pdf - WHALE

impression that it was Boerner himself who headed an important
particle accelerator project then underway at Brookhaven. And this
in turn magnified their fears about the possible motivations behind
the sudden American interest in their "implosion" concepts.
Walter Schauberger admitted that in the process of producing their
reports, it dawned on them that a bomb could possible be produced
through implosion that was magnitudes more powerful than the
hydrogen bomb. Assuming Boerner to be more influential than he was,
Viktor and Walter became convinced that all the information they
were supplying to him was being passed directly to the U.S.
government and the military. 30
While Coats himself downplays this potentiality, it is worth
recalling that a similar "compression-decompression" principle lay
behind the "molecular" bomb of Dr. Nowak, and hence, their
concerns may have come less from a misunderstanding of Boerner's
role, and more from an acquaintance with the work being done by
the SS in Nazi Germany. In any case, I do not believe it is entirely
fair to the Schaubergers to discount the possibility that the whole
"private funding" venture via Robert Donner and Karl
Gerchsheimer was not an operation designed to place into the
hands of the US military and its research facilities the fundamental
outlines of Schauberger's concepts.
In any case, a meeting was held on the Totten Ranch in early
September 1958. Present were the two Schaubergers, Robert
Donner, Boerner, and possibly Viktor Schauberger's machinist,
Alois Renner. Based principally on the reports he had received,
Boerner reported to the group that Project implosion was "a viable
proposition." Boerner believed that "the solution of the problem of
energy lay in the proper interpretation of Max Planck's equation
E=hv, formulated in 1900, and the Freidrich Hasenohrl-Albert
Einstein equation E=Mc 2 ." 31 Doubtless Boerner had in mind a
30
31
Coats, Living Energies, p. 23.
Ibid., p. 23. Coats rightly notes that is was first Hasenohrl who had
postulated the equation in 1903 in the form of m=E/c 2 (p. 29, n. 27).
Hasenohrl's equation is slightly different than Einstein's which is properly
E=Mc 2 , where the capital M stands for a mass difference between two observed
219