PDA

View Full Version : do you think the nazis got to master antigravity?



raaaid
12-12-2004, 09:41 AM
theres this guy schauberger that is not as known as von brown but the fact is that he was forced to study about antigravity and he claimed to have achieved both antigravity and free energy by making air spin very fast in a special manner, it has to do with the vortex(you can see a vortex in the spiral tracers in the spiral of the german propellers and even in the swastica)

with antigravity engines you would be able to load infinite g´s since the force of gravity when produces movement gives the impresion of 0 g´s (when you fall you acelerate at 10 ms2 but neglecting the air you would have the feeling to be at 0 g, if it was 1000 g´s would be the same)

its also known the foo fighters that might have interfered with the electromagnetic devices of the allied planes

on the other hand if the allies had got this tecnology it would make sense they kept it secret

Tully__
12-12-2004, 09:45 AM
http://forums.ubi.com/images/smilies/blink.gif http://forums.ubi.com/images/smilies/35.gif

AWL_Spinner
12-12-2004, 09:46 AM
No.

3.JG51_BigBear
12-12-2004, 09:54 AM
Wow that's really good, give me just one sec while I put my tin foil hat back on... http://forums.ubi.com/images/smilies/blink.gif

Bearcat99
12-12-2004, 10:00 AM
Philadelphia Experiment? Similar stuff... though not antigravity. Nothing would surprise me. I know Tesla was waaaaay ahead of his time.

VMF223_Smitty
12-12-2004, 10:09 AM
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><font size="-1">quote:</font><HR>Originally posted by 3.JG51_BigBear:
Wow that's really good, give me just one sec while I put my tin foil hat back on... http://forums.ubi.com/images/smilies/blink.gif <HR></BLOCKQUOTE>

Laugh if you want. http://forums.ubi.com/images/smilies/88.gif Tully http://forums.ubi.com/images/smilies/35.gif, BigBear http://forums.ubi.com/images/smilies/blink.gif etal. It is amazing that educated people still scoff at the "unthinkable notions".
Victor Schauberger (1895-1958) was Austrian and a brilliant inventor and theorist.
Well the nay-sayers are to be expected, they laughed at all the great theorists. I'm glad that the early aviation pioneers didn't pay attention to their scoffers. We wouldn't be flying this sim. http://forums.ubi.com/images/smilies/88.gif

"I must furnish those who would protect or save life, with an energy source, which produces energy so cheaply that nuclear fission will not only be uneconomical, but ridiculous. This is the task I have set myself in what little life I have left." Viktor Schauberger 1952



There is a book called "Living Energies", written by Callum Coats that explores Schauberger's amazing vortex technologies.

"Coats has spent years translating Schauberger's works chapters on Schauberger's important years during World War II and later as a captured scientist. Magnetism, electricity and vortex motion, energy from the deep ocean, floating stones, spring water versus other water, trees as "Mirrors of Light," implosion motors, Schauberger's water-vortex flying saucers, more. 22 chapters in all.

311 pages. 7x9 paperback. Illustrated. Footnotes & Bibliography. $19.95.

Thanks raaaid http://forums.ubi.com/images/smilies/25.gif I think it's great that you tried to bring something to the table besides a whine or the question "Can you destroy Japanese fishing boats with the .50 cal ?" http://forums.ubi.com/images/smilies/88.gif

The internet has lots on the man. Here's one:
Viktor Schauberger (http://www.frank.germano.com/viktorschauberger.htm)

Schauberger's Book (http://www.wexclub.com/US/Anti_Gravity2.html)

VMF223_Smitty
12-12-2004, 10:38 AM
An addendum to the above: An american aircraft consortium offered Viktor 3.5 million for his work. It failed to materialize and the work was lost. A great loss to humanity.

And since Tesla was mentioned:

Check out this site Frank Germano.com (http://www.frank.germano.com/default.htm)

Also Applied Vortex Mechanics (http://www.frank.germano.com/vortexscience.htm)

brasil66
12-12-2004, 10:50 AM
Yes. Tesla was amazing. I mean....he invented alternating current, the hair stand up machine, and a great video game.

Incredible. Free energy? errrrrrrrrr...I picture Jack Black putting his hands to his face and crying, "Cuckoo! Cuckoo! Cuckoo!".

VMF223_Smitty
12-12-2004, 10:54 AM
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><font size="-1">quote:</font><HR>Originally posted by brasil66:
Yes. Tesla was amazing. I mean....he invented alternating current, the hair stand up machine, and a great video game.

Incredible. Free energy? errrrrrrrrr...I picture Jack Black putting his hands to his face and crying, "Cuckoo! Cuckoo! Cuckoo!". <HR></BLOCKQUOTE>

Exactly the kind of attitude I was referring to. http://forums.ubi.com/groupee_common/emoticons/icon_frown.gif

In May 1885, George Westinghouse purchased the patents to Tesla's induction motor, his polyphase system of alternating-current dynamos, transformers and motors and made this the basis of the Westinghouse power system which still underlies the modern electrical power industry today. When Westinghouse found that they could not stay in business if they paid him his due of Twelve Million Dollars, Tesla tore up the contract. Tesla did this, quite simply, so people could have the benefit of financially attainable electricity. Tesla made his first million before he was 40, but gave up the royalties on his most profitable invention as a humanitarian gesture.

DuxCorvan
12-12-2004, 11:14 AM
Ehem, g's have nothing to do with air, raaaid, but with acceleration. I mean, you can travel at 20.000 km/h in space and feel nothing because there's no air resistance, it's true -until you find a screw lost in space and pierces you like butter. You can stand it, given that you reach that speed progressively and slowly.

But G's are another thing. It's what happens if you reach very high speeds in a short time. Every mass has an inertia. A guy of 80 kg that passes from 1 G to 200 G in a second supports an induced weight gravity of more than 16 tons. He just dies crushed by his own weight, his blood escaping from his body and his internal organs melted like yogourth.

Even if Nazis would have built that UFO -which is a known urban legend with no facts availing- they could have never flown it -not with those UFO accelerations and decelerations.

Tully__
12-12-2004, 11:17 AM
Smitty, all I can continue to say without breaking rules is: http://forums.ubi.com/images/smilies/blink.gif http://forums.ubi.com/images/smilies/35.gif

oFZo
12-12-2004, 11:21 AM
"How about no, you crazy Dutch bastard?"

(nationality irrelevant)

VMF223_Smitty
12-12-2004, 11:26 AM
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><font size="-1">quote:</font><HR>Originally posted by Tully__:
Smitty, all I can continue to say without breaking rules is: http://forums.ubi.com/images/smilies/blink.gif http://forums.ubi.com/images/smilies/35.gif <HR></BLOCKQUOTE>

Mutual I'm sure

TAGERT.
12-12-2004, 11:32 AM
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><font size="-1">quote:</font><HR>Originally posted by Bearcat99:
Philadelphia Experiment? Similar stuff... <HR></BLOCKQUOTE>Ah?

<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><font size="-1">quote:</font><HR>Originally posted by Bearcat99:
though not antigravity. <HR></BLOCKQUOTE>So, just like this, but different?

<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><font size="-1">quote:</font><HR>Originally posted by Bearcat99:
Nothing would surprise me. <HR></BLOCKQUOTE>Clearly!

<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><font size="-1">quote:</font><HR>Originally posted by Bearcat99:
I know Tesla was waaaaay ahead of his time. <HR></BLOCKQUOTE>Let me guess.. As in a time machine?

