Mathematics of Gravitational Shielding

theeastcoastwest

I came across an article the other day that was discussing possible HAARP activities and their methodologies, when I noticed that, rather than the usual rants + youtubes of odd clouds & scary sky noises, this linked to a document very reminiscent of a scientific journal entry.



http://beforeitsnews.com/science-and-technology/2012/05/physicist-haarp-manipulates-time-2167703.html

The link that takes you to the document is several hyperlinks down and is titled:
"High-power ELF radiation generated by modulated HF heating of the ionosphere can cause earthquakes, cyclones and localized heating"

Click that and it will take you to the pdf. I had a little trouble viewing within my browser (chrome) and ended up having to save it first, then open it through acrobat.

The information in the document was interesting to say the least. The mathematics, however, were far beyond my range of comprehension.

I was wondering if there were anyone within the forums here that had both the ability to validate the math along with the interest to do so.

Gardener

Hi theeastcoastwest,
you can upload certain file types by clicking the "Attach a file" link, located below the comment form.

Well, actually it used to be a link. Now it's a button for better visibility.

Thanx for pointing this out.

theeastcoastwest

@ Gardener: Sorry, new to the forums, thanks for the assist.

Gardener

No problem at all... You are very welcome

activestorage

some think that Earthquakes themselves generate signals in ionosphere. Not the other way around.
http://ntrs.nasa.gov/search.jsp?R=20120009854

theeastcoastwest

Well, I posted because I was curious to see if some of the math found in that document might have actual novelty to offer to the study of levitation/gravity shielding because that was the pretense by which I arrived at the document.

However:
Recent studies have shown that there were precursory atmospheric/ionospheric signals observed in space associated with major earthquakes

That's the second line of the abstract on that paper. Admittedly, I didn't read the entire paper so I can't say with confidence that it doesn't go on to state those precursory waves are somehow generated by tectonic shifting and they don't actually precede the quakes at all and the researcher's initial thoughts were completely wrong. However, their use of the word precursory does seem to harp at it, in fact, being the "other way around." That is to say, ionospheric disturbances being noted before tectonic events, rather than after effects. Also, that would only support the other points made by the paper by Dr. Aquino.