Propulsion Question

Plasma and electricity in space. Failure of gravity-only cosmology. Exposing the myths of dark matter, dark energy, black holes, neutron stars, and other mathematical constructs. The electric model of stars. Predictions and confirmations of the electric comet.

Moderators: bboyer, MGmirkin

JHL
Posts: 158
Joined: Wed Dec 10, 2014 3:11 pm

Re: Propulsion Question

Unread post by JHL » Sat Nov 16, 2019 8:30 am

JP Michael wrote:If the Russians actually did lose a lot of personnel in their attempts for space, it does not surprise me that they never bothered to go to the moon because they already figured out it was an exercise in fatality, rather than one of insufficient funds, technology or rocketry prowess. And I would predict neither will China, India, European Union or any other space-capable world power of today will be sending humans to the moon for the same reasons the Russians knew in 1961. Space is fatal to biologicals and we (still) do not have the know-how to overcome that issue.
Nor do we have cause to be there, the attractive nationalism and scientific socialism of the thing for all political partisans notwithstanding. It's uninhabitable, sterile, toxic, lethal, the economies are imaginary, the distances insurmountably silly given the above, and there's nothing whatsoever to do there, wherever there is. At best it serves an abstract need to know, but even that - as the UE seems to point out - is steeped in myopia and special interest.

Which is why it'll be pursued anyway, our fascination with boondoggles, bogus economies, and lying to ourselves being what it is.

MaxGain
Posts: 23
Joined: Tue Jun 04, 2019 4:25 pm

Re: Propulsion Question

Unread post by MaxGain » Tue Nov 19, 2019 3:43 pm

Thanks for all the back and forth guys .
It's very interesting .

MaxGain
Posts: 23
Joined: Tue Jun 04, 2019 4:25 pm

Re: Propulsion Question

Unread post by MaxGain » Fri Dec 13, 2019 7:25 pm

Hi paladin17
I have another question for you .
It doesn't have anything to do with Propulsion .
Here it is . Why do some scientist think there are such things as gravitational waves ?
How would you counter their argument ?

User avatar
neilwilkes
Posts: 366
Joined: Sat Dec 06, 2008 4:30 am
Location: London, England
Contact:

Re: Propulsion Question

Unread post by neilwilkes » Tue Dec 17, 2019 2:54 am

MaxGain wrote:Can you give me your thoughts on so called anti gravity propulsion .
That is to say somehow pushing against gravity to move forward , Is it Science Fiction ?
Do we come back to having to find the fuel to generate the power needed to use so called anti gravity propulsion ?
Is gravity a strong enough force to be pushed against ?
The term "Anti-Gravity" is not only wildly inaccurate but will get you into a lot of heated arguments from folks who will not even get past the header - far, far better to talk about "gravity shielding".
The method for propulsion with this type of technology was possible in the 1980's, using only existing technology & well understood physics - nothing exotic or Sci-Fi was needed, only the application of a well understood principle in an admittedly unconventional manner - Dynamic Nuclear Orientation.
This was developed fully (including a verification experiment in 1984) by Dr Frederick Alzofon, and completely ignored at the time which was something he never understood the reason for, even though he was offered the funding to develop the technology with the condition that he signed all the rights over and may not even have been allowed to work on his own invention at a later date. Not surprisingly, perhaps, he refused - and that seemed to be that.

He presented a paper at the 1981 AIAA/SAE/ASME 17th Joint Propulsion Conference in Colorado Springs, which is one of the main papers he published (although absolutely not the only one) and I am not at all sure if I am allowed to post this paper openly here - I will if it is allowed, but if anyone is interested please get in touch via email or the PM system.
I would very much like to start a discussion about this man's work - his Son is publishing a lot of his dad's work to try & get the 1984 experiment verified independently - if this can be done then everything will change overnight. Dr Alzofon was a highly respected scientist, not prone to exaggeration or telling porkies, and if he said he did this then I consider that to be good enough for me - it is very difficult to justify that statement, but I am confident I can spot the bunco artists these days and Dr Alzofon is not one of these by any stretch of the imagination.