BSR_Dude
12-12-2004, 12:08 PM
Let's not forget that Tesla gave us stuff besides electricity. What about the rock band? Little Suzy is a classic. http://forums.ubi.com/groupee_common/emoticons/icon_biggrin.gif

Fenris459
12-12-2004, 12:09 PM
Just a thought here,

Its the year 1900, A man walks up to you and says " You know what! In 20 years man will have built machines that will carry him into the air and a great war will have been fought where these machines did battle in the skys and changed the way man looks at war. In 50 years another great war will have been fought where those same machines now vastly improved will carry men across oceans and vast distances and a single plane will rain destruction on entire cities with just one bomb. In 100 years these same machines will carry millions of passengers all over the world every single day and be able to fly faster than a rifle bullet. Why these machines will even carry men off our planet and on to the moon.

He must be crazy right?

Is it likely that the Germans were experimenting in antigravity? Probably not.
is it possible? Based on the science of the last 200 years who are we to say what is or is not possible?

Rememeber, back in days days before steam train travel it was a scientific fact that man could not survive speeds above that of a running horse due to the air being forced from his lungs.

Argue for your limitations and sure enough, they're yours.

Fenris459

raaaid
12-12-2004, 12:15 PM
if you acelerate in a car 10 ms2 your head will go back but if the cables of an elevator cut you wont go against the ceiling because gravity affects you the same way than the lift so you drop at the same time than the lift feeling 0 gravity

so when you drop its always 0 gravity it doesnt matter if you change from 10 g´s to 1000 g´s you always feel 0, that would explain heavy g´s loads as posible with antigravity

Bearcat99
12-12-2004, 01:27 PM
Tesla also pioneered the use of microwaves, he had invented a way to transmit electricity from one place to anotherwithout wires.... like radio, in fact he did an experiment that was disastrous using this technology. The currnt HARP program is directly related to his work. And Tagert.... I dont get what you were trying to say...... http://forums.ubi.com/images/smilies/53.gif

VMF223_Smitty
12-12-2004, 01:35 PM
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><font size="-1">quote:</font><HR>Originally posted by Bearcat99:
And Tagert.... I dont get what you were trying to say...... http://forums.ubi.com/images/smilies/53.gif <HR></BLOCKQUOTE>

He's going on vacation.

Mjollnir111675
12-12-2004, 01:35 PM
Nope....

the burning of the library at Alexandria kept this conversation from happening 1000 years ago!!!

Burnin_777_AVG
12-12-2004, 01:51 PM
Guys,

Don't mess with Tagert. He works with Lazers in real life and will zap you with his THEL or whatever it is called. Bottom line he is a smart guy.

BV

WB_Outlaw
12-12-2004, 01:51 PM
I usually resist, but here's a few random thoughts that came to my mind as I read this topic...

The maximum load that can be applied due to gravity is 1G. Gravity has nothing to do with the g-load induced by the motion of any kind of car, aircraft, elevator, UFO, etc.

If the equation...

F=ma

does not mean anything to you, please quit reading and posting in this topic now.

When you are falling, you are experiencing 1G, not zero G. Weightlessness and zero G ARE NOT THE SAME THING. In a low earth orbit you are being acted upon by almost 1G. In any orbit, you are experiencing some G, otherwise you would not be in orbit.

Raaaid, no offense, but you do not have the knowledge necessary to make an argument on this subject.

If you want to discuss high G maneuvers, think inertial damping, not anti-gravity.

-Outlaw.

Chuck_Older
12-12-2004, 01:54 PM
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><font size="-1">quote:</font><HR>Originally posted by TAGERT.:
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><font size="-1">quote:</font><HR>Originally posted by Bearcat99:
Philadelphia Experiment? Similar stuff... <HR></BLOCKQUOTE>Ah?

<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><font size="-1">quote:</font><HR>Originally posted by Bearcat99:
though not antigravity. <HR></BLOCKQUOTE>So, just like this, but different?

<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><font size="-1">quote:</font><HR>Originally posted by Bearcat99:
Nothing would surprise me. <HR></BLOCKQUOTE>Clearly!

<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><font size="-1">quote:</font><HR>Originally posted by Bearcat99:
I know Tesla was waaaaay ahead of his time. <HR></BLOCKQUOTE>Let me guess.. As in a time machine? <HR></BLOCKQUOTE>

I have three time machines. one of them fits on my wrist

TX-WarHawk
12-12-2004, 02:06 PM
I suppose the other one is a DeLorean. http://forums.ubi.com/groupee_common/emoticons/icon_biggrin.gif

TPN_Cephas
12-12-2004, 02:07 PM
Outlaw is quite correct.

I am interested in finding out what the sling-shot technique is though, I did a search and get no results no matter what I entered. The search engine for this forum is abysmal.

darkhorizon11
12-12-2004, 02:12 PM
Creating anti-gravity is very much possible. Men like Serle and Hamel have proven it.

Claiming the Germans did it in world war two is an entirely different story however...

TAGERT.
12-12-2004, 02:22 PM
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><font size="-1">quote:</font><HR>Originally posted by raaaid:
if you acelerate in a car 10 ms2 your head will go back but if the cables of an elevator cut you wont go against the ceiling because gravity affects you the same way <HR></BLOCKQUOTE>True.

<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><font size="-1">quote:</font><HR>Originally posted by raaaid:
than the lift so you drop at the same time than the lift feeling 0 gravity

so when you drop its always 0 gravity it doesnt matter if you change from 10 g´s to 1000 g´s you always feel 0, that would explain heavy g´s loads as posible with antigravity <HR></BLOCKQUOTE>Not True.

TAGERT.
12-12-2004, 02:23 PM
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><font size="-1">quote:</font><HR>Originally posted by Mjollnir111675:
Nope....

the burning of the library at Alexandria kept this conversation from happening 1000 years ago!!! <HR></BLOCKQUOTE>ROTFL! Probally true! http://forums.ubi.com/groupee_common/emoticons/icon_wink.gif

TAGERT.
12-12-2004, 02:25 PM
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><font size="-1">quote:</font><HR>Originally posted by Bearcat99:
Tesla also pioneered the use of microwaves, he had invented a way to transmit electricity from one place to another_without wires.... like radio_, in fact he did an experiment that was disastrous using this technology. <HR></BLOCKQUOTE>True.

<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><font size="-1">quote:</font><HR>Originally posted by Bearcat99:
The currnt HARP program is directly related to his work. <HR></BLOCKQUOTE>Emmmmmmmm Ill take the 5th

<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><font size="-1">quote:</font><HR>Originally posted by Bearcat99:
And Tagert.... I dont get what you were trying to say...... http://forums.ubi.com/images/smilies/53.gif <HR></BLOCKQUOTE>SOP for you.

Chuck_Older
12-12-2004, 02:27 PM
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><font size="-1">quote:</font><HR>Originally posted by TX-WarHawk:
I suppose the other one is a DeLorean. http://forums.ubi.com/groupee_common/emoticons/icon_biggrin.gif <HR></BLOCKQUOTE>

Nope, Timex

clint-ruin
12-12-2004, 02:39 PM
This conversation is way better if you watch it from inside your timecube (http://www.timecube.com/). Get the feel!

I would like to think that if the library hadn't been destroyed we wouldn't be having this conversation at all because noone would take it seriously.

pselva
12-12-2004, 02:40 PM
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><font size="-1">quote:</font><HR>Originally posted by Bearcat99:
Tesla also pioneered the use of microwaves, he had invented a way to transmit electricity from one place to another_without wires.... like radio_, in fact he did an experiment that was disastrous using this technology. The currnt HARP program is directly related to his work. And Tagert.... I dont get what you were trying to say...... http://forums.ubi.com/images/smilies/53.gif <HR></BLOCKQUOTE>

Aahh Tesla Coils, aahh Red Alert! http://forums.ubi.com/groupee_common/emoticons/icon_biggrin.gifhttp://www.sg.hu/kep/2000_11/red_alert2_bemutato_04.jpg

PriK
12-12-2004, 02:41 PM
I feel dumber for just having read and posted in this thread.

