View Full Version : Bone loss under no gravity circumstances

H.j. Woltring, Fax/tel +31.40.413 744
09-17-1992, 07:28 PM
Dear Biomch-L readers,

Various biomechanical groups, a.o., at Penn State University, have been
involved with biomechanics under no-gravity circumstances. One of the
problems seems to be the loss of minerals in bones when there is extensive
exposure to lack of gravity. Perhaps, the material below just received
from MECH-L could be useful to further investigate these phenomena? The
method may seem rather phantastic, but the costs of patents (as opposed to
copyrights and trade secrets, cf. my recent posting on the F-16 and VDU's)
and the seriousness of mechanical engineers are such that it MUST be a
viable proposition ...

Comments will be appreciated -- hjw.


Date: Thu, 17 Sep 1992 20:00:00 CST
From: "NAME 'Robert E. McElwaine'"
Subject: Gravity NEUTRALIZING Invention
Sender: Mechanical Engineering Discussion List

Gravity-NEUTRALIZING Spacecraft

NASA should build an experimental spacecraft based on
U.S. Patent #3,626,605 [at least $1.00 per complete copy from
U.S. Patent Office, correct 7-digit patent number required],
GRAVITATIONAL FORCE FIELD", awarded to inventor Henry W.
Wallace on Dec. 14, 1971.

In the patent, Figs. 7A and 7B are basically side views
of a gravity-NEUTRALIZING FLYING SAUCER, or, if anchored to
the ground, a ZERO-GRAVITY CHAMBER [which could have MANY
possible GROUND-level applications for science, medicine,
manufacturing, etc.]. Each oval diagram shows a motor
spinning a central disc at a very high speed, about 28,000
RPM, and also rotating two other discs sandwiched around the
first disc, via gears, at a much slower speed, perhaps 2,800
RPM, in the opposite direction. The two outer discs have
extensions [counter-balanced via off-center axis] that, as
they rotate, alternately make contact with two wide
extensions from opposite walls of the spacecraft. The
central disc should have shallow spiral-shaped grooves on
both sides for air-bearings, to allow the needed very close
contact with the two outer discs.

I should clarify that each of the two outer discs has
ONLY ONE [counter-balanced] extension, each one pointed
opposite (180 degrees) the extension of the other disc.

VERY CLOSE CONTACT must be made as the disc extensions
slide past the wall extensions in order to conduct the
"Kinemassic" Energy (term coined by the Inventor) from the
discs to the walls in an ALTERNATING CIRCULATION.

The most important factor making it work is that the
discs, extensions, and outer walls of the spacecraft MUST be
made of any material(s) in which a very large majority of the
atoms are of isotopes having "half integral atomic spin",
such as copper (3/2). All other parts, etc., should have a
minority of such atoms. [See the appropriate column of the
table of isotopes in the latest edition of "The Handbook of
Chemistry and Physics."]

Experimenters should use one motor to spin the center
disc, and a 2ND SEPARATE motor to rotate the two outer discs,
so their relative speeds can be varied to establish the
needed conditions for PROPULSION of the spacecraft via
"NEGATIVE WEIGHT" (with the spacecraft's "Kinemassic" field
PUSHING AGAINST the earth's gravitational field, etc.).

If we have to put up a space station, establish Moon
bases, go to Mars, rendezvous with comets, etc., WHY DO IT

Your favorite university or research company could make
a big name for itself by making a small model of this work.


Robert E. McElwaine
B.S., Physics and Astronomy, UW-EC