understand by 'charge', or 'charged particle', this theory does not get us very far. In the
standard model of particle physics, 'fundamental' charged particles such as electrons and
quarks are modelled as infinitely small particles with no internal structure -- which is
clearly a physical impossibility.
Researchers in the field of ether physics have developed a variety of more concrete
models to explain the structure of matter and the forces of nature [11]. Such theories are
already 'unified' in the sense that physical matter and forces are all derived from the
activity of the underlying ether. Subatomic particles are often modelled as self-sustaining
vortices in the ether; this means that masses continuously radiate and absorb flows of
ether. Inertia can be pictured as the drag force exerted by the disturbed ether as a body
accelerates through it. Electric charge may represent a difference in ether concentration,
while magnetic forces may involve circular flows of ether. Some researchers, such as Dan
Davidson, say that just as electric charge is a gradient in ether, the gravitational force is a
gradient of electric charge. This means that if the etheric gradient is changed around an
atom, the gravity force will also change, as demonstrated by the Biefeld-Brown effect.
The effect can be amplified by synchronizing ether flows through the nucleus of a given
mass, and this can be achieved either by rotation or movement or by sonic stimulation,
which causes all the atoms to resonate together [12].
Paul LaViolette has developed a theory known as 'subquantum kinetics', which
replaces the 19th-century concept of a mechanical, inert ether with that of a continuously
transmuting ether [13]. Physical subatomic particles and energy quanta are regarded as
wavelike concentration patterns in the ether. A particle's gravitational and electromagnetic
fields are said to result from the fluxes of different kinds of etheric particles, or etherons,
across their boundaries, and the resulting etheron concentration gradients. Positively
charged particles such as protons generate matter-attracting gravity wells whereas,
contrary to conventional theory, negatively charged particles such as electrons generate
matter-repelling gravity hills; this would explain the Biefeld-Brown effect. Electrically
neutral matter remains gravitationally attractive because the proton's gravity well
marginally dominates the electron's gravity hill.
In Joseph Cater's model of 'soft particle physics', ether particles combine to form lightphotons of different frequencies, which in turn combine to form denser particles. Physical
matter particles ('hard' particles) are said to be composed of gamma-ray photons, whereas
lower-frequency photons form subtler ('softer') particles. Gravity effects are said to be
produced by highly penetrating electromagnetic radiation located between the lower
portion of the infrared and the radar band [14]. The energies emitted by the sun are

transformed into ever lower frequencies as they penetrate the earth, and a small amount is
transformed into gravity-inducing radiations, which hold the earth in its orbit. The earth's
own gravity is said to arise mainly from the thermal agitation of atoms and molecules, as
the resulting radiation is most readily transformed into gravity-inducing radiations. Cater
argues that what are usually regarded as electrically neutral atoms and molecules actually
have a small positive charge (as does the earth as a whole). Positively charged matter is
attracted by gravity, whereas negative charges are repelled by gravity, so that if matter is
impregnated with sufficient quantities of negative charges (especially soft electrons) it
will lose weight and even levitate.
It is sometimes theorized that gravity is caused by the bombardment of physical matter
by gravity particles. Tom Van Flandern, for example, argues that the universe is full of
tiny particles ('classical gravitons') moving at extremely high speed in all directions, and
that the collisions of these particles cause bodies to be 'attracted' (i.e. pushed) towards
one another, since bodies screen one another from a certain proportion of counteracting
collisions [15]. While it is logical to suppose that all attractive forces ultimately arise
from pushes at some level,* the impact theory of gravity is too simplistic to account for
all the relevant facts.
*If we reason by analogy (as above, so below), the microscopic world is a vastly scaleddown and speeded-up version of the macroscopic world (see The infinite divisibility of
matter). At the macroscopic level, it is impossible to find an attractive or pulling force
that is not really a push. For instance, a person who is 'sucked' out of a pressurized cabin
if the door opens while the aircraft is in flight is really pushed out by the greater number
of molecular bombardments 'behind' them. If an object immersed in an elastic fluid emits
waves of condensation and rarefaction, other bodies will be attracted or repelled
depending on whether the wavelength is very large or very small compared with their
dimensions (Encyclopaedia Britannica, 9th ed., 1898, p. 64). This case therefore involves
both attractive and repulsive forces, and both are ultimately reducible to pushes, but the
situation is far more complex than in the aircraft example.
The impact theory cannot explain why all the planets orbit the sun in planes which
form only small angles to the sun's equatorial plane, or why all the planets circle the sun
in the same direction as the sun's sense of rotation. It also ignores the evidence that
gravitation is bipolar and is linked with electromagnetism. Another problem is that
gravity-particle impacts would heat all material bodies to an enormous temperature.
Defenders of the theory reply simply that this heat must be re-radiated isotropically into
space. However, there is no clear evidence to support this in the case of the earth. Further
evidence against the theory was discovered by Q. Majorana, who found that placing a
lead mass between a lead sphere and the earth reduced the earth's gravitational pull on the
sphere very slightly, whereas placing the lead mass above the sphere did not [16]. He
concluded that this contradicted Le Sage's theory; it is also inconsistent with newtonian
theory, which does not allow gravitational shielding.
Van Flandern argues that if the sun's force propagated at the speed of light, it would
accelerate the earth's orbital speed by a noticeable amount; he calculates from binary-

pulsar data that gravity must propagate at least 20 billion times faster than light [17]! Pari
Spolter argues that since the sun's gravitational force is constantly spread in all directions,
and since the angular velocities of the sun and planets remain constant for long periods of
time, it is immaterial what the speed of gravity is. The lag period would be important
only at the beginning and end of a planet's evolution [18].

