The Hunt for Zero Point

by JD » Wed Jan 11, 2006 3:42 am

In Jeff's post <a href="http://rigorousintuition.blogspot.com/2006/01/space-cadets.html#comments">rigorousintuition.blogspo...l#comments</a> Nick Cook's book "The Hunt for Zero Point" is referenced. (note tried to post all this in comments but it wouldn't take it!) I read it with a great deal of interest. But something troubled me rather deeply. I couldn't make much sense of how it had been written and published in the first place. Cook is an editor for Jane's. In such a position he can't stray too far in either divulgence of technical secrets, or be too unconventional...... "The Hunt for Zero Point" is either spilling all kinds of big secrets, or is totally whacky. Something that an insider such as Cook can't do, or at least can't do while staying employed in an insider's position. Cook kept his job at Jane's after the publication of "The Hunt for Zero Point" so we can discount either of the above. He isn't giving us big secrets, and he isn't a nut either. Cook warns readers many times in reading the book about PURPOSEFUL DISINFORMATION. I believe that is what the book is, and that Cook wrote it as part of his job as aviation journalist/insider. Disinformation against what? My best guess is it is to counter the work of another aviation journalist. Bill Gunston wrote about the B2 bomber employing antigravity technology in Air International in January 2000 - a copy is below: <a href="http://www.aeronautics.ru/nws001/ai014.htm">www.aeronautics.ru/nws001/ai014.htm</a> When one of the top aeronautics writers in the world writes such an amazing thing in an august journal like Air International, SOME kinda response is required! I believe that is why Cook's book was written and published, to dirty the trail of the propulsion breakthrough employed on the B2 under our very noses.

by **glubglubglub** » Thu Jan 12, 2006 12:09 am

JD: you're an engineer if I recall correctly -- look up the engine claimed to be used in the B2, the weight of the B2, and do the math. That the #s match up so poorly in the public info => someone's sending a message to the people who pay attention to such things; whether the general public is intended to pick up on that is a separate question. I've heard from reliable people that there's truth to the rumors that the B2 at altitude uses static buildup to first ionize and then better streamline itself (by repelling/attracting the ionization of the air that passes around the craft); at the least, the sources I heard from were in positions to be fairly certain and believed that that technology was in place -- but they could be misinformed. If you take Nick Cook's book @ face value he's probably being used to distribute deliberate disinformation, and the remaining question would be whether he caught on or fell for the ruse. If you don't take his book at face value the possibility that it's deliberate disinfo on his part also comes into play; personally I don't have an opinion on that one but suspect he's at the very least buying info with promises to spread disinfo. On major topics in Cook's book: Podkletnov -- worth further investigation Schauberger -- worth investigation, but the cottage industry around his stuff has sufficiently obscured whatever he caught on to that there's far more noise than signal up this way; given limited time I'd move on to other fronts Hutchinson -- seems either a savant or a fraud (I lean towards the latter), and sufficiently unable to articulate his findings as to be worthless in either case Nazi Time Travel -- disinfo, imho, though perhaps covering up something worthwhile in Germany's late-war last-ditch efforts. Zero Point Energy -- found, in my opinion -- there's not much other explanation for the energy supplies apparent in the 'nuts + bolts' ufos that've been credibly sighted; it's possible that stable, containable fusion's been kept underwraps (perhaps cold fusion?) but that'd be the only other known possibility. No real clue what the mechanism for tapping the energy would be. I'm probably forgetting some, but those are my thoughts on the major topics. --- Also: consider the possibility of damning with faint praise being more effective than a hard-on attack. Despite bestseller status + a few television specials I don't think Cook's work has had much of an impact, and what impact it has had has been mostly limited to the incorrigably suspicious in the first place; the usual retinue of character assasination and marginalization might have been deemed counterproductive (perhaps incorrectly deemd as such, but deemed nonetheless), and having been so deemed his work was left to hang out and die with a whimper, not a bang.

by JD » Thu Jan 12, 2006 1:43 am

Thanks for the thoughtful reply. Yes there probably are a few interesting snippets in THFZP. I think that's the point to effective disinformation as opposed to ineffective disinformation. Cook's work recieved more attention than Gunston's! Scant mention of B2 anti-gravitics in mainstream media. The Air International article has the reference buried at the bottom - I think it slipped the censor's eyes LOL. I'm an engineer and a private pilot as well.......... but unfortunately don't have a handy toolbox of aeronautical knowledge to figure out the B2's need of anti-gravitics and not the time to sort out how to go about it.