Good post Outlaw. People read books, and without the scientific background and understanding believe them or draw certain absurd conclusions. This is akin to blind faith and any scientific answer or explanation given is easily dismissed as conspiracy and helps reassure themselves of their belief.

In other words proof will get you "know"where. http://forums.ubi.com/groupee_common/emoticons/icon_wink.gif

raaaid
12-12-2004, 02:51 PM
if you are diving vertical in a plane and drop something within the cockpit it will seem to float, it means its weight is 0 it means it stays at 0 gravity, therefore you are not at 1 g you are at 0 g, at leats thats what you feel

if its true for 1 g is true for 1000 g´s

Jason Bourne
12-12-2004, 03:14 PM
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><font size="-1">quote:</font><HR>Originally posted by raaaid:
if you are diving vertical in a plane and drop something within the cockpit it will seem to float, it means its weight is 0 it means it stays at 0 gravity, therefore you are not at 1 g you are at 0 g, at leats thats what you feel

if its true for 1 g is true for 1000 g´s <HR></BLOCKQUOTE>

not exactly true. relative to you in the situation you described, it would APPEAR that the items in the cockpit have an acceleration of 0, however, relative to the earth (standard Frame of Refrence) the item items in the cockpit are accelerating at 9.81 ms^2. and since wieght is just a mesure of the force being applied to you by gravity, the items weight is not infact zero. also, for future reference in this thread

Fg = (GMm)/(r^2)

that is the force of gravity at a radius R from the CoG. so unless there is an object with negative mass b/w you and the earth, you will always be experiencing gravitational acceleration.

and as already mentioned, weightlessness and 0G are two seperate things. weightlessness is when there is nothing opposing the force of gravity, which while it feels like there is no gravity, really you are simply not resisting it.

TAGERT.
12-12-2004, 03:20 PM
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><font size="-1">quote:</font><HR>Originally posted by raaaid:
if you are diving vertical in a plane and drop something within the cockpit it will seem to float, it means its weight is 0 <HR></BLOCKQUOTE>Nope! Try again.

<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><font size="-1">quote:</font><HR>Originally posted by raaaid:
it means it stays at 0 gravity, therefore you are not at 1 g you are at 0 g, at leats thats what you feel <HR></BLOCKQUOTE>Nope, if it floats it simply means your both falling at the same rate.

<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><font size="-1">quote:</font><HR>Originally posted by raaaid:
if its true for 1 g is true for 1000 g´s <HR></BLOCKQUOTE>Nope, sorry, not true. In your example above, if your both accelerating at 1 g the coin would *appear* to float *relitive* to you... But if your plane stated to accelerate faster than 1g (9.8m/s^2) up to 1000g's that penny that was floating would NO LONGER BE FLOATING and it would be stuck to the back of the seat/canopy... And it would have been stuck there way before your plane got to 2g's

Air_Hog
12-12-2004, 03:31 PM
Lifters, now that's the way to go once the kinks are worked out. Check JLN Labs website.

A.H.

TAGERT.
12-12-2004, 03:35 PM
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><font size="-1">quote:</font><HR>Originally posted by Burnin_777_AVG:
Guys,

Don't mess with Tagert. He works with Lazers in real life and will zap you with his THEL or whatever it is called. Bottom line he is a smart guy.

BV <HR></BLOCKQUOTE>LOL! I can neither confirm or deny the reports of my demise!

http://www.israeli-weapons.com/weapons/missile_systems/systems/THEL.html

raaaid
12-12-2004, 03:50 PM
yes but the penny would have to stand the 1000 g´s as well so it would keep floating

when you fall your mass is constant but the weight becomes 0 (the weight measurer would be floating like you)

acelerating with a car at 1 g means you feel 1 g in the oposite direction, acelerating 1 g by falling, you feel 0 g
if you acelerate in a car 1000 g youll be pushed back 1000 g if you acelerate 1000 g by gravitation force you feel 0 g

why because in the car the atoms try to remain in their position appearing forces of presure among them while the gravitation moves all the atoms together not appearing any preasure

TAGERT.
12-12-2004, 03:55 PM
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><font size="-1">quote:</font><HR>Originally posted by raaaid:
yes but <HR></BLOCKQUOTE>No but about it

<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><font size="-1">quote:</font><HR>Originally posted by raaaid:
the penny would have to stand the 1000 g´s as well so it would keep floating <HR></BLOCKQUOTE>Stand the g's as well? Eitherway it would not be floating anymore.. sorry.

<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><font size="-1">quote:</font><HR>Originally posted by raaaid:
when you fall your mass is constant but the weight becomes 0 (the weight measurer would be floating like you) <HR></BLOCKQUOTE>Mass is constant, but you weight wouldnt be. At least until you near the speed of light.. Then all bets are off. http://forums.ubi.com/groupee_common/emoticons/icon_wink.gif

<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><font size="-1">quote:</font><HR>Originally posted by raaaid:
acelerating with a car at 1 g means you feel 1 g in the oposite direction, acelerating 1 g by falling, you feel 0 g <HR></BLOCKQUOTE>Because 1g + (-1g) = 0g

<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><font size="-1">quote:</font><HR>Originally posted by raaaid:
if you acelerate in a car 1000 g youll be pushed back 1000 g if you acelerate 1000 g by gravitation force you feel 0 g <HR></BLOCKQUOTE>Nope, Becuase 1000g + (-1g) = 999g

<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><font size="-1">quote:</font><HR>Originally posted by raaaid:
why because in the car the atoms try to remain in their position appearing forces of presure among them while the gravitation moves all the atoms together not appearing any preasure <HR></BLOCKQUOTE>And if monkeys could fly out of my but with ray guns they could take over the world.

WB_Outlaw
12-12-2004, 05:36 PM
raaaid,
Do me a favor and show the free body diagram and the summation of forces you are describing. If you can show me a zero resultant force and an acceleration greater than any initial acceleration, then I will kiss your butt and post the picture in this thread.

-Outlaw.

Note that the acceleration and zero resultant force must be along the same axis. Also, interactions at the sub-atomic level need not apply.

"The preceeding language does not guarantee a butt-kissing even if suitable calculations/diagrams are provided"

9th_Bloodfist
12-12-2004, 05:46 PM
Who cares, this is the Pacific Fighters forum, no nazis in the pacific lol.

Burnin_777_AVG
12-12-2004, 05:55 PM
So can someone tell me how Warp Drive works? And how can we create an Inertial Dampner? Thanks in advance ;-) LOL

BV

WWSensei
12-12-2004, 06:20 PM
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><font size="-1">quote:</font><HR>So can someone tell me how Warp Drive works? And how can we create an Inertial Dampner? Thanks in advance ;-) <HR></BLOCKQUOTE>

I remember reading a book called The Science of Star Trek (or similar title. The author was an aerospace engineer and physicist. He said the odd thing about the ST universe was that mathematically, he could prove Warp engines were, at least in theory, possible.

The one big thing that was impossible were the impulse engines. Since they worked with "plain old Newtonian physics" and not Quantum Mechanics he went through and showed that a ship the size of Enterprise accelerating to even a couple of hundred thousands of miles per hour would either need a couple of hundred years to accelerate to that speed at 2 G's or less or it could get there pretty quick but would reduce the crew to a bloody mess.

Oh, and the fuel it would take (hydrogen) would need a tank about 3 or 4 miles in diameter.

BSS_Vidar
12-12-2004, 09:23 PM
I don't think they mastered anit-grav technology in real life; however, sometimes I think they have in this game. http://forums.ubi.com/groupee_common/emoticons/icon_cool.gif

ImpStarDuece
12-13-2004, 12:24 AM
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><font size="-1">quote:</font><HR>Originally posted by darkhorizon11:
Creating anti-gravity is very much possible. Men like Serle and Hamel have proven it.