Where he got into serious difficulty was in stating he had modified Einstein's STR - the relativists went up in fits of hysterics over this. His response was "In exchange for a simple correction to the STR, I get unification of the fundamental forces, a solution to the wave/particle problem, elimination of infinities from field equations and quantum electrodynamics, and an operational definition of the gravitational force that yields engineering applications. Seems like a reasonable trade to me".
The correction is to one of the core assumptions of STR - distant clock synchronization - and I am not going to go into details right now as there is a little more to it than that and it will take time to prepare.

In summary for the moment, his work absolutely provides engineering applications and would work - now, today, with no exotic physics required.
You will never get a man to understand something his salary depends on him not understanding.

User avatar
paladin17
Posts: 175
Joined: Mon Jul 14, 2014 7:47 am
Location: Minsk, Belarus

Re: Propulsion Question

Unread post by paladin17 » Tue Dec 17, 2019 5:24 am

MaxGain wrote:Hi paladin17
I have another question for you .
It doesn't have anything to do with Propulsion .
Here it is . Why do some scientist think there are such things as gravitational waves ?
How would you counter their argument ?
The theory (general relativity) suggests that the gravitational (or any other) disturbance propagates with the speed of light. That's the idea.
If the speed was infinite, then probably it would be pointless to talk about the waves, though some analogous perturbations might still be detectable. (Roughly speaking, you accelerate half a galaxy in one direction, and the other half immediately "feels" it).
neilwilkes wrote: I would very much like to start a discussion about this man's work - his Son is publishing a lot of his dad's work to try & get the 1984 experiment verified independently - if this can be done then everything will change overnight.
Why not start a separate topic about it?

MaxGain
Posts: 23
Joined: Tue Jun 04, 2019 4:25 pm

Re: Propulsion Question

Unread post by MaxGain » Tue Dec 17, 2019 7:34 am

It seems to me that the type of waves they are talking about are like ocean waves .
If gravity transmits information across the universe wouldn't waves be the least efficient way.

User avatar
neilwilkes
Posts: 366
Joined: Sat Dec 06, 2008 4:30 am
Location: London, England
Contact:

Re: Propulsion Question

Unread post by neilwilkes » Wed Dec 18, 2019 2:30 am

paladin17 wrote:
MaxGain wrote:Hi paladin17
I have another question for you .
It doesn't have anything to do with Propulsion .
Here it is . Why do some scientist think there are such things as gravitational waves ?
How would you counter their argument ?
The theory (general relativity) suggests that the gravitational (or any other) disturbance propagates with the speed of light. That's the idea.
If the speed was infinite, then probably it would be pointless to talk about the waves, though some analogous perturbations might still be detectable. (Roughly speaking, you accelerate half a galaxy in one direction, and the other half immediately "feels" it).
Gravity Waves are still theoretical, and despite the claims made by the LIGO people none have actually been detected (the "discovery" announced was almost certainly either system noise (see https://www.newscientist.com/article/mg ... nal-waves/, where even a biased article which starts from the assumption that these Unicorns are real casts serious doubt on the alleged "discovery") or something else entirely (see https://www.holoscience.com/wp/gravitational-waves/, where the supplied photo of Einstein also shows that so-called Black Holes cannot exist either - at least in the form described by Mainstream Cosmology)
paladin17 wrote:
neilwilkes wrote: I would very much like to start a discussion about this man's work - his Son is publishing a lot of his dad's work to try & get the 1984 experiment verified independently - if this can be done then everything will change overnight.
Why not start a separate topic about it?
Good idea.
I have been meaning to do just that for a while now - it is a case of finding the time.
You will never get a man to understand something his salary depends on him not understanding.

MaxGain
Posts: 23
Joined: Tue Jun 04, 2019 4:25 pm

Re: Propulsion Question

Unread post by MaxGain » Thu Dec 19, 2019 4:46 pm

Thanks , I'll check out your links .

perpetual motion
Posts: 154
Joined: Mon Mar 24, 2008 9:04 pm

Re: Propulsion Question

Unread post by perpetual motion » Mon Dec 23, 2019 10:55 pm

Here's a small draft I uncovered a while ago, I will only mention this once.
I have not been into this moon stuff as I had to work for a living. This is really logical.

