Honda 1996 Townsend Brown Experiment

[Eddie.B]

Has anyone tried to replicate the 1996 Honda experiment? Because they dipped all setup in transmission oil that completely removes ion wind problem.. which if works sort of validates townsend brown work

[paul cotter]

I don't know anything about what you are referencing, it is however quite simple to disprove any hint of "antigravity". Simply do the experiment in a vacuum chamber and all the lift associated with the experiment in air vanishes- this has been done.

[Eddie.B]

hey paul, thnx for the reply.

this is exactly what the Honda R&D team set out to do ie to disprove the effect. they submerged the capacitor in insulating oil inside a grounded metal vessel specifically to eliminate ion wind. In oil, atmospheric ion wind is gone. electrohydrodynamic flow in the liquid is still theoretically possible, but Honda found that AC produced MORE weight reduction than DC.

then there is Bahder & Fazi at the US Army Research Lab built 4 different capacitor geometries and confirmed the force exists, and calculated that ionic wind is at least 1000x too small to explain what they measured.

re the vacuum argument, i'd push back on "simply do it in vacuum and it vanishes." There are 4 positive results that actually control for ion wind properly are Honda (Musha 2008), Bahder & Fazi (ARL 2003), Porcelli & Filho (IET 2016), and Buhler (patent WO2020159603A2). four different groups, different decades, different countries, different setups. all report anomalous forces that ion wind can't explain.

Honda experiment actually the most intresting, because it is cheapest and easiest to replicate - so keen to know anyone who has tried it or willing to do it. I am ready to pay out of my pocket for someone to try

[AVGresponding]

I don't know anything about what you are referencing, it is however quite simple to disprove any hint of "antigravity". Simply do the experiment in a vacuum chamber and all the lift associated with the experiment in air vanishes- this has been done.

Exactly so. Threads like this make me want giant-sized versions of emojis   

[Eddie.B]

That’s the whole point of the thread.. but just need someone to debunk this actually if not true. And this is Honda R&D team.. so.. anyone..?

[paul cotter]

I don't see the point of doing it in transformer oil. A good diffusion pump backed by an oil immersion pump will give an excellent vacuum and this, to me, is the only way to go. Yes, there have been claims of tiny weight reductions but nothing stunning- this is similar to the many claims of overunity/free energy but the vast majority of experiments have recorded a null result. On any set of experiments there will always be the outliers, whether it is down to measurement error or failure to take account of some relevant parameter.

[Electrodynamic]

Has anyone tried to replicate the 1996 Honda experiment? Because they dipped all setup in transmission oil that completely removes ion wind problem.. which if works sort of validates townsend brown work

I have done many HV experiments up to 600kV and immersing a circuit in mineral oil is the way to go.

The experiment in question is problematic because it intends to remove external forces when it doesn't. The Earth has an electric field rising by 100v/m present everywhere. Even if we left the Earth in vacuum there would still be non-uniform radiation forces. So what we end up doing is creating a charged capacitor within a larger externally charged atmosphere. On top of this we would also have EM and environmental magnetic fields to contend with. As such it is basically impossible to remove all unwanted interactions even in a vacuum chamber.

Another problem with the effect called gravity is that it does not act on objects but every part of them down to the atomic level. Matter is less than 1% material and in between the material is a perfect vacuum filled with EM fields. We could say 99% of every object is already in a vacuum. The lack of stuff between the material stuff in the atoms which make up an object.

If you want to understand gravity consider that the difference between the heaviest object and the vacuum of outer space is less than 1%.

 

[Eddie.B]

Great points, and good to hear from someone with real HV experience (600kv is crazy!). You’re right about the external field environment, Honda’s grounded metal cage acts as a Faraday cage, which screens the atmospheric 100V/m. I believe they also did the orientation flip  , any coupling to external fields stays the same direction when you flip the stack, but the dielectric asymmetry reverses. If the force reverses with the flip, external fields can’t explain it.

I’m not claiming anti-gravity though… that’s a bit silly , but four groups did measure anomalous forces on dielectrics that exceeded ion wind calculations by 1000×. You’ve done 600kV in oil — you probably have everything needed to test this. Would you be interested?

I’d love community to rip and poke holes at this.. I’ve literally reread papers several times over Easter and had this can’t be right attitude. Honda and Buehler are the only credible ones..

[Electrodynamic]

Great points, and good to hear from someone with real HV experience (600kv is crazy!). You’re right about the external field environment, Honda’s grounded metal cage acts as a Faraday cage, which screens the atmospheric 100V/m. I believe they also did the orientation flip  , any coupling to external fields stays the same direction when you flip the stack, but the dielectric asymmetry reverses. If the force reverses with the flip, external fields can’t explain it.