Claiming the Germans did it in world war two is an entirely different story however... <HR></BLOCKQUOTE>

Can you provide ANY evidence to back up this claim? Any whatsoever?

Because i am a geeky kind of guy i once asked the Julius Sumner Miller Fellow (guy responsible for PROMOTING science and physics knowledge in Australia) as well as the head of the physics department at the University of Sydney about HOW mass creates gravity. Both of them went kind of misty eyed and sadly smiled and told me quite plainly that we still dont understand much about gravity AT ALL.

In fact there are probably thousands of PHDs to be had in the study of gavometrics.

So if we dont understand how gravity is created, how in the world can we hope to create ANIT-Gravity?

triggerhappyfin
12-13-2004, 01:02 AM
<span class="ev_code_RED">do you think the nazis got to master antigravity?</span>

Not in this game!! all the nazi ac I fly is regular lawn darts http://forums.ubi.com/images/smilies/88.gif

raaaid
12-13-2004, 07:50 AM
there are at least 3 known ways to achieve 0 g (0 g means you feel 0 g you feel like floating)

one is to orbit around the planet, the centrifugal force of the orbit will compensate the force of gravity giving a feeling of 0 g

other is parabolic flight the pilot pushes 1 negative g in the stick which compensates the 1 g of earth giving a feeling of 0 g

the third is diving theres 1 postive g by the earth but you are acelerated also 1 g by the earth creating 1 negative g which will compensate giving a result of 0 g

if you are falling to a black hole that acelerates you 1000 g´s you feel 0 g because theres the positive 1000 g´s of the black hole but you feel also the 1000 negatives g because you are acelerated 1000 g´s, total 0 g

so if you get a gravitational engine you can pull as many g´s as you want but you will always feel 0

DuxCorvan
12-13-2004, 08:12 AM
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><font size="-1">quote:</font><HR>Originally posted by raaaid:
if you are falling to a black hole that acelerates you 1000 g´s you feel 0 g because theres the positive 1000 g´s of the black hole but you feel also the 1000 negatives g because you are acelerated 1000 g´s, total 0 g
<HR></BLOCKQUOTE>

Raaaid, check that again. It seems like you don't know what Gs are. You can't be 'accelerated 1000 Gs'. It's not a measure for acceleration, but for the effects of gravity on mass. That is, weight. Normal G force on Earth the same for a static mass that for a free falling one is 1G. It has nothing to do with 'sensations'. If you're on that lifter that free falls, you accelerate 9,8ms^2, and you're experimenting 1 G the same. If a mass is constantly accelerated thru other means apart than gravity, then it has inducted Gs. If the acceleration is 9.8ms^2 the mass is exposed to 1G in the opposing direction. If you're on Earth an that constant acceleration is in a contrary direction than that of gravity -this is, upwards, 'escaping' from Earth, then is 1G positive and 1G positive, this is 2G, and you're not right. But if you accelerates this mass on Earth in the very same direction at the rate of 9800ms^G that is 1G positive plus 1000G positive, this is 1001G positive, and they would had to extract your eyes from among your toes, it doesn't matter what mystery nazi machine you were riding. http://forums.ubi.com/images/smilies/16x16_smiley-surprised.gif

It has more to be with inertial forces.

If you're in a black hole, your acceleration would be such that you would get near lightspeed, and you couldn't exist any more as a material body, for mass must grow to infinite at lightspeed and that's a physycal absurd. You should be energy by then, but don't worry: the awesome forces and stresses surrounding a black hole would make a pure of you much time before.

BTW, orbiting works on a different principle, they attain 1 G negative thru tangential force. They fly in a circular path around the globe, till tangential force is equal to the opposing gravity one. That's how they get 0G. But they don't need to be in horizontal acceleration all the time, just to reach a high constant speed and sustain it.

You have to take one more look at those Advanced Sesame Street programs, lad. http://forums.ubi.com/groupee_common/emoticons/icon_biggrin.gif

BSS_Goat
12-13-2004, 08:36 AM
AAAAAAAAHHHHHHHHHHHH..... MY HEAD EXPLODED!! http://forums.ubi.com/images/smilies/53.gif

TAGERT.
12-13-2004, 09:28 AM
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><font size="-1">quote:</font><HR>Originally posted by raaaid:
there are at least 3 known ways to achieve 0 g (0 g means you feel 0 g you feel like floating)

one is to orbit around the planet, the centrifugal force of the orbit will compensate the force of gravity giving a feeling of 0 g

other is parabolic flight the pilot pushes 1 negative g in the stick which compensates the 1 g of earth giving a feeling of 0 g

the third is diving theres 1 postive g by the earth but you are acelerated also 1 g by the earth creating 1 negative g which will compensate giving a result of 0 g

if you are falling to a black hole that acelerates you 1000 g´s you feel 0 g because theres the positive 1000 g´s of the black hole but you feel also the 1000 negatives g because you are acelerated 1000 g´s, total 0 g

so if you get a gravitational engine you can pull as many g´s as you want but you will always feel 0 <HR></BLOCKQUOTE>so if you get monkesy to fly out of my but at the speed of light with red hats on what does that do?

gates123
12-13-2004, 10:20 AM
There are alot of rumors that have been swirling around about German anti-gravity craft since the 80's and 90's because alot of people started talking on their death bed. Here's one instance to be taken with a grain of salt. True or false it has to be taken under consideration that this old soldier didnt make this up since he has nothing to gain by such allegations.

http://www.netowne.com/naziufos/boblee/cornwell.htm

There was also other anti-gravity rumors that surfaced in the late eighties from a man named Bob Lazar a scientist who allegedly work for the US government at its now famous "area-51" facility with anti-gravity propulsion. Here is his interviews and how he explains the workings of antigravity/antimatter and its relation to space travel. Fun topic but highly controversial.

http://www.serve.com/mahood/lazar/lazartec.htm

mortoma
12-13-2004, 10:51 AM
If the Nazis had developed something like that and craft capable of utilizing it, they would have used the "Foo fighters" to shoot down every American, British and Russian plane in the sky, period!!!

Like I'm sure, they had such technology developed and they just flew the Foos around for the sake of Joyriding/Sightseeing!! All the while the British and American bombers are ravaging Germany. NOT!!!!! This is beyond implausible and moronic.

gates123
12-13-2004, 11:04 AM
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><font size="-1">quote:</font><HR>Originally posted by mortoma:
If the Nazis had developed something like that and craft capable of utilizing it, they would have used the "Foo fighters" to shoot down every American, British and Russian plane in the sky, period!!!

Like I'm sure, they had such technology developed and they just flew the Foos around for the sake of Joyriding/Sightseeing!! All the while the British and American bombers are ravaging Germany. NOT!!!!! This is beyond implausible and moronic. <HR></BLOCKQUOTE>

________________________________________________

Well not if it didnt have any guns on it, and why would you throw 1 or 2 of these prototypes in to battle? Recon yes but against 1000 B-17's...NO now that is implausible and moronic.

WB_Outlaw
12-13-2004, 11:19 AM
I love the "...chip of element 115..." powered generator. What kind of moron believes this stuff?

raaaid,
Let me reiterate, YOUR WEAPONS ARE USELESS AGAINST ME!...sorry, sorry, got lost there for a second.

Ahem...let me reiterate, show the free body diagram and we will all shut-up and say you are the king. That's all you have to do. It's a very simple request.

BTW, falling in an elevator, riding the vomit comet, "diving", and sustained orbit are all the same thing. You are free-falling. Please do not mention centrifugal force again as it only exists as a convenient notation for those who have never passed a dynamics course.