Gravity anomalies
In theory, all freely falling bodies -- individual atoms as well as macroscopic objects -should experience a gravitational acceleration (g) of 9.8 m/s near the earth's surface. In
reality, the value of g varies all over the earth owing to its departure from a perfect sphere
(i.e. the equatorial bulge and local topography) and -- in the conventional theory -- to
local variations in the density of the crust and upper mantle. These 'gravity anomalies' are
believed to be fully explicable in the context of newtonian theory. We have seen,
however, that there is no empirical basis for the assumption that gravity is proportional to
inert mass.
Rather than being a direct function of the quantity of matter, the strength of the
gravitational force appears to depend on the electrical and other properties of matter. The
local gravity field may vary due to the ability of negatively charged particles and ions to
screen or counteract the attractive force of gravity, and to the capacity of different types
of rock to emit and absorb gravity-inducing radiation under different conditions. There
may also be huge caverns in the earth's outer shell. This would be impossible if the
newtonian theory were correct and gravity had unlimited penetrability, since pressures
would increase all the way to the earth's centre. Even a few miles beneath the earth's
surface the immense pressures would cause any large cavities to collapse. But if the
orthodox assumptions are wrong, many interesting possibilities open up.
On the basis of the newtonian theory of gravity, it might be expected that gravitational
attraction over continents, and especially mountains, would be higher than over oceans.
But this is not the case. In fact, the gravity on top of large mountains is less than expected
on the basis of their visible mass while over ocean surfaces it is unexpectedly high. To
explain this, the concept of isostasy was developed: it was postulated that low-density
rock exists 30 to 100 km beneath mountains, which buoys them up, while denser rock
exists 30 to 100 km beneath the ocean bottom. However, this hypothesis is far from
proven. Maurice Allais commented: 'There is an excess of gravity over the ocean and a
deficiency above the continents. The theory of isostasis provided only a
pseudoexplanation of this' [1]. The standard, simplistic theory of isostasy is contradicted
by the fact that in regions of tectonic activity vertical movements often intensify gravity
anomalies rather than acting to restore isostatic equilibrium. For example, the Greater
Caucasus shows a positive gravity anomaly (usually interpreted to mean it is overloaded
with excess mass), yet it is rising rather than subsiding.

While scientists know the value of many 'fundamental constants' to eight decimal
places, they disagree on the gravitational constant (G) after only three; this is regarded as
an embarrassment in an age of precision [2]. And if certain highly anomalous results are
taken into account, scientists disagree even about the first decimal place. In 1981 F.D.
Stacey and G.J. Tuck published a paper in which they showed that measurements of G in
deep mines, boreholes, and under the sea gave values about 1% higher than that currently
accepted [3]. Furthermore, the deeper the experiment, the greater the discrepancy.
However, no one took much notice of these results until 1986, when E. Fischbach and
his colleagues reanalyzed the data from a series of experiments by Etvs in the 1920s,
which were supposed to have shown that gravitational acceleration is independent of the
mass or composition of the attracted body. Fischbach et al. found that there was a
consistent anomaly hidden in the data that had been dismissed as random error. On the
basis of these laboratory results and the observations from mines, they announced that
they had found evidence of a short-range, composition-dependent 'fifth force'. Their
paper caused a great deal of controversy and generated a flurry of experimental activity in
physics laboratories around the world [4].
The majority of the experiments failed to find any evidence of a compositiondependent force. But one or two did. Is it safe to simply dismiss these results as
'experimental error', or is there a genuine unexplained anomaly which only experimental
setups of the right design and sensitivity are capable of detecting? Several earlier
experimenters have detected anomalies incompatible with newtonian theory, but the
results have long since been forgotten. For instance, Charles Brush performed very
precise experiments showing that metals of very high atomic weight and density tend to
fall very slightly faster than elements of lower atomic weight and density, even though
the same mass of each metal is used. He also reported that a constant mass or quantity of
certain metals may be appreciably changed in weight by changing its physical condition
[5]. Experiments by Victor Crmieu showed that gravitation measured in water at the
earth's surface appears to be one tenth greater than that computed by newtonian theory
[6]. Donald Kelly has demonstrated that if the absorption capacity of a body is reduced
by magnetizing or electrically energizing it, it is attracted to the earth at a rate less than g
[7]. Physicists normally measure g in a controlled manner which includes not altering the
absorption capacity of bodies from their usual state. Bruce DePalma discovered that
rotating objects falling in a magnetic field accelerate faster than g [8].
As already mentioned, measurements of gravity below the earth's surface are
consistently higher than predicted on the basis of Newton's theory (which includes a
universal gravitational constant and the inverse-square law) [9]. Sceptics simply assume
that hidden rocks of unusually high density must be present. However, measurements in
mines where densities are very well known have given the same anomalous results, as
have measurements to a depth of 1673 metres in an homogenous ice sheet in Greenland,
well above the underlying rock. Instead of inventing new forces to explain such results, it
would be better to reexamine the fundamental assumption that gravity is proportional to
inert mass.

Like Pari Spolter, Stephen Mooney believes that the Cavendish torsion balance
experiment actually measures electrostatic attraction rather than gravitational attraction
[10]. He argues that the mechanism of this attraction is the same as that for the
gravitational attraction between macro-scale bodies -- namely, the absorption of radiation.
Repulsion, on the other hand, involves bodies pushing away from each other due to the
equivalence of their radiation. He also points out that when Cavendish first conducted the
torsion balance experiment, he discovered, but did not understand, that the attraction
increased when he heated the larger of the two bodies. Mooney suggests that this is due to
the increased exchange of radiation between the bodies. He believes that experiments to
measure G actually measure the radiation density at the earth's surface, which is not
absolutely constant. Similarly, he attributes the increased gravitational attraction in a deep
mine shaft to the fact that the decay of the surrounding rocks increases the density of the
radiation impacting on the bodies.
Newtonian gravity theory is challenged by various aspects of planetary behaviour in
our solar system. The rings of Saturn, for example, present a major problem [11]. There
are tens of thousands of rings and ringlets separated by just as many gaps in which matter
is either less dense or essentially absent. The complex, dynamic nature of the rings seems
beyond the power of newtonian mechanics to explain. The gaps in the asteroid belt
present a similar puzzle. Another major anomaly concerns the deviations in the orbits of
the outer planets (Jupiter, Saturn, Uranus, and Neptune) [12]. A 'Planet X' beyond Pluto
has been hypothesized, but despite extensive searches no such planet has been found.
Alternatively, the deviations may point to defects in the current theory of gravitation.

References
The mass error
[1] Pari Spolter, Gravitational force of the sun, Granada Hills, CA: Orb Publishing, 1993,
pp. 137-138.
[2] Ibid., p. 18.
[3] Ibid., p. 117.
[4] Ibid., pp. 231-238.
[5] Ibid., pp. 195-198.
[6] Johannes Kepler, Epitome of Copernican astronomy (1618-21), in Great books of the
western world, Chicago: Encyclopaedia Britannica, Inc., 1952, vol. 16, pp. 895-905;
Stephen Mooney, 'From the cause of gravity to the revolution of science', Apeiron
(http://redshift.vif.com), v. 6, no. 1-2, pp. 138-141, 1999.

[7] Quoted in Meta Research Bulletin, 5:3, p. 41, 1996.

