Mike Monett wrote: > Marshall Dudley <mdud...@king-cart.com> wrote: > > > Mike Monett wrote: > > >> You are kidding. NASA is now funding projects to study > >> antigravity formed above a rotating disk, and ion lifters which > >> have been analyzed and proven to be unscalable. Complete waste of > >> money. > > >> They should use it to make more robotic satellites, and more > >> visible and UV telescopes to replace Hubble. > > > Why is it a complete waste of money? The antigravity effect above > > a rotating disk is a well established phenomonen despite no one > > having a theory as to why it occurs yet. That was confirmed at Oak > > Ridge National Lab several years ago to my personally by one of > > their scientists. You won't see many papers on it though because > > researchers tend to not publish papers on experiments who's effect > > they cannot explain, plus there is a big clamp on publishing this > > type of thing anyway for "National Security" reasons.. The common > > UFO apprears to be a combination of a rotating disk and high > > voltage, which definitely is capabile of antigravity. When you > > know there is a result, why not explore all the possible means you > > can to get there? > > > Marshall > > Marshall, the evidence for antigravity as a combination of a > rotating disk and high voltage is debatable. There are plenty of > papers available, but no one takes it seriously as a means for space > travel. It is unscalable.
Since they as yet have no theory as to how it works, how can they have a proof that it is unscalable? They use to think that the casimir effect was unscalable to anything macroscopic as well, but that of course have been proven wrong. They also thought transistors were unscalable when they were frist invented, yet now they have managed to scale them to control kilowatts and kiloamps. > > > Often, many signals you can obtain from a measurement are buried in > noise. Recovering signals from noise has been my specialty for over > 40 years, and I have a number of patents, papers, and invention > disclosures on the subject. For example, see the "Binary Sampler" at > the bottom of the page. > The changes in the gravity above the disks typically run from 3% to 10% or so with the experiments that were run at Oak Ride Labs. A 100 kilogram weight can be measured easily to one gram or less, or to better than 1/100,000 of it's weight. Thus this is hardly in the noise. The changes are over 1,000 times the noise of precise force measuring devices. If balances are used, the measurements can easily be made for forces of one part in 100 million, so the changes are over a million times the noise. > > When an effect is beneath the noise level, very minor effects can > appear to be related to the effect you are looking for. Many > researchers have convinced themselves that an experiment yielded > positive results, when nobody else could duplicate them. > I agree, but we are not talking about measurements anywhere near the noise. We are talking about measurements that are easy to make with signal to noise ratios of from 1000 to over 1,000,000.. > > When an effect is close to the limits of detection, any thought of > scaling it to useful levels is out of the question. For example, > measurements of the Casimir effect eluded scientists for decades, > until recent advances in technology finally confirmed it. But it > will never be possible to scale it to the level that would lift > space vehicles: > > http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Casimir_effect How would it be used to lift spcaecraft, it only works at dimensions close to the size of an atom? But as it turns out the casimir effect IS easy to measure, you just have to scale it so you have a force in the range of grams or more.. Gecko feet provide a van der Waals adhesion which is sufficient to hold up a gecko, and thus is very easy to measure. A force sufficient to hold up full sized lizard is easy to measure (and in fact research has shown that all the setae on a gecho's foot could support 200 to 300 pounds), which proves that despite your claim, it is scalable to something useful, it just took a lizard to figure out how to do it instead of a scientist: It hardly takes an advance in technology to measure it, I can measure it using a gecko and a cheap fishing scale. http://www.pnas.org/cgi/content/full/99/19/12252 http://www.memagazine.org/backissues/aug00/features/sticky/sticky.html "Two years ago, the Gecko Team measured the force of a single seta from the foot of a Tokay gecko (Gekko gecko). The team concluded that one hair could hold up an ant, and that all of a gecko's setae - if used simultaneously - could support the weight of an NFL linebacker." www.sarahgoforth.com/gecko.pdf > > > Another example: gravitational waves have yet to be detected, > despite many decades of attempts and much money spent in building > new systems. We even know how far away a system is from the > detection threshold, yet the systems are still being built. The > reason is it gives scientists ways to test new technology, much the > same reasons that fusion plants are built even though we know they > will never produce energy for sale. They advance the state of the > art. > Most attempts to measure gravity waves have used massive objects seperated at a distance, and attempted to measure a change in distance between them. They are only capable of measuring gravity waves with a wavelength approximately the distance between them. However since gravity travels infinitely fast (as opposed to the speed of light), most likely gravity waves travel at the same infinite speed, and thus the wavelength is infinite, making measurement of them by this means an absolute impossibility no matter how far apart the weights are. > > To answer your question on spending money to explore all the > possible means you can, NASA is severely constrained for money. The > Shuttle program has gutted the Space Science programs for decades. > Projects have been cancelled in order to support the Shuttle, and > the people dispersed to find ways to support their families and > mortgages as best they can. This is not the way to attract top > people. > I agree that the shuttle program is a waste of money. It SHOULD be scrapped for more economical and reliable solutions. Marshall
