From what i gather, they label this man as a perpetual motion machine inventor which, and claims he deals with theoretical zero point energy. I still cannot find anyone debunking his work, and he claims different, he claims that he does not tap into zero point anything, he claims he taps into the spin of neutrons and protons within the atom. Wish i could learn more about him. He gives many caculations with his theory, i wish i could find someone reviewing his work, and explaining either its a possible theory or not, and why.
Here some of his writing. This is just a small bit, from his site...check it out, does anyone see any obvious flaws that have been proved to be true or false that he claims otherwise?
"GRAVITATIONAL FORCE"
According to this description we can easily imagine why the gravitational force is so weak since this is the consequence of a velocity differential relative to the ongoing wave. Then we will no longer be surprised to notice that it is 10-40 times the strong force [vortex forces] in strength. Its range is long, contrary to this last force which directs its force inwards, because these are radiant energy waves propagating outward with a force proportional to the inverse square law. They move through space at the same velocity as that of light according to the medium density and in the case of the Earth, for example, they do not move as fast because they are impeded by the numerous atoms and their fields within the Earth. In fact, the carrier of the force wave is the etheron or more precisely a collection of etherons. This is what has been called a gravitational wave which has never been detected and this is not without reason! It would be difficult to detect movement of etherons in the Aether except possibly by temperature as has been the 3K particle, or kaytron as it is called herein, which is called background radiation.
Gravitational force has been determined to be 10-40 less than the binding energy for medium elements which is about 8 MeV [8 million electron volts] per nucleon [proton and neutron]. This is because most of the energy of gravitation lies in the nucleons of the atom. A nucleon has the same structure and method of producing a field of waves as does the atom except that instead of nucleons in orbit, as in the atom, the orbiting particles are the basic etherons. The volume of a proton is 10-15 times that of an atom. The energy of the orbiting particles in the nucleon is also of this ratio. Since etherons contain equivalent energy to one another, less etherons by volume means the same reduction in energy. However, a wave is produced within a nucleon by a revolution of the orbiting etherons of an inner vortex in the nucleon, hence the number of waves, or the strength of the field of waves, emanating from a nucleon is dependent upon the velocity of these orbiting etherons.
Alan D. Krisch, in an article called the Spin of the Proton, Scientific American, May 1979, states that "in Newtonian Mechanics, the kinetic energy of a moving particle is proportional to the square of its velocity". Thus the strength of the field is reduced again since the velocity is proportional the square root of the nucleon energy. If we multiply [10-15]2 by the strong force of the atom, we bring the field strength of the proton down to 10-30. However, the force of the waves at the surface of the proton, which have been emitted from the inner vortex at the center of the proton, also depend upon its radius, which is 10-5 times that of the atom, because the gravitational effect is proportionate to the square of the radius. Thus the total gravitational effect of the nucleon is [10-5]2 X 10-30 which equals 10-40 times the strong force of the atom.
They say that shit floats, but mine sinks....why?? I guess i'm just into some heavy shit!