Electrogravity
[1] Q. Majorana, 'On gravitation. Theoretical and experimental researches', Phil. Mag., v.
39, pp. 488-504, 1920; Q. Majorana, 'Sur l'absorption de la gravitation', Comptes Rendus
de l'Acadmie des Sciences, v. 173, pp. 478-479, 1921; Teodor Schlomka, 'ber die
Abhngigkeit der Schwerkraft vom Zwischenmedium', Zeit. fur Geophys., 1927, pp. 397400; Q. Majorana, 'Quelques recherches sur l'absorption de la gravitation par la matire',
Journal de Physique et le Radium, I, pp. 314-324, 1930.
[2] E.J. Saxl, 'An electrically charged torque pendulum', Nature, v. 203, pp. 136-138,
1964; E.J. Saxl and M. Allen, '1970 solar eclipse as "seen" by a torsion pendulum',
Physical Review D, v. 3, pp. 823-825, 1971; Rho Sigma (Rolf Schaffranke), Ethertechnology: A rational approach to gravity control, Lakemont, GA: CSA Printing &
Bindery, 1977, pp. 23, 50-3.
[3] Journal of Scientific Exploration (http://www.scientificexploration.org), 10:2, pp.
269-279, and 10:3, pp. 413-416, 1996.
[4] M.F.C. Allais, 'Should the laws of gravitation be reconsidered?', parts 1 and 2,
Aero/Space Engineering, v. 18, pp. 46-52, September 1959, and v. 18, pp. 51-55, October
1959 (http://allais.maurice.free.fr/English/Science.htm).
[5] Shu-wen Zhou, 'Abnormal physical phenomena observed when the sun, moon, and
earth are aligned', 21st Century Science and Technology, Fall 1999, pp. 55-61.
[6] Qian-shen Wang et al., 'Precise measurement of gravity variations during a total solar
eclipse', Physical Review D, v. 62, 041101, 2000; for abstract, see
http://users.telemail.it/gmodanese/rei.htm.
[7] Tom Van Flandern, 'Possible new properties of gravity', Astrophysics and Space
Science, v. 244, pp. 249-261, 1996.
[8] The Gravity Society, http://www.gravity.org; Quantum Cavorite,
http://inetarena.com/~noetic/pls/gravity.html.
[9] Jeane Manning, The coming energy revolution: The search for free energy, NY:
Avery, 1996, pp. 66, 75; Dan A. Davidson, 'Free energy, gravity and the aether', 1997,
http://216.60.190.54/davidson/npap1.htm; Dan A. Davidson, Shape power, Sierra Vista,
AR: RIVAS, 1997; Antigravity News and Space Drive Technology,
http://www.padrak.com/agn.
[10] Laurence Hecht, 'Rethinking the laws of gravitation', 21st Century Science and
Technology, Fall 1998, pp. 2-3 (http://allais.maurice.free.fr/English/media9-1.htm).

[11]Ether-technology, p. 42.
[12] Ibid., pp. 40, 43.
[13] E.J. Saxl, 'An electrically charged torque pendulum', Nature, v. 203, pp. 136-138,
1964.
[14] The Home of Primordial Energy (Bruce DePalma), http://www.depalma.pair.com;
Manning, The coming energy revolution, pp. 82-86.
[15] Paul LaViolette, 'The U.S. antigravity squadron', in Thomas Valone (ed.),
Electrogravitic systems: Reports on a new propulsion methodology, Washington, DC:
Integrity Research Institute, 1999, pp. 82-101; Paul LaViolette, Subquantum kinetics: The
alchemy of creation, Schenectady, NY, 1994, pp. 168-183 (http://www.etheric.com);
Ether-technology, pp. 25-49; Thomas Townsend Brown Website,
http://www.soteria.com/brown.
[16] 'The U.S. antigravity squadron', pp. 84-85.
[17] Ibid., p. 82.
[18] Ether-technology, pp. 73-82, 87-88, 108; John Davidson, The secret of the creative
vacuum, Saffron Walden, Essex: Daniel Company, 1989, pp. 200-216; Joseph H. Cater,
The ultimate reality, Pomeroy, WA: Health Research, 1998, pp. 359-369; The Searl
Effect, http://www.searleffect.com.
[19] V.V. Roschin and S.M. Godin, 'Experimental research of the magnetic-gravity
effects', http://www.watchersnet.com/nightwatch/antigrav_paper.html.
Empty space vs. the ether
[1] Quoted in G. de Purucker, The esoteric tradition, Pasadena, CA: Theosophical
University Press, 2nd ed., 1940, pp. 443-444fn; H.P. Blavatsky, The secret doctrine,
Pasadena, CA: Theosophical University Press, 1977 (1888), 1:490-491.
[2] The esoteric tradition, 901-902fn.
[3] See Space, time, and relativity (Einstein's fallacies),
http://ourworld.compuserve.com/homepages/relativ.htm.
[4] Brian Greene, The elegant universe: Superstrings, hidden dimensions, and the quest
for the ultimate theory, London: Vintage, 2000, p. 19.
[5] Ibid., pp. 287-288, 379.

[6] R. Forward, 'Mass modification experiment definition study', Journal of Scientific

Exploration, 10:3, pp. 325-354, 1996.
[7] Breakthrough Propulsion Physics, http://www.lerc.nasa.gov/WWW/bpp/summ.htm.
[8] Dan A. Davidson, 'Free energy, gravity and the aether', 1997,
http://216.60.190.54/davidson/npap1.htm; Jeane Manning, The coming energy
revolution: The search for free energy, NY: Avery, 1996; Rho Sigma (Rolf Schaffranke),
Ether-technology: A rational approach to gravity control, Lakemont, GA: CSA Printing &
Bindery, 1977; Elektromagnum, www.newphys.se/elektromagnum; KeelyNet,
http://www.keelynet.com.
[9] B. Haisch and A. Rueda, 'The zero-point field and the NASA challenge to create the
space drive', Journal of Scientific Exploration, 11:4, pp. 473-485, 1997; 'Questions and
answers about the origin of inertia and the zero-point field',
http://www.calphysics.org/questions.html.
[10] B. Haisch, A. Rueda and H.E. Puthoff, 'Beyond E=mc', The Sciences, 34:6, pp. 2631, 1994.
[11] E.g. Caroline H. Thompson, 'Phi-waves and forces', December 2000,
http://users.aber.ac.uk/cat/Papers/phi-waves.htm. See also refs. 8, 12, 13, 14.
[12] Dan A. Davidson, Shape power, Sierra Vista, AR: RIVAS, 1997, pp. 1-7.
[13] Paul LaViolette, Beyond the big bang: Ancient myth and the science of continuous
creation, Rochester, VE: Park St Press, 1995, pp. 309-314; Paul LaViolette, Subquantum
kinetics: The alchemy of creation, Schenectady, NY, 1994, pp. 168-183.
[14] Joseph H. Cater, The ultimate reality, Pomeroy, WA: Health Research, 1998, pp. 7382, 167-181.
[15] Tom Van Flandern, Dark matter, missing planets & new comets, Berkeley, CA:
North Atlantic Books, 1993, pp. 27-57.
[16] Q. Majorana, 'Quelques recherches sur l'absorption de la gravitation par la matire',
Journal de Physique et le Radium, I, pp. 314-324, 1930.
[17] Tom Van Flandern, 'The speed of gravity -- what the experiments say', Meta
Research Bulletin, 6:4, 1997, pp. 49-62.
[18] Pari Spolter, pers. com., 2001.
Gravity anomalies