by **sussurus2** » Thu Jan 12, 2006 3:09 am

"Schauberger -- worth investigation, but the cottage industry around his stuff has sufficiently obscured whatever he caught on to that there's far more noise than signal up this way; given limited time I'd move on to other fronts" On the topic of flying saucers, I'd agree with the above assessment. But for all other aspects of things Schauberger, I could not make a stronger recommendation that folks on this board get and read everything they can about his work. Sweeping ramifications for agriculture, forestry, and specifically his work as a whole outlines a complete, coherent, 180-degrees alternate view of how the geometry and physics of the natural world actually works, and how to work with it. As opposed to how it's been hopelessly misinterpreted or corrupted....and how we've worked against it for so many hundreds of years. <a href="http://www.frank.germano.com/viktorschauberger.htm">www.frank.germano.com/vik...berger.htm</a> <a href="http://www.hasslberger.com/tecno/tecno_8.htm">www.hasslberger.com/tecno/tecno_8.htm</a> <a href="http://www.sulis-health.co.uk/vs/">www.sulis-health.co.uk/vs/</a> S. Edited by: <A HREF=http://p216.ezboard.com/brigorousintuition.showUserPublicProfile?gid=sussurus2>sussurus2</A> at: 1/12/06 11:08 am

by **IMO** » Thu Jan 12, 2006 10:25 pm

Whilst I fully understand the simple fact that no one on earth should be paying anything more than a token amount for energy, I was always confused about Nick Cook. That was until I saw him on TV the other night with a guy called Danny Wallace, who is the "Champion" of the latest Sky TV

by **nashvillebrook** » Thu Jan 12, 2006 11:12 pm

i commented on jeff's recent HFZP post asking about the water-river guy. couldn't remember his name. then i saw this post...found my book...and stumbled upon a bunch of his stuff via another blogger. wow. it has been Vicktor Schauberger day! spirals...nature...magic...hurricanes...lifting bodies...bio-technology all of this has immediate intuitive appeal. it connects primitive and postmodern science. it's deceptively simple; a higher-order interaction occurs at a certain rate of spin. isn't this what we see in weather? especially our new super hurricanes? there's a point where the vortex seems to generate it's own energy. nasa can't figure it out. hurricanes that reach a critical mass of rotation aren't playing by the old rules. and they display geometry, suggesting organization at high levels of energy. there's been lots of talk about the last season of hurricanes having a man-made component. that's highly controversial and shuts down rational examination. what if there's something totally natural that happens when vortices reach a critical mass -- what Schauberger called 'implosion." <a href="http://science.nasa.gov/headlines/y2006/09jan_electrichurricanes.htm">science.nasa.gov/headline...icanes.htm</a> Electric Hurricanes Three of the most powerful hurricanes of 2005 were filled with mysterious lightning. January 9, 2006: The boom of thunder and crackle of lightning generally mean one thing: a storm is coming. Curiously, though, the biggest storms of all, hurricanes, are notoriously lacking in lightning. Hurricanes blow, they rain, they flood, but seldom do they crackle. Surprise: During the record-setting hurricane season of 2005 three of the most powerful storms--Rita, Katrina, and Emily--did have lightning, lots of it. And researchers would like to know why. Richard Blakeslee of the Global Hydrology and Climate Center (GHCC) in Huntsville, Alabama, was one of a team of scientists who explored Hurricane Emily using NASA's ER-2 aircraft, a research version of the famous U-2 spy plane. Flying high above the storm, they noted frequent lightning in the cylindrical wall of clouds surrounding the hurricane's eye. Both cloud-to-cloud and cloud-to-ground lightning were present, "a few flashes per minute," says Blakeslee

by **glubglubglub** » Fri Jan 13, 2006 12:34 am

On schauberger: his 'technological' applications appear 100% obfuscated, and I'm not convinced that his son isn't primarily responsible -- or at least complicit -- in/for this obfuscation. His agricultural/ecological implications, I agree, are perhaps equally important and in many ways appear to be the more 'earth shaking' insofar as their implications for our understanding of the natural world; unfortunately, in my mind they're also fairly well obfuscated or at least a bit unclear (I'm of uncertain mind as to the intention of Callum Coats, for example --- one can well go mad doubting the intentions of every writer under the sun, but he does seem suspect also, perhaps a useful idiot?). The obvious takeaways is that fluids -- water, and wind to a lesser extent -- in motion naturally take on particular structures -- vortices and eddies being common -- and that much life has evolved to organize itself around the useful areas of those flows...when the flows are disrupted or ignored life suffers not only because the supplies of nutrients, etc. are disrupted -- having formerly ridden in on those flows -- but because the natural environment has been altered substantially, albeit in a way not easily perceptible (and barely conceivable outside of a schaubergian framework -- the idea of ley lines,etc., is imho a crude approximation to a fleshed-out version of schauberger's ideas). On everything else: I've some rough ideas on how these devices work, which I hope aren't based off of too high a dis/mis-info to info ratio; in any case, I wouldn't be surprised if bearden et. al. and their scalar electromagnetics aren't deliberate disinfo to cover over more fruitful areas of recent work, in the same vein as cook covering over for, say, some legit leaks on the high-tech front. Perhaps also covering up for functional electrogravitics -- is the timeframe correct for that?