I’m not claiming anti-gravity though… that’s a bit silly , but four groups did measure anomalous forces on dielectrics that exceeded ion wind calculations by 1000×. You’ve done 600kV in oil — you probably have everything needed to test this. Would you be interested?

I’d love community to rip and poke holes at this.. I’ve literally reread papers several times over Easter and had this can’t be right attitude. Honda and Buehler are the only credible ones..

It's debatable and we need to be careful.

The picture in the article shows an open earth grounded metal pan filled with oil open to atmosphere which is not a Faraday cage. The thing to remember is that no forces are black or white but shades of grey. Everything acts through gradients of force which is a fancy word for small steps.

As well, electrostatic forces are much larger in practice than most realize. For example, The attractive force between two 12 inch square metal plates separated by 3 inches and charged to 600 kV is around 100.2 Kg of force. Drop the voltage to 18kV like in the experiment and were down to 226 grams of force which is not a minor point when the anomaly measured was under 2 grams.

The problem I found, more so as an ESD consultant, was that very few people understand electrostatics. I quizzed a few of my EE friends and most came to the wrong conclusions. The main sticking point is that at higher voltages everything conducts to some extent and insulators become conductors of force.

For example, charge a metal plate to (-)18kV and a 2mm sheet of plastic will become polarized and stick to it. The plastic inside surface has an opposite (+) charge and the outside surface has a like (-) charge like the metal plate. Since bits of tin foil or paper will now stick to the outside part of the plastic sheet we could ask, what did the supposed "insulator" insulate?.

From the experiment in question I would bet the oil above the plate was polarized and surface deformed or dropped by a very small amount. The oil displaced very close to the supposed 2g weight lost by the capacitor. Two grams of oil displacement works out to a change in level of about 0.03 mm. Do you think anyone would notice?. This is why we need to be careful about what we think we are seeing.

[Eddie.B]

really good points and fair to flag about open top.. I was wrong to call it a Faraday cage.. looking at Musha’s Figure 1 it’s a metallic vessel with an open top, not a full enclosure. so electrostatic coupling to the room through the open top is a legitimate concern… I should have noticed that..

on the oil displacement argument though.. I think you are missing this though: the entire vessel + oil + capacitor sits on the balance. if oil redistributes internally (rises here, drops there from polarization), net weight on the balance doesn’t change. it’s all internal forces. the only way it produces a spurious reading is if the deformed oil surface couples to something NOT on the balance through the open top, which is possible but gets us back to the electrostatic coupling question.unless I’m missing something again?

the thing I keep coming back to is: every artifact you’ve described scales as V square or stronger with voltage. DC at 18kV should produce ~5× more electrostatic force than AC at 8kV. Honda measured AC at 8kV producing 2.7x MORE weight reduction than DC at 18kV. that’s ~14× in the wrong direction for any electrostatic artifact. what do you think is  explanation for that?

agree 100% this needs proper replication with a fully sealed metal enclosure. that’s exactly what I’m trying to get done. You still need Honda setup as control first and then Each addition to see if effect stops

[Eddie.B]

It's a puzzle to me because so far it cannot be just dismissed out of hand which what makes this effing interesting.. so would love people to engage but without labels and more with science / engineering - what did Honda R&D team miss?
Over last few hours, I tried to summarise all issues in one place, as many as i can think of. If anyone has any other ideas or issues, please tell me and ill add, but so far even after Electrodynamic gentlemen's answers - i see this still as unexplained:

Potential Artifact / Issue	Description	Does It Explain the Weight Change?	Does It Explain AC > DC?	Status
───────────	───────────	───────────	───────────	───────────
Atmospheric ion wind	Corona discharge creates ions that transfer momentum through air	Eliminated by oil submersion. Musha calculated it as 1.3×10⁻³ g vs observed ~1.92g  ie negligible	No, would scale as V²	✅ Ruled out
───────────	───────────	───────────	───────────	───────────
EHD flow in oil	Trace ions in oil drift under field, drag oil molecules	Possible, but if entire vessel is on balance, internal flow = net zero force on scale	No, DC should produce stronger steady-state flow than AC at lower voltage	✅ Ruled out by AC > DC
───────────	───────────	───────────	───────────	───────────
Oil displacement / surface deformation	Electric field polarizes oil, deforms surface slightly	If everything is on the balance, internal redistribution doesn't change total weight. Only matters if deformed surface couples to something off the balance	No, scales as V²	✅ Ruled out by AC > DC
───────────	───────────	───────────	───────────	───────────
Open top (not a full Faraday cage)	Open top, so not full metal coverage. Electrostatic coupling to room possible	Yes,charged capacitor could attract/repel objects above the vessel through the open top	No, coupling strength scales as V² or E², DC at 18kV should dominate	✅ Ruled out by AC > DC
───────────	───────────	───────────	───────────	───────────
HV wire forces	Wires from external power supply enter the vessel. Tension/attraction on wires could transmit force to external structure not on the balance	Yes, if wires connect to something off the balance, electrostatic forces on the wires could create a spurious reading	No, wire forces scale with V²	✅ Ruled out by AC > DC
───────────	───────────	───────────	───────────	───────────
Electrostatic coupling to the balance itself	HV field could directly affect the electronic balance mechanism	Musha states they tested this separately by suspending capacitor away from scale — found negligible	No, would scale with V²	✅ Ruled out by Honda team
───────────	───────────	───────────	───────────	───────────
Earth's atmospheric field (100 V/m)	Capacitor inside Earth's atmospheric electric field creates interaction	Grounded metal vessel screens this on 5 of 6 sides. This field is static and constant — turning HV on/off shouldn't change it	No, external field doesn't change with applied voltage	✅ Ruled out
───────────	───────────	───────────	───────────	───────────
Environmental magnetic fields	Earth's field, nearby equipment, NST leakage	Magnetic forces on a stationary non-current-carrying dielectric are negligible	No	✅ Ruled out
───────────	───────────	───────────	───────────	───────────
Thermal effects / convection	Resistive heating in oil from leakage current creates convection	If everything is on balance, convection is internal. Only possible through open top	No, thermal effects increase with V² (more heating at higher voltage)	✅ Ruled out by AC > DC
───────────	───────────	───────────	───────────	───────────
Piezoelectric deformation of glass	Glass under high E field could mechanically deform, shifting center of mass	Soda-lime glass is not piezoelectric. Electrostriction is symmetric (compressive on both faces)	No	✅ Ruled out
───────────	───────────	───────────	───────────	───────────
Weight variation with time (lunar/solar)	Honda observed weight reduction varied over the month	ON vs OFF comparison at each session controls for this	N/A, this is about scatter, not the mean effect	✅ Not an artifact
───────────	───────────	───────────	───────────	───────────
Charge accumulation / electret effect	Glass could retain charge after power-off, creating persistent forces	Effect appears/disappears with voltage at each session, doesn't persist or accumulate across sessions	No	✅ Ruled out
───────────	───────────	───────────	───────────	───────────
Diode rectification / peak voltage	Ignition coil + diode produces spiky pulses, not clean AC. Actual peak voltage may be >> stated 8kV	Yes	Yes, if actual peak > 8kV, the V² comparison breaks and AC > DC anomaly may be a voltage measurement artifact	⚠️ Genuine concern - paper doesn't say how voltage was measured

[Electrodynamic]

really good points and fair to flag about open top.. I was wrong to call it a Faraday cage.. looking at Musha’s Figure 1 it’s a metallic vessel with an open top, not a full enclosure. so electrostatic coupling to the room through the open top is a legitimate concern… I should have noticed that..

on the oil displacement argument though.. I think you are missing this though: the entire vessel + oil + capacitor sits on the balance. if oil redistributes internally (rises here, drops there from polarization), net weight on the balance doesn’t change. it’s all internal forces. the only way it produces a spurious reading is if the deformed oil surface couples to something NOT on the balance through the open top, which is possible but gets us back to the electrostatic coupling question.unless I’m missing something again?

the thing I keep coming back to is: every artifact you’ve described scales as V square or stronger with voltage. DC at 18kV should produce ~5× more electrostatic force than AC at 8kV. Honda measured AC at 8kV producing 2.7x MORE weight reduction than DC at 18kV. that’s ~14× in the wrong direction for any electrostatic artifact. what do you think is  explanation for that?

agree 100% this needs proper replication with a fully sealed metal enclosure. that’s exactly what I’m trying to get done. You still need Honda setup as control first and then Each addition to see if effect stops

It's an interesting experiment. I found everything I need on hand to replicate the experiment except for a large shallow metal pan. I will buy a pan and replicate the experiment this weekend.

The first experiment should be the most telling imo. That is to suspend a single charged plate in the oil bath with the other connection to the pan. I suspect there could be a change in weight without the capacitor being present. Should also be able to measure the field geometry/gradient with my E field array to check for any possible external coupling.

[Eddie.B]

Really glad you're giving this a go. The single plate control is a smart idea, didnt think of that..