[1] M.F.C. Allais, 'Should the laws of gravitation be reconsidered?', part 2, Aero/Space
Engineering, v. 18, October 1959, p. 52.
[2] D. Kestenbaum, 'The legend of G', New Scientist, 17 January 1998, pp. 39-42.
[3] F.D. Stacey and G.J. Tuck, 'Geophysical evidence for non-newtonian gravity', Nature,
v. 292, pp. 230-232, 1981.
[4] Rupert Sheldrake, Seven experiments that could change the world, London: Fourth
Estate, 1994, pp. 174-176; Pari Spolter, Gravitational force of the sun, Granada Hills,
CA: Orb Publishing, 1993, pp. 146-147.
[5] Charles F. Brush, 'Some new experiments in gravitation', Proceedings of the American
Philosophy Society, v. 63, pp. 57-61, 1924.
[6] Victor Crmieu, 'Recherches sur la gravitation', Comptes Rendus de l'Acadmie des
Sciences, Dec. 1906, pp. 887-889; Victor Crmieu, 'Le problme de la gravitation', Rev.
Gen. Sc. Pur. et Appl., v. 18, pp. 7-13, 1907.
[7] Stephen Mooney, 'From the cause of gravity to the revolution of science', Apeiron, v.
6, no. 1-2, pp. 138-141, 1999; Josef Hasslberger, 'Comments on gravity drop tests
performed by Donald A. Kelly', Nexus, Dec. 1994-Jan. 1995, pp. 48-49.
[8] The Home of Primordial Energy (Bruce DePalma), http://www.depalma.pair.com;
Jeane Manning, The coming energy revolution: The search for free energy, NY: Avery,
1996, pp. 82-86.
[9] S.C. Holding and G.J. Tuck, 'A new mine determination of the newtonian
gravitational constant', Nature, v. 307, pp. 714-716, 1984; Mark A. Zumberge et al.,
'Results from the 1987 Greenland G experiment', Eos, v. 69, p. 1046, 1988; R. Poole, '
"Fifth force" update: more tests needed', Science, v. 242, p. 1499, 1988; Ian Anderson,
'Icy tests provide firmer evidence for a fifth force', New Scientist, 11 August 1988, p. 29.
[10] Mooney, 'From the cause of gravity to the revolution of science'.
[11] W.R. Corliss (comp.), The moon and the planets, Glen Arm, MD: Sourcebook
Project, 1985, pp. 282-284.
[12] Tom Van Flandern, Dark matter, missing planets & new comets, Berkeley, CA:
North Atlantic Books, 1993, pp. 315-325.

Gravity and Antigravity

David Pratt
February 2001

-------------------------------------------------------------------------------Part 2
Levitation technology
Human levitation
Theosophical writings
References
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Levitation technology
The megalithic structures found at various sites around the world have generated endless
controversy as to how they were built. Conventional archaeologists, who dismiss the
possibility of highly advanced civilizations in the remote past, insist that they were built
solely with the use of primitive tools and brute force. Some of the structures, or parts of
them, could have been built in this way. However, a number of engineers have stated that
some features would be difficult if not impossible to duplicate today, even using the most
advanced technology. The sheer weight and size of some of the stone blocks have
prompted several researchers to wonder whether the ancient builders had mastered some
form of levitation technology.*
*The acoustic and magnetic levitation techniques currently under development by
mainstream scientists create a physical lifting force stronger than the force of gravity and
are not designed to modify gravity or generate an antigravitational force.
The pre-Incan fortresses at Ollantaytambo and Sacsayhuaman in the Peruvian Andes
consist of cyclopean walls constructed from tight-fitting polygonal stone blocks, some
weighing 120 tonnes or more. The blocks used at Ollantaytambo were somehow
transported from a quarry located on another mountaintop 11 km away, the descent from
which was impeded by a river canyon with 305-metre vertical rock walls. The ruins of
Tiahuanaco near Lake Titicaca in Bolivia include a number of blocks weighing around

100 tonnes, which were transported from quarries 50 km away [1]. According to the local
Aymara Indians, the complex was built at the 'beginning of time' by the founder-god
Viracocha and his followers, who caused the stones to be 'carried through the air to the
sound of a trumpet'. An alternative theme is that they created a 'heavenly fire' that
consumed the stones and enabled large blocks to be lifted by hand 'as if they were cork'.
According to a Mayan legend, the temple complex of Uxmal in the Yucatan Peninsula
was built by a race of dwarfs who were able to move heavy rocks into place by whistling
[2].
Legends of sound being used to lift and transport stone blocks are in fact universal. For
instance, according to early Greek historians, the walls of the ancient city of Thebes were
built by Amphion, a son of Jupiter, who moved the large stones 'to the music of his harp',
while his 'songs drew even stones and beasts after him'. Another version claims that when
he played 'loud and clear on his golden lyre, rock twice as large followed in his footsteps'.
The 10th-century Arab historian Mas'udi wrote that, to build the pyramids, the ancient
Egyptians inserted papyri inscribed with certain characters beneath the stone blocks; they
were then struck by an instrument, producing a sound which caused them to rise into the
air and travel for a distance of over 86 metres [3].
The achievements of the ancient Egyptian builders have caused even some fairly
orthodox investigators to wonder whether levitation might have been employed [4]. For
instance the roof of the King's Chamber in the Great Pyramid, 200 feet up, consists of
huge granite beams weighing up to 70 tonnes. What's more, the major temples on the
Giza plateau -- the two next to the Sphinx and those besides the Second and Third
Pyramids -- contain colossal limestone blocks weighing between 50 and 200 tonnes and
placed on top of one another. The largest are an incredible 9 metres long, 3.6 metres wide
and 3.6 metres high. It is interesting to note that there are only a few cranes in the world
today capable of lifting objects weighing 200 tonnes or more [5].
The largest blocks used in any known man-made structure are found in the ancient
platform beneath the Roman Temple of Jupiter at Baalbek in Lebanon [6]. The foundation
platform is enclosed by a cyclopean retaining wall; in the western side, on the fifth level,
at a height of 10 metres, there are three colossal stones known as the Trilithon, each
measuring about 19.5 metres long, 4.5 metres high and 3.5 metres deep, and weighing a
staggering 1000 tonnes. The stones fit together perfectly and not even a knife blade can
be pushed between them. At the quarry, half a kilometre away, there remains a fourth,
even larger block, weighing as much as 1200 tonnes, the lower part of its base still
attached to the bedrock. The course beneath the Trilithon contains seven mammoth stones
weighing about 450 tonnes each. There are no traces of a roadbed leading from the quarry
and no traces of any ramp. Nor are there any written records as to how the platform was
built. According to local Arab legend, Baalbek's first citadel was built before the Flood,
and rebuilt afterwards by a race of giants. The Phoenician historian Sanchoniatho stated
that Lebanon's first city was Byblos, founded by the god Ouranus, who designed
cyclopean structures and was able to make stones move as if they had a life of their own.