by **heath7** » Fri Jan 13, 2006 1:27 am

Schauberger has been a very interesting study for me. I appreciated the above description of 'immediate intuitive appeal'. Schauberger's story is kinda romantic in how he came from a family of foresters, and his closeness to nature and his magnificent intelligence conspired to create a kind of alter-Einstein, with Schauberger akin to more harmonic and less destructive science. When searching for information about his death, and finding virtually nothing, I stumbled upon this little gem: <a href="http://www.implementations.co.uk/schau_related/interview_frau_schauberger.html">Talk with Frau Schauberger</a> The interview is with Viktor's son Walter's widow. Its not too long, and she describes how Viktor and Walter were lured to Texas, from Austria, with promises of research. Viktor mysteriously became ill as he was forced to sign promises to abandon his work on implosion technology in order to be allowed to go back home to Austria, where he died five days after getting home. The interview also paints a human portrait of Viktor and Walter's father-son relationship. Based on this interview, it'd seem that Walter is an important fellow to research as well.

by **IMO** » Fri Jan 13, 2006 1:44 am

Just had another basic lesson in how we all miss the obvious 'anomalies' of nature going on all around us ; <blockquote>Quote:<hr>He always said, ‘CAN’T YOU SEE IT? Can’t you see the water climbing up in the trees, 30 metres or more? There is no pump in the Earth!<hr></blockquote> An awful lot of technically speaking "free energy magic" going on around us right there, based upon any logical laws of science.

by **nashvillebrook** » Fri Jan 13, 2006 1:47 am

engineer-types are special folks. i never appreciated this until i went to live my chemical engineer uncle in a town of engineers in the mountains of east tennessee. nick cook makes the observation that schauberger was an engineer who happened to be a forester, so his work reflected his surroundings. eco-systems were his inspiration and media (to borrow from art vocabulary). this makes perfect sense to me and makes me wonder how many schaubergers have lived and died in annonymity. this, btw, was one of the high-flying promises of 'the internets' way back in the early 90s when, as a graduate student in sociology we wondered about the impact of remote people sharing info in a global forum. many years ago a friend of mine interviewed a hillbilly engineer for the local paper -- the Johnson City Press. this must have been 1992, maybe. the guy lived in johnesborough tenn and had developed a perpetual motion energy generator. seems like the machine needed a small motor to start the process and he used a battery. the author's name was john newland but i can't remember the name of the guy who he interviewed. it was one of those local interest stories... Local Man Discovers Free Energy. when i read the article i thought, 'we'll never hear from him again,' b/c it felt like watching a kitten wander into traffic, you just knew the story wasn't going to end well. hillbilly. free energy. dead hillbilly.

by **nashvillebrook** » Fri Jan 13, 2006 1:58 am

all these guys who wonder about organic engineering...it's so compelling. since i was a kid i always "knew" we were overlooking something very obvious. that life seems more difficult than it should be. something seems out of place at a fundamental level. it's hard to explain -- just a feeling. do you ever just look around and see something and think, 'that doesn't belong there. we don't need that.' i've been feeling this way about electrical wires. plugs. it seems a very clunky method of transferral. it seems glaringly primitive. like seeing vacuum tubes in a laptop. aesthetically, my mind tells me we don't need those anymore. house to house? on poles? there has to be another way.

by **Pirx** » Fri Jan 13, 2006 6:19 am

There was a similar article in the Knoxville paper around the same time about a cousin of Dolly Parton who had built a perpetual motion device. Could that be the same one? I think his name was Parton or Ogle. And I recollect he was from Sevierville. Somehow I suspect there's at least one in every county.

by **nashvillebrook** » Fri Jan 13, 2006 3:45 pm

i wonder what ever happened to him? i'll ask around the next time i'm up in the mountains for a visit.

by **castanblaidd** » Tue Dec 29, 2009 10:46 pm

Zero point and free energy is highly abundant, as revealed in large amounts of Nikola Tesla's research.

Here's a new patent:
http://www.electrifyingtimes.com/santazeropoint.html

http://www.infinite-energy.com/

The Hunt for Zero Point

The Hunt for Zero Point

I made a study of his book at one point

THFZP

Re: THFZP

Nick Cook.

Schauberger! and coninkydink

schauberger, cont.

Re: Schauberger! and coninkydink

thinking logically.

forester/engineer

there's something very Reich in this

Re: forester/engineer

that could be it!

Who is online