The vestibular system of humans has hairs in it which depend on a downward force and acceleration to work. The vestibular system gives us our bearings, so we know which was is up, left, right, down, as well as the force of our motion and the position of our body and its parts. This is how we know if our head is tilted, and how quickly we are moving. We cannot predict motion nor trajectory in environments with no, or different, downward forces acting, with accuracy, if at all. Everything acts together and one component of the vestibular system cannot be disrupted, without upsetting the rest. There needs to be a combination of both the otolithic and semicircular canal signals to determine simple head tilt. One relies on the down force. Further, the vestibular system works in conjunction with the bodies proprioception, which depends on perceptual constants such as the weight and speed of objects in the environment. The brain must combine the information from many senses and systems. The perception of self motion, motion, spatial orientation, oculomotor control, body control, are compromised, at best.In the supposed weightlessness of supposed space, the visceral function of the body is also compromised. Perceptual constancy is also gone.
The astronauts would have been quite physically ill.
There is no training, except in the vomit comet, for a matter of a minute, that can get simulate such an environment. One cannot function in an environment for which the human body is not designed. They must wear supposed pressurized suits, because they would die in supposed very very low pressure without air to breathe. But there is no suit in which to put the ear so that it can function in this hostile non-earth like environment, with no direction down.
The intensity of the light on the moon would have been too intense for the astronauts to be on it, if there were any possibility that they could have got there. According to the inverse square law of light propagation, its intensity would be extreme. The intensity of sunlight is reduced dramatically by our atmosphere. There is no lunar atmosphere to mitigate just the lumens, regardless of all the other radiation, such a electromagnetic radiation, which we do not get where we live here on earth.

User avatar
nick c
Moderator
Posts: 2483
Joined: Sun Mar 16, 2008 8:12 pm
Location: connecticut

Re: Propulsion Question

Unread post by nick c » Tue Dec 24, 2019 8:51 am

Perpetual Motion,
The vestibular system of humans has hairs in it which depend on a downward force and acceleration to work. The vestibular system gives us our bearings, so we know which was is up, left, right, down, as well as the force of our motion and the position of our body and its parts. This is how we know if our head is tilted, and how quickly we are moving. We cannot predict motion nor trajectory in environments with no, or different, downward forces acting, with accuracy, if at all. Everything acts together and one component of the vestibular system cannot be disrupted, without upsetting the rest. There needs to be a combination of both the otolithic and semicircular canal signals to determine simple head tilt. One relies on the down force. Further, the vestibular system works in conjunction with the bodies proprioception, which depends on perceptual constants such as the weight and speed of objects in the environment. The brain must combine the information from many senses and systems. The perception of self motion, motion, spatial orientation, oculomotor control, body control, are compromised, at best.In the supposed weightlessness of supposed space, the visceral function of the body is also compromised. Perceptual constancy is also gone.
The astronauts would have been quite physically ill.
There is no training, except in the vomit comet, for a matter of a minute, that can get simulate such an environment. One cannot function in an environment for which the human body is not designed. They must wear supposed pressurized suits, because they would die in supposed very very low pressure without air to breathe. But there is no suit in which to put the ear so that it can function in this hostile non-earth like environment, with no direction down.
The intensity of the light on the moon would have been too intense for the astronauts to be on it, if there were any possibility that they could have got there. According to the inverse square law of light propagation, its intensity would be extreme. The intensity of sunlight is reduced dramatically by our atmosphere. There is no lunar atmosphere to mitigate just the lumens, regardless of all the other radiation, such a electromagnetic radiation, which we do not get where we live here on earth.
Obviously you are missing something since astronauts have gone to and landed on the Moon, and regularly spend extended periods of time in the weightless environment of space.