Figure. The massive Trilithon at Baalbek. (The silhouetted two-storey house has been
inserted for scale.) [7]

Figure. The 'Stone of the South' still in the quarry at Baalbek. [8]
Evidence that worldwide legends of acoustic levitation might have a basis in fact, was
provided by the Swedish engineer Henry Kjellson, who in the 1950s recorded the
experiences of two separate western travellers who had allegedly witnessed
demonstrations of sonic technology in Tibet [9]. Since neither of the following accounts
can be verified, sceptics assume that Kjellson probably made them up himself.
During a visit to a Tibetan monastery situated southwest of the capital Lhasa, the
Swede Dr Jarl was taken to a meadow where there was a high cliff to the northwest.
About 250 metres up the face of the cliff was an entrance to a cave, in front of which was
a wide ledge where monks were building a stone wall. Embedded in the ground 250
metres from the foot of the cliff, was a large rock slab with a bowl-shaped depression in
it. A block of stone, 1.5 metres long, 1 metre wide, and 1 metre high, was manhandled
into the depression. Monks with 19 musical instruments, consisting of 13 drums and 6
very long trumpets, were arranged in an arc of about 90 degrees, 63 metres from the
bowl-stone. The drums, open at one end, were aimed at the stone block. Behind each
instrument was a line of monks eight to ten deep. A monk in the middle of the arc started
chanting and beating out a rhythm on a small drum, and then the other instruments joined
in. After four minutes, the large stone block began to wobble and floated into the air
rocking from side to side. All the instruments were trained constantly on the stone as it
rose upwards at an accelerating rate and finally crashed onto the ledge. The monks
continued to perform this feat at the rate of 5 or 6 stones per hour. The role of the 200 or
so monks behind the instruments was unclear: one suggestion is that they used some form
of coordinated psychokinesis to aid the flight of the stone.

Figure. Dr Jarl's sketch showing how Tibetan monks were able to raise stone blocks into
the air using the power of sound.

The second case involved an Austrian named Linauer, who stated that while at a
remote monastery in northern Tibet during the 1930s, he had witnessed the demonstration
of two curious sound instruments which, when used in concert, could induce
weightlessness in stone blocks. The first was an extremely large gong, 3.5 metres in
diameter, composed of a central circular area of very soft gold, followed by a ring of pure
iron, and finally a ring of extremely hard brass. When struck, it produced an extremely
low dumph which ceased almost immediately. The second instrument was also composed
of three different metals; it had a half-oval shape like a mussel shell, and measured 2
metres long and 1 metre wide, with strings stretched longitudinally over its hollow
surface. Linauer was told that it emitted an inaudible resonance wave when the gong was
struck. The two devices were used in conjunction with a pair of large screens, positioned
so as to form a triangular configuration with them. When the gong was struck with a large
club to produce a series of brief, low-frequency sounds, a monk was able to lift a heavy
stone block with just one hand. Linauer was informed that this was how their ancestors
had built protective walls around Tibet, and that such devices could also disintegrate
physical matter.
A man who appears to have gone a long way to unlocking the secrets of sound was
John Ernst Worrell Keely of Philadelphia (1827-1898). He spent 50 years developing and
refining a wide variety of devices that used 'sympathetic vibratory force' or 'etheric force'
to levitate objects, spin large wheels, power engines, and disintegrate rock. He performed
many convincing demonstrations in his laboratory for scientists and other interested
observers. He attempted to put his apparatus into commercial production, but this was
hampered by the fact that it had to be tuned to the bodily vibrations of the operator and
also to the surroundings [10].

Figure. John Keely.

Keely built several devices to manipulate gravity [11]. One of them was the
'sympathetic transmitter', a copper globe about one foot (30 cm) in diameter, containing a
Chladni plate and various metal tubes, whose position could be adjusted by means of a
knob. The globe was held by a metal stand, around the base of which projected small
metal rods a few inches long, of different sizes and lengths, which vibrated like tuning
forks when twanged by the fingers. In one experiment, the transmitter was connected by a
wire made of gold, platinum, and silver to the top of a water-filled glass jar. When the
right chord was sounded on the strings of a zither, metal balls, weighing 2 pounds (0.9
kg), rose from the bottom of the jar until they hit the metal cap, and remained there until a
different note was played which caused them to sink again. Witnesses relate how, after
further experimentation, Keely was able to make heavy steel balls move in the air by
simply playing on a kind of mouth organ. Using the same combination of transmitter,
connecting cord, and musical instrument, he was able to make a 3.6-kg model of an

airship rise into the air, descend, or hover with a motion 'as gentle as that of thistledown'.
He was also able to lift extremely heavy weights by connecting them to vibratory
appliances worn on his person; several people witnessed him levitate and move a 3-tonne
cast-iron sphere in this way, and also make it heavier so that it sank into the ground as if
into mud.
Keely was able to catalyze the vibratory force necessary to make objects move using a
variety of musical instruments, including trumpets, horns, harmonicas, fiddles, and
zithers, and could even operate the equipment just by whistling. One sceptic, however,
claimed that Keely did not play on an instrument to set up sympathetic vibration but to
signal to a confederate in another part of the building when to turn on or off the
compressed air that supposedly powered his 'fraudulent' devices!
A man who in more recent times claimed to know the secret of how the pyramids and
other megalithic structures were built was Edward Leedskalnin [12]. He lived in a place
called Coral Castle, near Miami, Florida, which he built himself from giant blocks of
coral weighing up to 30 tons. In 28 years, working alone, without the use of modern
construction machinery, he quarried and erected a total of 1100 tons. He was very
secretive and usually worked at night, and died in 1952 without divulging his
construction techniques, despite visits from engineers and government officials. Some
teenagers spying on him one evening claimed they saw him 'float coral blocks through
the air like hydrogen balloons'. It is widely thought that he had discovered some means of
locally reversing the effects of gravity. From the remaining contents of Leedskalnin's
workshop and photographic evidence, engineer Chris Dunn suggests that he generated a
radio signal that caused the coral to vibrate at its resonant frequency, and then used an
electromagnetic field to flip the magnetic poles of the atoms so that they were repulsed
by the earth's magnetic field.