Also, please stop summing accelerations, it's making me nauseus.

-Outlaw.

Gato__Loco
12-13-2004, 12:21 PM
Aaaah€¦ €œfree energy€. Another topic for a juicy €˜science vs. myth€ thread.

Ok guys. If something sounds too good to be true, it probably is. The idea of €œfree energy€ or perpetual motion and €œanti gravity€ devices have been floating around for years. These ideas are, of course, totally bogus and are based on very bad science. They sound €œscientific€, and some people believe they are true, but this only proves that these people have a really poor formation in science.

clint-ruin
12-13-2004, 01:26 PM
The trouble with this is that the nazi element and the antigravity element and the free energy element and the total misunderstanding of physics element are all tied in together.

Individually I would say:

There are some interesting blue-skyish projects ongoing into "cheating" gravity by a small margin - whether these work or even can be made to be work remains to be seen. Even this work is sort of looking a bit crank-ish, but there's money available for it for a look. Not a lot of published data yet on how this is supposed to be achieved. Bear in mind that at the end of 2004 we are talking about maybe being able to shove an object a little bit or reduce its apparent mass on the ground by a tiny fraction. Not compressing a "0-g machine" into a compact UFO sized space and then whizzing around at speed, with old mechanical technology rather than superconductors and lasers and hugely powerful computers to nut the problem out on. No matter how far ahead of their time the math was, the materials issue - and that the technology didn't make it into either the USSR or USAs military or industrial tech output later - sort of sinks this on its own. What did they build it out of - cast iron and wood like their other end of the war 'superplanes'?

If 'free' energy was easily available to power a Nazi UFO then rather a lot of what is known about .. basically every major field of science is unknown. A deathbed account by an old geezer does not, on its own, overturn the way the rest of the world can plausibly be shown to work under controlled conditions. There's a distinction to be made between being interested to see whether something is true and wanting to believe that it really is true despite having nothing to back it up. I'm waiting to see just how many gyroscopes, springs, pulleys, and vacuum making devices this Nazi UFO is supposed to have used in its construction - and the other usual magical parts used in the highly respectable perpetual motion machine trade.

"Now, an interesting thing happens when you apply this to say, Catholicism..."

Klarkash
12-13-2004, 02:02 PM
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><font size="-1">quote:</font><HR>Originally posted by raaaid:
there are at least 3 known ways to achieve 0 g (0 g means you feel 0 g you feel like floating)

snip

so if you get a gravitational engine you can pull as many g´s as you want but you will always feel 0 <HR></BLOCKQUOTE>

Like many of the people have already stated, you don't seem to really understand gravity, and seem also to be confusing concepts of relativity in there as well. Gravity isn't relative in the way you describe, it's a field effect.

For example, in your cockpit with the coin, the coin will only float if the plane is accelerating downwards at 1g. If the plane changes that path, the coin will not, and it will no longer be 'floating'. In your lift example the lift is the plane and you are the coin.

you can get exactly the same effect jumping off a cliff. let go of a coin beside you and it will also appear to 'float' beside you, as the acceleration will be the same (plus or minus drag effects) all the way to the ground. At about ground level you will discover that free fall does not equal 0 gravity, but 1 gravity. Please don't try this.

Luftwaffe_109
12-13-2004, 03:03 PM
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><font size="-1">quote:</font><HR> one is to orbit around the planet, the centrifugal force of the orbit will compensate the force of gravity giving a feeling of 0 g <HR></BLOCKQUOTE>

No!!!!!!!!!!!! As a past physics student this absurd statement made me squirm in my seat. Please, Please, for the love of God, DO NOT post in this tread again until you learn at least some simple physics!!!

It is the force of gravity, the net force on the craft, the CENTRIPETAL FORCE, which keeps the object in orbit in the first place and prevents it from being flung of into space in an instant on a course tangental to its motion while in orbit!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!! This net centripetal force is the only thing needed for circular motion.

There are NO OTHER FORCES AT ALL acting on the object in this instance!!!!!!!!!

The object already has velocity, so the force due to gravity is the only thing which makes it constantly change direction, resulting in uniform circular motion.

Do this simple experiment. Get a ball, tie a string to it, and whirl it around in a circle.
Deductions:

-We can simplify the situation and say that tension is the only force acting on the system. IE Tension is the NET, centripetal (centre SEEKING) force.
-We can ignore gravity.
-Therefore, tension in the string, pulling the ball IN, keeps the ball in uniform circular motion.

Forget centrifugal force, thats irrelevant!!! Thats what an occupant inside, say a car for example, might appear to feel when a car makes a turn and he instead continues to move forward, the car "pushes" him. It is simply the inertia (resistance to change in motion) that an object experiences.

Regards

PS I think others have told you the folly of your reasoning in other examples so I wont comment on them. Suffice to say you are simply talking about what appears to happen RELATIVE to something, and not what actually happens (for example, you would be absolutely stupid to think even for a second that an occupant in an aircraft undergoing parabolic flight no longer has acceleration due to gravity.)

gates123
12-13-2004, 03:41 PM
There are theories that say gravity is a wave or a frequency much like microwaves and radio waves. One being on a macro scale (low frequency) which holds the planets and solar systems togather and the other which is on the micro scale (high frequency) which holds all atoms togather. If one can harness gravity on a micro scale (w/o spliting the atom) and amplify it to offset earth's gravity then your on to something that can be called anti-gravity.

oisink
12-13-2004, 04:30 PM
theres a book called (i think) "the hunt for zero point" by a guy called ( again, i think) nick cook that deals with the nazis alleged zero gravity experiments. No idea of the veracity of the research but its a good read.

JG51Beolke
12-13-2004, 04:40 PM
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><font size="-1">quote:</font><HR>Originally posted by 3.JG51_BigBear:
Wow that's really good, give me just one sec while I put my tin foil hat back on... http://forums.ubi.com/images/smilies/blink.gif <HR></BLOCKQUOTE>

Now where did I put that thing again?

Stanger_361st
12-13-2004, 04:44 PM
Is this one of those threads that last post wins. http://forums.ubi.com/groupee_common/emoticons/icon_biggrin.gif

WB_Outlaw
12-13-2004, 05:18 PM
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><font size="-1">quote:</font><HR>Originally posted by Stanger_361st:
Is this one of those threads that last post wins. http://forums.ubi.com/groupee_common/emoticons/icon_biggrin.gif <HR></BLOCKQUOTE>

Absolutely not!

Jason Bourne
12-13-2004, 06:12 PM
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><font size="-1">quote:</font><HR>
there are at least 3 known ways to achieve 0 g (0 g means you feel 0 g you feel like floating)

one is to orbit around the planet, the centrifugal force of the orbit will compensate the force of gravity giving a feeling of 0 g
<HR></BLOCKQUOTE>

no such thing as centrifugal foce, it is actually momentum and centripital forces. the reason that you feel WEIGHTLESS is that you are not resisting the fall, infact, sats in orbit are ALWAYS FALLING. at little under 9.81m/s^2 (depending on how far they are from the center of the planet)

<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><font size="-1">quote:</font><HR>
other is parabolic flight the pilot pushes 1 negative g in the stick which compensates the 1 g of earth giving a feeling of 0 g
<HR></BLOCKQUOTE>
um, no, pushing on the stick in level flight or a climb will NOT compensate for gravity, it will mearly allow you to follow the flight path that gravity wants you to take, but only for a certain amount of time

<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><font size="-1">quote:</font><HR>
the third is diving theres 1 postive g by the earth but you are acelerated also 1 g by the earth creating 1 negative g which will compensate giving a result of 0 g
<HR></BLOCKQUOTE>
so, to summarise: 1+1-1 = 0??
but what ever.

when you fall, you accelerate at the rate of a = 9.81 m/s^2 (near the surface of the earth). you STILL EXPERIENCE ONE G however you fee weightless because the sensation of weight only occures when something is opposing the acceleration due to gravity, like the ground itself when you walk

if you are falling to a black hole that acelerates you 1000 g´s you feel 0 g because theres the positive 1000 g´s of the black hole but you feel also the 1000 negatives g because you are acelerated 1000 g´s, total 0 g

<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><font size="-1">quote:</font><HR>
so if you get a gravitational engine you can pull as many g´s as you want but you will always feel 0 <HR></BLOCKQUOTE>

true, if you pull enough Gs, then you die, then you are not going to be able to feel any Gs. and feeling nothing = 0

but please, start using weightless ness instead of 0G

Mjollnir111675
12-13-2004, 07:03 PM
I now give this thread the almighty cloaking device!!
From now on noone will be able to see this thread!!!!


oh yeah and by the way.......

http://img.villagephotos.com/p/2004-11/873935/aVENGE.jpg
"Free da flounda from flatbush, BEEYOTCH!!!"