User avatar
neilwilkes
Posts: 366
Joined: Sat Dec 06, 2008 4:30 am
Location: London, England
Contact:

Re: Propulsion Question

Unread post by neilwilkes » Sat Dec 28, 2019 4:23 am

nick c wrote:
Tue Dec 24, 2019 8:51 am
Perpetual Motion,
The vestibular system of humans has hairs in it which depend on a downward force and acceleration to work. The vestibular system gives us our bearings, so we know which was is up, left, right, down, as well as the force of our motion and the position of our body and its parts. This is how we know if our head is tilted, and how quickly we are moving. We cannot predict motion nor trajectory in environments with no, or different, downward forces acting, with accuracy, if at all. Everything acts together and one component of the vestibular system cannot be disrupted, without upsetting the rest. There needs to be a combination of both the otolithic and semicircular canal signals to determine simple head tilt. One relies on the down force. Further, the vestibular system works in conjunction with the bodies proprioception, which depends on perceptual constants such as the weight and speed of objects in the environment. The brain must combine the information from many senses and systems. The perception of self motion, motion, spatial orientation, oculomotor control, body control, are compromised, at best.In the supposed weightlessness of supposed space, the visceral function of the body is also compromised. Perceptual constancy is also gone.
The astronauts would have been quite physically ill.
There is no training, except in the vomit comet, for a matter of a minute, that can get simulate such an environment. One cannot function in an environment for which the human body is not designed. They must wear supposed pressurized suits, because they would die in supposed very very low pressure without air to breathe. But there is no suit in which to put the ear so that it can function in this hostile non-earth like environment, with no direction down.
The intensity of the light on the moon would have been too intense for the astronauts to be on it, if there were any possibility that they could have got there. According to the inverse square law of light propagation, its intensity would be extreme. The intensity of sunlight is reduced dramatically by our atmosphere. There is no lunar atmosphere to mitigate just the lumens, regardless of all the other radiation, such a electromagnetic radiation, which we do not get where we live here on earth.
Obviously you are missing something since astronauts have gone to and landed on the Moon, and regularly spend extended periods of time in the weightless environment of space.
Indeed - and what he has missed is that there is a gravity field on The Moon, just a weaker one - but it is still there.
Also, we know for sure that people have spent extended time in Orbit - which is also subject to a gravity field (the only reason they stay up in orbit is because of the speed of the station in orbit, but the gravity field is still absolutely present.

I get so fed up with these ridiculous statements that we never went to the moon. Tosh & Nonsense, not to mention extremely rude to those who went knowing full well they had at best a 50/50 chance of getting back again.
You will never get a man to understand something his salary depends on him not understanding.

User avatar
JP Michael
Posts: 97
Joined: Sat Oct 26, 2019 9:19 pm

Re: Propulsion Question

Unread post by JP Michael » Sat Dec 28, 2019 8:35 pm

neilwilkes wrote:I get so fed up with these ridiculous statements that we never went to the moon. Tosh & Nonsense, not to mention extremely rude to those who went knowing full well they had at best a 50/50 chance of getting back again.
So are you saying, with Virgil Grissom, RIP, that they were indeed flying lemon rockets? Yet every moon landing, excepting Apollo 13, was a resounding success! Wow, how did that happen!! Surely with 50/50 chances there should have been more than one accident in six attempts? Right? Oh that's right. They were so lucky, the astronauts never even suffered a second of radiation exposure after traversing the van Allen belts, twice, and that during a solar maximum! That 0.7mm aluminium shielding must be something special! They should be rolling that stuff out on nuclear reactors everywhere! Poor Virgil! If only he had demonstrated more uncritical faith in the Organisation! Who would have known that a qualified aeronautical engineer like Grissom was horrendously wrong about NASA's Apollo rocket designs. They flew perfectly fine after all! What a shame Grissom perished suddenly after a ground-based, 100% oxygen training capsule suddenly erupted in flame. What were the chances of that happening to NASA's most outspoken Apollo program critic?! But nevermind. Even Apollo 13's crew returned safe and well after a mid-flight mishap! Dear oh dear oh dear, poor Grissom! Such lack of faith!

If you ever choose to set aside your patriotism for an hour or two, however, you will find that the evidence that the moon landings were the most successful piece of Earth-bound cinematography ever produced is rather significant. Countless authors have only poured lifetimes into dispelling the patriotic euphoria of Nixon's Vietnam war crimes coverup propaganda machine, but don't let that get in the way of NASA's gospel truth! Can't really blame you for having little inclination to delve into documentation outlining that the American Government is the world's No. 1. liar, but I think most of the rest of the world already knows that.

Locked

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: Bing [Bot] and 14 guests