Human levitation
Over 200 Christian saints are reported to have levitated -- usually involuntarily -- during
religious raptures, and some cases are supported by an impressive amount of eyewitness
testimony [1]. For instance, the 16th-century mystic St Teresa of Avila was observed on
many occasions, typically when deep in prayer, to rise anywhere from a few feet to as
high as the ceiling of the room. When she felt an 'attack' coming on she would beg the
sisters in her convent to hold her down, though they were not always successful. Once
while receiving Holy Communion from the Bishop of Avila, she felt her knees begin to
leave the floor so she clutched onto the grille. But after receiving the sacrament, she let
go -- with predictable results.
The 17th-century Franciscan monk St Joseph of Copertino began levitating during
services and was often observed by whole congregations. Once while walking in the
monastery grounds, he soared up into the branches of an olive tree and remained kneeling
on a branch for half an hour, the thin stem hardly moving under his weight. Unable to

glide down, after his ecstasy had passed, he had to wait for a ladder to be brought. For 35
years he was banned from all public services, but he levitated not only before the Pope
and his fellow monks but also before Europe's titled heads and the philosopher Leibnitz.
The Spanish ambassador to the papal court watched him fly over the heads of a crowd to
a statue of the Virgin Mary, where he briefly hovered. After giving his customary shriek,
he flew back; the ambassador's wife had to be revived with smelling salts. The duke of
Brunswick hid himself in a stairway to observe one of Joseph's levitations. After
observing a second levitation, the duke renounced his Lutheran faith and became a
Catholic. At Osimo, Joseph flew eight feet into the air to kiss a statue of Jesus then
carried it off to his cell and floated about with it. He is also reported to have caught up
another friar and carried him in the air around the room.
The annals of 19th-century spiritualism contain many references to human levitations,
as well as to tables, chairs, and other objects gaining or losing weight, levitating, and
moving without human contact [2]. The most famous levitator of all was the medium
Daniel Dunglas Home (pronounced: Hume). His first recorded levitation took place at a
seance in August 1852. He was suddenly 'taken up into the air . . . He palpitated from
head to foot with the contending emotions of joy and fear . . . Again and again he was
taken from the floor, and the third time he was carried to the ceiling of the apartment,
with which his hands and feet came into gentle contact.' He later became able to levitate
at will, and believed he was lifted up by 'spirits'. During a public career lasting 30 years,
hundreds of people witnessed his levitations. The most famous of Home's levitations was
when in the company of Lord Adare, the Master of Lindsay, and a friend of theirs, he
floated out of one window of a London house and in at another. The eminent English
scientist Sir William Crookes saw him levitate on several occasions and verified that
there was no trickery involved. On one occasion, Crookes' wife, who was sitting beside
Home, was raised off the ground in her chair [3].
The magician Harry Kellar, who enjoyed showing audiences how mediums did their
tricks, described how during a world tour in the 1870s he was watching a Zulu witch
doctor go into a trance when suddenly 'to my intense amazement, the recumbent body
slowly arose from the ground and floated upward in the air to the height of about three
feet, where for a while it floated, moving up and down'. In 1882 he challenged the
medium William Eglinton to perform some feat which no conjuror could repeat. Eglinton
then levitated, carrying Kellar, holding his foot, into the air -- an achievement which
Kellar had to admit he could not account for [4].
The Italian medium Eusapia Palladino occasionally used to levitate and was also able
to increase or decrease the weight of objects. Her paranormal powers were verified in
investigations conducted by European scientists around the turn of the 20th century. After
witnessing her demonstrations, the French astronomer Camille Flammarion stated that
levitation should no longer be any more in question than the attraction of iron by a
magnet [5]. Levitations of mediums have frequently been reported since then in
spiritualist journals, but no medium has been able to produce them in conditions which
could be called fraud-proof.

In the mid-19th century, Louis Jacolliot, Chief Justice of Chandernagore, travelled all
over India to learn more about wonder-working fakirs. He witnessed many extraordinary
phenomena, which he tried to view without prejudice or emotion, as a judge would weigh
evidence in a court of law. In Varanasi (Benares) he met a fakir named Covindasamy,
who performed various paranormal phenomena for him. On one occasion he crossed his
arms on his chest and slowly levitated to a height of ten to twelve inches, remaining in
the air more than eight minutes [6]. Another of his levitations is described by Jacolliot as
follows:
Leaning upon [his] cane with one hand, the Fakir rose gradually about two feet from the
ground. His legs were crossed beneath him, and he made no change in his position . . .
For more than twenty minutes I tried to see how Covindasamy could thus fly in the
face and eyes of all the known laws of gravity; it was entirely beyond my comprehension;
the stick gave him no visible support, and there was no apparent contact between that and
his body, except through his right hand. [7]
A similar display was reported by the American journalist John Keel. While travelling
in Sikkim in the 1950s, he met an old lama who demonstrated his ability to levitate.
He . . . pressed one hand on top of his stick, a heavy branch about four feet long, frowned
a little with effort, and then slowly lifted his legs up off the floor until he was sitting
cross-legged in the air! There was nothing behind him or under him. His sole support was
his stick, which he seemed to use to keep his balance. I was astounded.
The lama then conducted the rest of the conversation 'sitting there in empty space' [8].
In July 1916, P. Muller, a German veterinarian stationed in Turkey, attended a
gathering of the Rufai dervishes. He described a large hall in which white-robed
dervishes wearing tall black caps 'moved in a circle with sideways steps and curious
jerking motions'. About an hour into the ceremony, the music and dancing and cries of the
dancers intensified, when suddenly one of them bounded into the middle of the circle. He
stood still, with his arms upraised, palms facing the sky:
And now the incomprehensible happened . . . [S]lowly the whole tense body of this man
elevated itself about eighteen inches off the floor and remained there, floating in the air
with the toes pointing down.
The ecstatic man remained suspended for about a minute [9].
Tibetans speak of a power of fast-walking known as lung-gom. An eye-witness account
was provided by Alexandra David-Neel, an early 20th-century explorer, journalist, and
Buddhist. While in northern Tibet, she saw a man approaching with an 'unusual gait' and
'extraordinary swiftness'.