Copperhead310th
12-13-2004, 11:55 PM
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><font size="-1">quote:</font><HR>Originally posted by BSR_Dude:
Let's not forget that Tesla gave us stuff besides electricity. What about the rock band? Little Suzy is a classic. http://forums.ubi.com/groupee_common/emoticons/icon_biggrin.gif <HR></BLOCKQUOTE>

Naaaa Gettin' better was the best dam track on that 1st album. http://forums.ubi.com/groupee_common/emoticons/icon_smile.gif

NTESLA
12-14-2004, 12:06 AM
ummmmmm..... interesting.

BM357_Infernal
12-14-2004, 03:58 AM
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><font size="-1">quote:</font><HR>Originally posted by Fenris459:
Just a thought here,

Its the year 1900, A man walks up to you and says " You know what! In 20 years man will have built machines that will carry him into the air and a great war will have been fought where these machines did battle in the skys and changed the way man looks at war. In 50 years another great war will have been fought where those same machines now vastly improved will carry men across oceans and vast distances and a single plane will rain destruction on entire cities with just one bomb. In 100 years these same machines will carry millions of passengers all over the world every single day and be able to fly faster than a rifle bullet. Why these machines will even carry men off our planet and on to the moon.

He must be crazy right? <HR></BLOCKQUOTE>

Another thought,

What is happening today that would have baffled people 20 years ago?

The internet?
Not really. It followed a logically exponential expansion over the years.

Cloning?
Not quite. A genetical tour de force, yes, but was already foreseen.

Decyphering the human genome?
Ten years early. Exponential computering power allowed this to happen. Surprising, but once again, no big deal.



Now let's see...

A cure for cancer?
What, where?

A cure for AIDS?
Heh.

Nanobots regulating our bodily functions bringing an effective end to aging?
Huh?

Endless cheap energy through Tokamak nuclear fusion?
Tinky Winky. Dipsy. Lala. Po!



Okay, okay, so that didn't quite happen. But still, we got this to happen, right? Right?

Feeding everyone on the planet?
i'm lovin it

A human being on Mars?
Does a giant bar of Snickers count?

Oh, for heaven's sake! At least tell me we got flying cars...
Bzzzzzzz!



Ah, well. Things we did achieve:

Even bigger frickin' nuclear bombs?
Check!

Everybody can be reached anywhere on his cellphone?
To say what, huh? Bloody things keep going off in the movie theatre no matter how many times they ask to kill 'em.

FB/AEP/PF?
See, the Russians did it!

World Idol?
So how do we detonate those bigger frickin' nuclear bombs?



My theory: we need more war.

Not just some petty bickering in a couple of Arab states no one really cares about. We need full-fledged global thermonuclear war with minimal incentive. Kill about 99.9% of Earth's population (that'll solve a couple of problems to begin with); which will force the remaining 0.1% to call upon massive technological advancements to make life even possible to begin with. Now that's crazy, wouldn't you agree?

carguy_
12-14-2004, 10:03 AM
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><font size="-1">quote:</font><HR>Originally posted by 9th_Bloodfist:
Who cares, this is the Pacific Fighters forum, no nazis in the pacific lol. <HR></BLOCKQUOTE>

LMAO exactly http://forums.ubi.com/images/smilies/16x16_smiley-very-happy.gif

slarsson
12-14-2004, 10:37 AM
N reply to BM357_Infernal's last post, I have to put on my radiation oncologist hat for a minute........

================
A cure for caner?
What? Where?
================

I do wish people wouldn't perpetrate these myths.
Over 95% of skin cancers are cured, and over 50% of all other cancers are cured. Already.

Gato__Loco
12-14-2004, 11:41 AM
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><font size="-1">quote:</font><HR>My theory: we need more war.

Not just some petty bickering in a couple of Arab states no one really cares about. We need full-fledged global thermonuclear war with minimal incentive. Kill about 99.9% of Earth's population (that'll solve a couple of problems to begin with); which will force the remaining 0.1% to call upon massive technological advancements to make life even possible to begin with. Now that's crazy, wouldn't you agree? <HR></BLOCKQUOTE>

AAAAAHHH!!! Please, stay away from the red button!!!
I'm assuming that was irony, right? You don't really mean this.

dragonhart38
12-14-2004, 12:46 PM
You could travel a massive distance in space, light years so to speak, if you could bend the time/space continuom. This is how it is done to achieve WARP speeds in Star Trek. For example take a piece of paper and measure the distance from the top of it (point A) to the bottom (point B). For a standard piece of writing paper this distance is 11 inches. Now fold or bend the paper together so that ther are series of peaks and troughs in it and you will now notice that the distance between the point a and b has been considerably reduced. This is a very generalized example in which the time/space continuom is bent or warped. As I understand it the space ships in Star Trek travel a more less the speed we could achieve now in space but through technology can bend the time/space continuom to achieve warp factor speeds.

stathem
12-14-2004, 01:14 PM
umm, good, sort of granted, but in order to do that you need a quantity of energy greater then the whole of the energy present in the universe

gates123
12-14-2004, 03:14 PM
Here's more to chew on:


http://www.llnl.gov/pao/news/news_releases/2004/NR-04-02-01.html

GENERAL PROPERTIES
Name: Ununpentium Symbol: Uup
Atomic Number: 115 Atomic Weight: UNKNOWN
Density @ 293K: 31.5g/cm³ Atomic Volume: 13.45cm³/mol
Group: Superheavy Elements Discovered: 1989
STATES
State: Solid
Melting Point: 1740?C Boiling Point: 3530?C
Heat of Fusion: UNKNOWN kJ/mol Heat of Vaporisation: UNKNOWN kJ/mol
ENERGIES
1st Ionization Energy: 531 kJ/mol Electronegativity: UNKNOWN
2nd Ionization Energy: 1756 kJ/mol Electron Affinity: UNKNOWN kJ/mol
3rd Ionization Energy: 2653 kJ/mol Specific Heat: UNKNOWN J/gK
Heat Atomization: kJ/mol atoms
APPEARANCE AND CHARACTERISTICS
Structure: FCC Face-centered cubic Color: Reddish-orange
Uses: Reactor Fuel Toxicity: UNKNOWN
Hardness: UNKNOWN mohs Characteristics: Stable
CONDUCTIVITY
Thermal Conductivity: 6.1 J/m-sec? Electrical Conductivity: 7.09 1/mohm-cm
Polarizability: 20.5 A³


SUPERHEAVY ELEMENTS DISCOVERED
THE DISCOVERY OF ELEMENT 115 PAVES THE WAY TO UNDERSTANDING GRAVITIC CONTROL



Element 115, the key to understanding how the ultra-secret "Black World" has created aircraft capable of manipulating gravity and space/time, has been identified, and the recent discovery of element 118, which decayed into element 114, further helps identify the possibilities.