For the Honda comparison though, if you're willing, the ideal sequence would be:

• Your single plate test first (no dielectric, just electrode in oil, charged to 18kV). Record weight change. This is the artifact baseline so we compare against that
• Then Honda replication, as you know yourself, is soda-lime glass disc, copper foil on both faces as electrodes, submerged in oil in the grounded pan, entire assembly on the balance. DC 18kV, record weight change. Then AC 8kV at 50Hz, record weight change.
• The critical number is the ratio between AC and DC readings. Honda got AC producing more than DC. If your DC reading is larger than AC then it's probably artifacts and we're done... honda screwed up haha If AC beats DC at lower voltage, that's the anomaly that needs explaining.
• If you have time, for me the killer test is -  flip the glass disc physically (swap which copper face is up) and re-run. Honda never did this test (i thought they did but they didnt..). If the reading changes with orientation, it's directional. If it doesn't, it's symmetric.
• If you can get an oscilloscope on the HV output, measuring the actual peak voltage of the AC waveform would resolve the one open question in the paper (whether the ignition coil produces voltage spikes way above the stated 8kV).

The E field array mapping you mentioned would be new data. Nobody has mapped the field distribution in this configuration. No rush on any of this obviously, but if you're doing it anyway having these measurements in sequence would make the results much more useful and systematic. Rulling it out systematically would also make it easier to solve where puzzle lies.

Updated: could wires be a problem ? Another test would be to Decouple the wires. Ie run the HV wires from above, hanging completely slack with a drip loop, so they can’t transmit any vertical force to the vessel. If the wires hang loose with excess length, any electrostatic tension pulls sideways or up on the wire, not down on the vessel. This eliminates the wire artifact..

[paul cotter]

Oil as a medium for this experiment is problematic. It is often said that oil and water do not mix and this is largely true but low level miscibility does occur. To get an organic liquid, like oil, rigorously dry is not a simple matter and often requires exotic drying agents such as sodium benzophenone ketyl. Once suitably dry exposure to air must be avoided. None of these problem exist with a hard vacuum. 

[Electrodynamic]

Really glad you're giving this a go. The single plate control is a smart idea, didnt think of that..

For the Honda comparison though, if you're willing, the ideal sequence would be:

• Your single plate test first (no dielectric, just electrode in oil, charged to 18kV). Record weight change. This is the artifact baseline so we compare against that
• Then Honda replication, as you know yourself, is soda-lime glass disc, copper foil on both faces as electrodes, submerged in oil in the grounded pan, entire assembly on the balance. DC 18kV, record weight change. Then AC 8kV at 50Hz, record weight change.
• The critical number is the ratio between AC and DC readings. Honda got AC producing more than DC. If your DC reading is larger than AC then it's probably artifacts and we're done... honda screwed up haha If AC beats DC at lower voltage, that's the anomaly that needs explaining.
• If you have time, for me the killer test is -  flip the glass disc physically (swap which copper face is up) and re-run. Honda never did this test (i thought they did but they didnt..). If the reading changes with orientation, it's directional. If it doesn't, it's symmetric.
• If you can get an oscilloscope on the HV output, measuring the actual peak voltage of the AC waveform would resolve the one open question in the paper (whether the ignition coil produces voltage spikes way above the stated 8kV).

The E field array mapping you mentioned would be new data. Nobody has mapped the field distribution in this configuration. No rush on any of this obviously, but if you're doing it anyway having these measurements in sequence would make the results much more useful and systematic. Rulling it out systematically would also make it easier to solve where puzzle lies.

I see one snag, the Biefeld-Bown effect used an asymmetric capacitor with a 50:1 plate size ratio where the Honda diagram shows a symmetric capacitor with a 170mm glass dielectric. There are no dimensions for the capacitor plate size used that I can see. It's not a problem and I had 20 soda-lime glass plates and pre cut capacitor plates on hand from other experiments. I can try different plate ratio's.

If you can get an oscilloscope on the HV output, measuring the actual peak voltage of the AC waveform would resolve the one open question in the paper (whether the ignition coil produces voltage spikes way above the stated 8kV).

I have many HV power supplies and the circuit shown in Fig 3 as AC is pulsed DC. I'm not sure why they wouldn't drive the ignition transformer with an AC transformer or H bridge driver. The pulsed DC circuit shown should produce HV spikes imo. There are a lot of unknowns but it's easy enough to try different HV power supplies.

[Eddie.B]

I emailed Musha to ask some details, but from googling I found that car ignition coils were standard in Japanese labs for HV generation in the 90s.. so probably why.. in any case, I’ll let you know if he replies, there are few things weird / unclear from the setup .

On the plate ratio, Honda’s setup is symmetric electrodes on both faces of the glass disc. The asymmetry in Honda’s case comes from inside the glass, not from electrode geometry. Sodium ions in soda-lime glass drift under field and create an internal charge gradient. So symmetric plates on soda-lime glass is the right starting point. But trying asymmetric plates as a second test would be interesting, especially since that’s closer to the traditional BB geometry.

For the first run I’d stick as close to Honda as possible just to get as close baseline as possible.

[Xena E]

?