I could clearly see his perfectly calm impassive face and wide-open eyes with their gaze
fixed on some invisible far-distant object situated somewhere high up in space. The man
did not run. He seemed to lift himself from the ground, proceeding by leaps. It looked as
if he had been endowed with the elasticity of a ball and rebounded each time his feet
touched the ground. His steps had the regularity of a pendulum. [10]
The native American Indians apparently knew of a similar method of magical running. In
the 1920s anthropologist Carobeth Laird reported on one of the last men to travel 'the old
way': the tracks left by his feet were very faint and far apart, as if his feet had barely
touched the ground [11].
In 1984 a German film crew filmed the levitation of an African witch-doctor, Nana
Owaka, in Togo. After meditating for a full day, he placed dry leaves and twigs in a circle
and sat in the middle.
Just as the sun was setting, Owaka started to stir. A villager lit the circle of twigs and
flames shot up. Drums began beating wildly -- then we were hardly able to believe our
eyes as Owaka stood and rose straight upward! It was as if he were being lifted on a
pillow of air. He simply hung as if suspended, with nothing above or below him.
After about a minute, Owaka fell back to earth. He was filmed from two angles, and no
one who has examined the film has been able to detect any signs of trickery [12].

Theosophical writings
As already mentioned, Kepler believed that the rotation of the sun generated its
gravitational force. A disciple of Pythagoras and Plato, he believed in an ether of subtler
matter and that stars and planets were animated by souls. He took the view that it was
solar magnetism that held the planets in their orbits, and he conceived magnetism to be a
form of vortical motion. More recent theosophical writers such as H.P. Blavatsky, W.Q.
Judge, and G. de Purucker have also highlighted the link between gravity and
electromagnetism, along with the bipolar nature of gravity, as the following quotations
show.
[T]here is no gravitation in the Newtonian sense, but only magnetic attraction and
repulsion; . . . it is by their magnetism that the planets of the solar system have their
motions regulated in their respective orbits by the still more powerful magnetism of the
sun, not by their weight or gravitation. [1]
Gravitation . . . depends entirely on electrical law, and not on weight or density. [2]
[The theosophical adepts] reject gravity as at present explained. They deny that the socalled 'impact theory'* is the only one that is tenable in the gravitation hypothesis. They
say that if all efforts made by the physicists to connect it with Ether, in order to explain
electric and magnetic distance-action have hitherto proved complete failures, it is again

due to the race ignorance of the ultimate states of matter in nature, foremost of all the real
nature of the solar stuff. Believing but in the law of mutual magneto-electric attraction
and repulsion, they agree with those who have come to the conclusion that 'Universal
gravitation is a weak force,' utterly incapable of accounting for even one small portion of
the phenomena of motion. [3]
*This refers to the idea that gravity is caused by bombardment (as in Van Flandern's
theory).
[T]he phenomenon of gravitation or 'falling' does not exist, except as the result of a
conflict of forces. It can only be considered as an isolated force by way of mental
analysis . . . [4]
[G]ravitation [is] the same fundamentally as cosmic electro-magnetism. [5]
[G]ravitation is: Vital Cosmic Magnetism; the efflux or outflow of cosmic vitality from
the heart of the celestial bodies . . . It is this Vital Electricity or Vital Magnetism in the
Cosmic Structure which attracts in all directions, thus uniting all things into the vast body
corporate of the Cosmos. Furthermore, some day it will be discovered that this Cosmic
Magnetic Vitality contains or includes in itself as powerful and as greatly functional an
element of repulsion as it does of attraction; and that behind all its phenomenal workings,
in fact, behind and within itself, lie the still higher and incomparably more potent
principles or elements of the inner and invisible Universe which thus infallibly guide its
activities everywhere. [6]
[Einstein's] ideas with regard to the nature of gravitation as being . . . a warping or
distortion of space in the proximity of material bodies seem to be a mathematical pipedream, purely and simply, although doubtless very creditable indeed to the gentleman's
mathematical ability . . . [7]
The earth is a magnetic body . . . It is charged with one form of electricity -- let us call it
positive -- which it evolves continuously by spontaneous action, in its interior or centre of
motion. Human bodies, in common with all other forms of matter, are charged with the
opposite form of electricity -- negative. That is to say, organic or inorganic bodies, if left
to themselves will constantly and involuntarily charge themselves with, and evolve the
form of electricity opposed to that of the earth itself. . . . [T]here is an attraction between
our planet and the organisms upon it, which holds them upon the surface of the ground.
But the law of gravitation has been counteracted in many instances, by levitations of
persons and inanimate objects . . . [T]he action of our will . . . can produce . . . a change
of this electrical polarity from negative to positive; the man's relations with the earthmagnet would then have become repellent, and 'gravity' for him would have ceased to
exist. It would then be as natural for him to rush into the air until the repellent force had
exhausted itself, as, before, it had been for him to remain upon the ground. The altitude of
his levitation would be measured by his ability, greater or less, to charge his body with
positive electricity. This control over the physical forces once obtained, alteration of his
levity or gravity would be as easy as breathing. [8]

Until gravitation is understood to be simply magnetic attraction and repulsion, and the
part played by magnetism itself in the endless correlations of forces in the ether of space .
. . it is neither fair nor wise to deny the levitation of either fakir or table. Bodies
oppositely electrified attract each other; similarly electrified, repulse each other. Admit,
therefore, that any body having weight, whether man or inanimate object, can by any
cause whatever, external or internal, be given the same polarity as the spot on which it
stands, and what is to prevent its rising? [9]
Levitation of the body in apparent defiance of gravitation is a thing to be done with ease
when the process is completely mastered. It contravenes no law. Gravitation is only half
of a law. The Oriental sage admits gravity, if one wishes to adopt the term; but the real
term is attraction, the other half of the law being expressed by the word repulsion, and
both being governed by the great laws of electrical force. Weight and stability depend on
polarity, and when the polarity of an object is altered in respect to the earth immediately
underneath it, then the object may rise. . . . The human body . . . will rise in the air
unsupported, like a bird, when its polarity is thus changed. [10]
Blavatsky says that the flight of birds and swimming of fishes, including the rapid
sinking of whales, involve changes in polarity and gravity not yet admitted by science.
Animals can do this instinctively, while humans can learn to do so by will [11].
Mainstream scientists have occasionally speculated on whether the 'gravitational
constant' is truly constant over very long periods of time, but no conclusive evidence of a
gradual increase or decrease has been found [12]. Theosophy asserts that during the lifeperiod of a planet or star, gravitational forces do not in fact remain constant. The first half
of a planet's life (the 'descending arc') is said to be characterized by the condensation of
matter from a primordial, ethereal state, implying an increase in the attractive and
cohesive forces. It is followed by the reverse process of etherealization and
spiritualization (the 'ascending arc'), when the attractive and cohesive forces weaken and
matter becomes increasingly radioactive [13].