The most important attribute of this heavier, stable element is that the gravity A wave is so abundant that it actually extends past the perimeter of the atom. These heavier, stable elements literally have their own gravity A field around them, in addition to the gravity B field that is native to all matter.

The Key To Gravity-Control Systems

No naturally occurring atoms on earth have enough protons and neutrons for the cumulative gravity A wave to extend past the perimeter of the atom so you can access it. Now even though the distance that the gravity A wave extends past the perimeter of the atom is infinitesimal, it is accessible and it has amplitude, wave length, and frequency, just like any other wave in the electromagnetic spectrum. Once you can access the gravity A wave, you can amplify it just like we amplify other electromagnetic waves.

And in like manner, the gravity A wave is amplified and then focused on the desired destination to cause the space/time distortion required for practical space travel.

This amplified gravity A wave is so powerful that the only naturally occurring source of gravity that could cause space/time to distort this much would be a black hole.

We're amplifying a wave that barely extends past the perimeter of an atom until it's large enough to distort vast amounts of space/time.

Transmutation

We synthesize heavier, unstable elements by using more stable elements as targets in a particle accelerator. We then bombard the target element with various atomic and sub-atomic particles. By doing this, we actually force neutrons into the nucleus of the atom and in some cases merge two dissimilar nuclei together. At this point, transmutation occurs, making the target element a different, heavier element.

As an example, in the early 80's, the lab for heavy ion research in Darmshtot, Germany synthesized some element 109 by bombarding Bismuth 203 with Iron 59. And to show you how difficult it is to do this, they had to bombard the target element for a week to synthesize 1 atom of element 109. And on that subject, this same lab has projected that in the future they should be able to bombard Curium 248 with with Calcium 48 to yield element 116 which will then decay through a series of nuclides which are unknown to them, but are well known to the scientists at S4 located within the complex of the Groom Lake "Area 51" installation.

The length of time which an element exists before it decays determines its stability. Atoms of some elements decay faster than atoms of other elements, so the faster an element decays, the more unstable that element is considered to be. When an atom decays, it releases or radiates sub-atomic particles and energy, which is the radiation that a Geiger counter detects.

Alien Craft

The reactor found in the alien craft at S4, as widely mentioned by physicist Robert Lazar is primarily based on a superheavy element with an atomic number of 115. Element 115 will be designated as "Ununpentium" according to IUPAC guidelines. Its periodic designation and electron configuration appear in the diagram at the top of the page.

VMF223_Smitty
12-14-2004, 04:45 PM
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><font size="-1">quote:</font><HR>Originally posted by gates123:
Here's more to chew on:


http://www.llnl.gov/pao/news/news_releases/2004/NR-04-02-01.html
<HR></BLOCKQUOTE>

As I said on page 1 of this thread:

Laugh if you want. It is amazing that educated people still scoff at the "unthinkable notions".

DuxCorvan
12-14-2004, 05:42 PM
SciFish 'UFOlogist' rubbish... http://forums.ubi.com/images/smilies/16x16_smiley-indifferent.gif

Pseudo-science. For example, you can't give it a density, and an atomic volume, and ignore its atomic weight.

'Area 51'... pfffff... http://forums.ubi.com/images/smilies/16x16_smiley-tongue.gif

No, I don't believe it.

gates123
12-14-2004, 06:03 PM
"You cannot teach a man anything; you can only help him find it within himself" - Galileo Galilei

VMF223_Smitty
12-14-2004, 06:09 PM
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><font size="-1">quote:</font><HR>Originally posted by gates123:
"You cannot teach a man anything; you can only help him find it within himself" - Galileo Galilei <HR></BLOCKQUOTE>


http://forums.ubi.com/images/smilies/25.gif

Unltd
12-14-2004, 06:24 PM
oh I've got the best antigrave vortex machine...I've got a Dyson...pure good magic I say.........

ImpStarDuece
12-14-2004, 07:24 PM
Here is something from a slightly more reliable source than a UFO website:

From PhysicsWeb, a news, employment and resources center for physicists

Elements 115 and 113 discovered in Dubna
3 February 2004

A team of Russian and American physicists that discovered elements 114 and 116 in 1998 and 2000 now believe they may have created two other superheavy elements €" 113 and 115. If confirmed, these results would lend even more weight to the idea of an €œisland of stability€ at the edge of the periodic table (Y Oganessian et al. 2003 Phys. Rev. C 69 021601)

Nuclear theorists first predicted the existence of superheavy elements more than 30 years ago based on the nuclear shell model. This model, which was originally developed in 1949, explains why nuclei with certain €œmagic numbers€ of neutrons and protons are especially stable. These nuclei have closed shells of either protons or neutrons. The most stable nuclei are €œdoubly magic€ with closed shells of both protons and neutrons.

The heaviest known doubly magic nucleus is lead-208, which has 82 protons and 126 neutrons. The shell model predicts that the next doubly magic nucleus in the sequence will contain either 114, 120 or 126 protons and a total of 184 neutrons. Moreover, other studies predict a whole superheavy €œisland of stability€ around these proton and neutron numbers.

In the last decade, nuclear physicists have created elements 110 (now known as darmstadtium), 111, 112, 114 and 116 €" although further results are still needed before the last three are confirmed. Now, Yuri Oganessian and colleagues at the Joint Institute for Nuclear Research in Dubna, Russia - collaborating with a team from the Lawrence Livermore National Laboratory in the US - have collided calcium-48 with americium-243 nuclei to produce element 115.

Working at the Dubna lab's U400 cyclotron, the Russian-US physicists bombarded the americium target with a beam of energetic calcium-48 nuclei day and night for a month. They observed three decay chains, which signalled the production and decay of an isotope of element 115 containing 173 neutrons, and one decay chain for an isotope of the element containing 172 neutrons. The isotopes lasted for tens of milliseconds before decaying through the emission of alpha particles to form the new element 113. This had a lifetime of 1.2 seconds before it decayed to known, lighter, elements.

Although the team is confident of its results, it agrees that the new elements will require independent confirmation before finally being accepted. The discoveries will be subject to close scrutiny, especially given the recent scandal over element 118. In 2002, the Lawrence Berkeley National Lab in the US sacked a physicist after it found that he had fabricated data purporting to show the existence of this element. Claims that the element had been discovered were subsequently withdrawn.



The idea that elements like 115 can exist in large physical quantities when lighter elements like 113, 112 ect have half lives measured in single seconds is patently ridiculous and i suggest you do some book learning before posting here again. http://forums.ubi.com/groupee_common/emoticons/icon_smile.gif

TAGERT.
12-14-2004, 10:59 PM
Hmmmm 0g is like 1000g only if Im falling.. Yes.. it all makes sense now.. But why am I holding this paper plate when it should be floating in air?
http://mitglied.lycos.de/Tyconderoga/qetlop0201/fotos/fascinating.jpg

malkuth
12-15-2004, 06:20 AM
No, the goverments can't keep anything secret. Exspecially in todays world.

So keeping this a secret for 60 years is totally impossible. Not including the fact that if it existed during the cold war, we would know of it by now. And if the govement had the secrets then they would of used it during the cold war and we would have planes today.

Airmail109
12-15-2004, 06:29 AM
well apparently the B2 stealth bomber uses anti-gravity to make up for its low powered engines (16000lbs of thrust)

gates123
12-15-2004, 09:31 AM
December 22, 1944: The pilot of the Allied plane was nervous. He was at 10,000 feet, over enemy territory. Somewhere hidden in the black sky there was sure to be German fighter aircraft. He scanned the darkness looking for trouble. Suddenly he saw two large, orange glowing balls approaching him. His radio operator saw them too. They didn't look like enemy fighters, but neither did they look like anything he'd ever seen.

