explaining how certain shapes or wave patterns can impact
conventional physics. He believes one needs to understand known
science as well as a more esoteric doctrine in order to
appreciate the nature of free-energy and some types of field
propulsion UFO craft. The work of Viktor Schauberger is an
example of this. In this work there remains a world of knowledge
imperfectly understood by most of us.
Returning to the mechanism by which these models flew,
Schauberger himself always made the point of the fact that his
saucer models were constructed of diamagnetic materials.
Diamagnetic materials are those which are repel a magnetic field.
Schauberger considered copper diamagnetic (10) and the surfaces
of the saucer models coming in contact with air were made of
copper.
As mentioned above, the very atomic structure of these atoms may
have altered by this process. Coats tells us that electrons,
protons and neutron may have been separated from one another
(11). It has been suggested that the electrons and protons of
these atoms were stripped from their nuclei. Their opposing
charges were free and attracted one another resulting in their
mutual annihilation of one another yielding a release of energy
(12). This would occur exactly at the point where centripetal
forces ceased and centrifugal forces began, these air particles
reversed their spin and altered their rotation.
Further, Coats explains that the neutrons, which were left over
in the process described above, and contrary to accepted views,
are themselves magnetic (13). These neutrons were expelled from
the saucer centrifugally along with water, water vapor and air
which had not reacted as stated above. These "magnetic"
neutrons, on the outside of the saucer body may serve to increase
the diamagnetic reaction of the copper saucer which would be both
pushing away from the earth and the cloud of surrounding
"magnetically charged" neutrons. In other words, the Schauberger
disc may have been repelling away from the magnetically charged
atmosphere which it itself had just created.
Dr. Richard LeFors Clark proposes a more detailed description of
similar ideas involving the mechanism of the Bloch Wall (14).
This will be discussed in the section involving Karl Schappeller
but it should be kept in mind while reading these ideas that Dr.
Clark had Schauberger in mind. These ideas and others pertaining
to both Schaub W&vW"