References
Levitation technology
[1] Paul LaViolette, Beyond the big bang: Ancient myth and the science of continuous
creation, Rochester, VE: Park Street Press, 1995, p. 320; Ian Lawton and Chris OgilvieHerald, Giza: The truth, London: Virgin, 1999, p. 201.
[2] Andrew Collins, Gods of Eden: Egypt's lost legacy and the genesis of civilisation,
London: Headline, 1998, pp. 58-62.
[3] Ibid., pp. 35-37, 62-63.

[4] Giza: The truth, pp. 198-210.

[5] Robert Bauval and Graham Hancock, Keeper of genesis, London: Heinemann, 1996,
pp. 28-29.
[6] Andrew Collins, 'Baalbek Lebanon's sacred fortress',
http://www.andrewcollins.net/page/articles/baalbek.htm; Collins, Gods of Eden, pp. 6364; David Hatcher Childress, Lost cities of Atlantis, ancient Europe & the Mediterranean,
Stelle, IL: Adventures Unlimited Press, 1996, pp. 31-36, 48-50; Christian and Barbara
Joy O'Brien, The shining ones, Kemble, Cirencester: Dianthus Publishing, 2001, pp. 26582.
[7] The shining ones, p. 269.
[8] http://www.lessing4.de/megaliths/non_europ.htm.
[9] Gods of Eden, pp. 66-72.
[10] H.P. Blavatsky, The secret doctrine, Pasadena, CA: Theosophical University Press,
1977 (1888), 1:554-566.
[11] Theo Paijmans, Free energy pioneer: John Worrell Keely, Lilburn, GA: IllumiNet
Press, 1998, pp. 58, 144, 200, 207-212; Clara Bloomfield Moore, Keely and his
discoveries: Aerial navigation, London: Kegan Paul, Trench, Trbner & Co., 1893,
Mokelumne Hill, CA: Health Research, 1971, pp. 106, 122-123; Dale Pond, Universal
laws never before revealed: Keely's secrets, Santa Fe, NM: Message Company, 1996, pp.
54-60, 214-217, 232-234, 257 (http://www.svpvril.com); Dan A. Davidson, Energy:
Breakthroughs to new free energy devices, Greenville, TE: RIVAS, 1990, pp. 12-13.
[12] Christopher Dunn, The Giza power plant: Technologies of ancient Egypt, Santa Fe,
NM: Bear & Co, 1988, pp. 109-119; Frank Joseph, 'Mysteries of Coral Castle', Fate,
1998, http://www.parascope.com/en/articles/coralCastle.htm; Kathy Doore, 'The enigma
of Coral Castle: a geomantic wonder', http://www.labyrinthina.com/coral.htm.
Human levitation
[1] Rodney Charles and Anna Jordan, Lighter than air: Miracles of human flight from
Christian saints to native American spirits, Fairfield, IO: Sunstar Publishing, 1995, pp.
155-180; Stuart Gordon, The paranormal: An illustrated encyclopedia, London: Headline,
1992, p. 395; Brian Inglis, The paranormal: An encyclopedia of psychic phenomena,
London: Paladin, 1985, pp. 159-160; Richard S. Broughton, Parapsychology: The
controversial science, New York: Ballantine Books, 1991, pp. 52-53.
[2] William Crookes, Researches in the phenomena of spiritualism, London: J. Burns,
1874, Pomeroy, WA: Health Research, n.d., pp. 9-19, 21-43, 88-91; H.P. Blavatsky, Isis

unveiled, Pasadena, CA: Theosophical University Press, 1972 (1877), 1:202-204, 358359.
[3] Researches in the phenomena of spiritualism, pp. 89-90; Gordon, The paranormal, pp.
395-396; Inglis, The paranormal, p. 161.
[4] Inglis, The paranormal, pp. 161-162.
[5] Brian Inglis, Natural and supernatural: A history of the paranormal, Bridport, Dorset:
Prism Press, Lindfield, NSW: Unity Press, 1992, p. 425.
[6] Louis Jacolliot, Occult science in India and among the ancients, NY: University
Books, 1971, p. 257.
[7] Ibid., pp. 237-238.
[8] Lighter than air, pp. 64-65.
[9] Ibid., p. 132.
[10] Alexandra David-Neel, With mystics and magicians in Tibet, London: Penguin
Books, 1937, p. 186.
[11] Lighter than air, pp. 98-99.
[12] D. Hatcher Childress (ed.), The anti-gravity handbook, Kempton, IL: Adventures
Unlimited Press, 1993, p. 171.
Theosophical writings
[1] H.P. Blavatsky, Isis unveiled, Pasadena, CA: Theosophical University Press, 1972
(1877), 1:271.
[2] William Q. Judge, Echoes of the orient, San Diego, CA: Point Loma Publications,
1975, 1:336.
[3] H.P. Blavatsky collected writings, Wheaton, IL: Theosophical Publishing House,
1950-91, 5:152-153.
[4] Blavatsky collected writings, 10:391.
[5] G. de Purucker, The esoteric tradition, Pasadena, CA: Theosophical University Press,
2nd ed., 1940, p. 441.
[6] Ibid., pp. 860-861.

[7] Ibid., p. 861fn.

[8] Isis unveiled, 1:xxiii-iv; 1:497-498.
[9] Blavatsky collected writings, 1:244.
[10] W.Q. Judge, The ocean of theosophy, Pasadena, CA: Theosophical University Press,
1973 (1893), p. 154.
[11] Blavatsky collected writings, 4:167-169.
[12] Rupert Sheldrake, Seven experiments that could change the world, London: Fourth
Estate, 1994, pp. 176-178.
[13] H.P. Blavatsky, The secret doctrine, Pasadena, CA: Theosophical University Press,
1977 (1888), 1:159, 2:68fn, 250, 308fn; The esoteric tradition, pp. 324-327, 453-454,
760; G. de Purucker, Studies in occult philosophy, Pasadena, CA: Theosophical
University Press, 1945, pp. 450-451; A.T. Barker (comp.), The mahatma letters to A.P.
Sinnett, Pasadena, CA: Theosophical University Press, 2nd ed., 1926, pp. 98-99.