The balls suddenly leveled off and started following the plane. The pilot decided to try and lose them with evasive maneuvers. He put his plane into a steep dive. The objects immediately followed. Next he tried a sharply banked turn. The objects stayed with him. For several more minutes the pilot used his best tricks to lose his pursuers and failed. When he was about to give up suddenly the objects were gone, disappearing suddenly into the night. During he whole incident not a shot was fired.

Another encounter was described by Major William D. Leet:

"My B-17 crew and I were kept company by a 'foo-fighter,' a small disc, all the way from Klagenfurt Austria, to the Adriatic Sea. This occurred on a 'lone wolf' mission at night, as I recall, in December 1944..." Major Leet goes on to note that the intelligence officer that debriefed him and his crew "stated that it was a new German fighter, but could not explain why it did not fire at us, or if it was reporting our heading, altitude and airspeed, why we did not receive anti-aircraft fire."


August 12,1942
Tulagi, Solomon Islands

Sergeant Stephen J. Brickner of the 1st Paratroop Brigade, 1st Marine Division, U.S. Marine Corps, reported that air raid sirens went off, and he observed over 150 objects fly over in straight lines of 10 or 12 objects, one behind the other. No wings or tails were visible to Sergeant Brickner, and the objects seemed to "wobble" slightly as they flew over at a speed that was "a little faster than Jap planes." Sergeant Brickner said that their appearance was that of highly polished silver that shimmered brightly in the sun. He said, "All in all, it was the most awe-inspiring and yet frightening spectacle I have seen in my life."

__________________________________________________ _____


The fact still remains that allied bomber crews saw metalic disks and balls (called foo fighters) making extreme manuavers out side their windshields towards that latter part of the war. They were also seen in the PTO. Most likely why the starter of this thread ask the questions that he did concerning german anti-gravity machines. Sure its easy to say that these crews were under fire and don't know what they were talking about but if you ask they same crew today how was it like to get hit by those MG 151's you would listen intensly on what they had to say. So if most of you think that the germans DID NOT have the means nor technology to operate these "foo fighters" then please by all means come up with a rational and scientific explanation on what these craft were and who operated them?

Chuck_Older
12-15-2004, 09:56 AM
Pffft. Physics. Way too many facts. I heard that twin sisters simultaneously gave birth to twins today. No word on who the Father(s) is(are).

Gato__Loco
12-15-2004, 11:05 AM
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><font size="-1">quote:</font><HR> The fact still remains that allied bomber crews saw metalic disks and balls... <HR></BLOCKQUOTE>

Sure, sure. People say they have seen UFO's, been abducted by aliens, seen monsters in Loch Ness, talked with dead relatives, etc.etc. The fact that a people say something does not make it real!!

WoodShaver3
12-15-2004, 11:15 AM
maybe this is what they saw:

http://xfacts.com/old/

gates123
12-15-2004, 11:48 AM
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><font size="-1">quote:</font><HR>Originally posted by Gato__Loco:
Sure, sure. People say they have seen UFO's, been abducted by aliens, seen monsters in Loch Ness, talked with dead relatives, etc.etc. The fact that a people say something does not make it real!! <HR></BLOCKQUOTE>


Again its a cop out to say that these guys weren't seeing these objects and to turn this into something paranormal like dead relatives and loch ness monsters is just flat out naive. This was war and intelligence was everything. Why would bombers crews all over the ETO and even PTO report such instances if they werent true. Remember this was during ww2 before the term flying saucer and UFO were even coined. It can't be compared to what people "claim" today. Either you don't have an explanation for what these pilots saw or your in denial and can't accept that what they saw might be in fact, what they saw. No one denied pilot reports of the new german fighters (FW-190's), what makes this any different.?


'As early as 1943 the British had set up a small organisation to gather information on these objects. It was under the direction of Lieutenant General Massey, and it had been inspired to some extent by the reports of a spy who was in reality a double agent, working under the direction of the Mayor of Cologne. He had confirmed that the Foo Fighters were not German devices but that the Germans thought they were Allied ranging instruments, which of course the British knew they were not.'

Chuck_Older
12-15-2004, 02:44 PM
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><font size="-1">quote:</font><HR>Originally posted by gates123:
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><font size="-1">quote:</font><HR>Originally posted by Gato__Loco:
Sure, sure. People say they have seen UFO's, been abducted by aliens, seen monsters in Loch Ness, talked with dead relatives, etc.etc. The fact that a people say something does not make it real!! <HR></BLOCKQUOTE>


Again its a cop out to say that these guys weren't seeing these objects and to turn this into something paranormal like dead relatives and loch ness monsters is just flat out naive. This was war and intelligence was everything. Why would bombers crews all over the ETO and even PTO report such instances if they werent true. Remember this was during ww2 before the term flying saucer and UFO were even coined. It can't be compared to what people "claim" today. Either you don't have an explanation for what these pilots saw or your in denial and can't accept that what they saw might be in fact, what they saw. No one denied pilot reports of the new german fighters (FW-190's), what makes this any different.?


_'As early as 1943 the British had set up a small organisation to gather information on these objects. It was under the direction of Lieutenant General Massey, and it had been inspired to some extent by the reports of a spy who was in reality a double agent, working under the direction of the Mayor of Cologne. He had confirmed that the Foo Fighters were not German devices but that the Germans thought they were Allied ranging instruments, which of course the British knew they were not.' _ <HR></BLOCKQUOTE>

OK, I'll field this one if I may.

Something may have been going on that was out of the ordinary. It is very arrogant and shortsighted for any human to say that we know everything, and are the only intelligent life in the Universe.

that said, aircrew were not the most reliable of eyewitnesses. Actually, in some law enforcement circles, I've heard of the saying "there's nothing worse than an eyewitness", because people will always want to believe the eyewitness.

Consider this: there are many instances of pilot eyeball malfunction in WWII. Look at all the threads about over-exaggerated kill claims in combat that you'll find here.

Often two wingmen in the same battle would see different things, or remember them differently.. Who shot down what? Was that an aircraft carrier? A Cruiser? Some pilots landed at the enemy's airfeild by mistake!

Eyewitness accounts need to be taken at face value. In this case, they saw something. To them it looked like a ball, or a disc, to another it may have looked like an airplane or an electrical display.

Humans are fallible, we get fooled all the time by our own senses. We know that and experience it all the time ourselves. What was that noise? Did I see something move? Am I alone in here? And our imagination can be quite powerful. US POWs in the Phillipines were lined up next to a mass grave, for example. The Japanese played a joke on them, and fired blanks. All the men tumbled into the grave pit. Some had to be revived by their fellow prisoners. Imagination is very powerful.

They may have seen UFOs, they may not have, but the mundane answer is usally the right one. UFOs can indeed exist. i just can't say- there's no proof yet that convinces me other than the fact that to me, it's impossible that we are alone in the Universe. But having no proof of that, I can't really make a convincing argument http://forums.ubi.com/groupee_common/emoticons/icon_biggrin.gif

DuxCorvan
12-15-2004, 04:48 PM
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><font size="-1">quote:</font><HR>Originally posted by Chuck_Older:
I heard that twin sisters simultaneously gave birth to twins today. No word on who the Father(s) is(are). <HR></BLOCKQUOTE>

http://forums.ubi.com/groupee_common/emoticons/icon_wink.gif

Air_Hog
12-15-2004, 06:25 PM
Well some, and I mean some of the glowing balls of light could be attributed to "Ball Lightening." It has been proven to exist. Particles of super heated and ionized carbon spinning. They were following the fighters to find a ground and discharge.

A.H.