Log In
Register
Home
Topic RSS
2:31 pm
June 5, 2012
Offline
A FTL Drive system is, in my opinion, very unacheivable at the moment because classical science tells us that an incredable amount of energy is required to accelerate an amount of mass to the speed of light. If I remember correctly, the amount of force required to propel an object is a function of the objects velocity and the speed of light. When we use mathmatics to assist us in physics hear on earth we dont take into account the fact that most relavent universal units, such as: Force, mass, energy, …. , are dependent on the velocity at any instant. For example:
we all know that the kinetic energy of a mass in motion is (1/2)*m*v^2 ……..
but in reality it is not…. because we deal with relatively low velocities hear on earth we exclude the series of terms that accually exsist after (1/2)*m*v^2 ……..
they are so miniscule that we don't bother to include them in the known equation…. it is on the order of (velocity of object)^2/(speed of light)^2 ……..
so in most cases it is an addition that amounts to a very small number but at high speeds it would not.
I tried to read as much as I could of Thomas' posts but they are incredably long. I would really like to see some prints of his proposels. I might be able to help in examining and providing feedback.
I don't beleive that anyone at the moment, except for select governements, have the resources to experiment with close to light speed engines. And if you are somehow doing it, your electric bill must be through the roof. And your power company must hate you for monopolizing all its power…….
There is a blog spacepropulsion.blogspot.com that explains all types of space propulsion engines and ahs other relavent material.
……A drive that would be able to efficently transport a ship over long distances would have to be an unconventional drive. We are all used to associating space ships with an engine that spits out some sort of mass in order to aquire propulsion, but an engine that was able to induce a warp to bend space would be more in the realm of possibilty.
3:10 pm
May 17, 2012
Offline
So basically you go around taking apart smoke detectors, you must also know the health risks, exposing yourself to low level alpha and gamma radiation.
don't be another David Hahn.
We are interested in everyone's IDEAS that have even an ounce of Merritt to them, not purported and non existent pattens and technology
.
EDIT (by pattens I mean made up ones1, by technology I mean your star ship2)
1Universal pattens don't exist, even above seven miles.
2it has no proof of existing
6:10 am
June 2, 2012
Offline
Do you speak for everyone? And why would you not be interested only because it has no proof of existence, when there is a possibility of existence?
3:36 pm
May 17, 2012
Offline
because he claims to have a functional FTL and star ship in his back yard, as well as claiming many other things on many other sites and always refusing to give proof and linking to non existent documents.
So yea Sure it is possible it "exists" however not in least probable. As for his credentials, even the Nixon library cant find any record of this guy or any variation of his name having ever received a presidential commendation ever, i asked. So any claims he makes are past suspect and into the realm of him needing a rubber room if he doesn't already have one in his "star ship" with his star ship captains "license no 1." and all his "Universal pattens" that only exist above 7miles hanging on the door.
5:02 pm
May 19, 2012
Offline
Arcbird said
Do you speak for everyone? And why would you not be interested only because it has no proof of existence, when there is a possibility of existence?
The problem is, as the idea is described, there is very little possibility of existence.
-
As Bud states, Thomas claims to have already built his idea and proved that it works.
All good, but without any evidence of this, the claims are meaningless.
5:44 am
May 18, 2012
Offline
….quote– from my reply to 100YSS.org..call for papers….abstract less than 250 words
—————————————————————-
Thomas Hulon Jackson
Starship Laboratories Est. 1962
9821 S.E.43rd
Oklahoma City, Oklahoma 73150
cell 1 -405-795-0316, e-mail mailto:thjackson@cox.net … …hy.html
I have no problem addressing him respectfully as "Doctor" as he obviously has the the required semester hours and thesis requirement completed by compiling other's prior research and he has meet the disseratation requirement demonstrating outstanding performance in the field by advancing the field with his independent work in the field of Aerospace Technology and he does have the military security clearance so keeps much secret though the clearance is inactive……………. Anyway, USAF people seem to have strange ideas about what counts as a doctorate degree…..end quote
8:26 am
May 18, 2012
Offline
Uploaded with ImageShack.us
Star Ship Laboratories Computer Lab.jpg
To view full size right click… save as… open location….click.. zoom in to read size 8 1/2 inches by 11 inches..unreadable any smaller….to print set all margins to zero…. print in black.
4:33 am
May 18, 2012
Offline
Arcbird said
Do you speak for everyone? And why would you not be interested only because it has no proof of existence, when there is a possibility of existence?See FAQ #17 Answer #17
FAQ Ion Propulsion Engines FTL ..Thread Page 1 to 5
FAQ # 1..Thomas Hullon Jackson, since you're some type of expert on FTL travel, would you be able to throw out an estimated length of time it would take to create an FTL drive if it were funded? Thanks
Answer..#1..It took me a little under two years to make a FTL drive and I funded it myself from petty cash drawer. I do all my working prototypes in miniature as it saves funds since all machines are expandable or reducible in size depending on how big or small we can make the parts.
FAQ # 2..And as far as FTL in the foreseeable future, didn't CERNs hadron collider just back up Einstein showing that the data on FTL neutrinos was in error due to the timing of their Fiber Optic network?
Answer..#2..No. Particle accelerators are poor tools for understanding the atom sez Einstein. I agree..Smashing atoms harder and harder just makes smaller and smaller pieces DUH? . Giving each a name and "discovering each next one " as credit: fame and fortune; follows then more funding is needed and given to build a bigger hammer to make more scientists famous . That makes a "Cash Cow" to be milked for all it is worth. We killed the Cow in Texas as it was poor science. Some dorks cloned it elsewhere.
A particle accelerator cannot send a particle beyond light speed as it provides the accelerating energy from a base frame at rest to propel a mass whose mass tends towards infinity as its velocity approaches light speed.
To get to FTL in another type machine provide the energy from an inertial or moving frame of reference. Switch to rockets and from conservation of momentum law the momentum of the exaust = momentum of the rocket expressed as MrVr=MeVe with M as mass and V as velocity with subscripts e for exhaust and r for rocket. Vr=MeVe/Mr to get Vr greater than light speed send send most of the rockets mass out the backside just under light speed. In atomic rockets converting mass to energy as Vr tends towards light speed the relativistic mass being converted to energy tends towards infinity…Presto… Warp Drive now.
FAQ # 3..If one cannot convince others, skeptics or not, that their idea is sound, then how do you except to be taken seriously?
Answer..#3.."Not My Job" to convince others skeptic or not. My job is to be a serious scientist using scientific methods. Convincing skeptics is no part of any of my methods. I save a lot of time and money that way, better spent on doing the work of science.
FAQ # 4..And lastly, why shame on me? What have I done, aside from question your idea and methods?
Answer..#4..Paraphrasing You stated that you were suspicious of any one claiming to be correct 99.9% when I stated I am Doctor Thomas Hulon Jackson Common Law Doctorates Math, Physics, Computer Science and General Education Your Academic Superior Na Na Na Na Na
Have you no shame?
FAQ # 5..Isn't this forum suppose to be about near term ideas not ones 20-30 years down the road?
Answer..#5..No This is the FTL thread only for research and development of light speed and beyond machines now. It is not for arguing whither one can or cannot exceed light speed. If you do not believe in FTL then trolling this thread will get you flamed. You will find no food here. I do not feed the trolls. PROVE no FTL Now or get out of this thread. If you cannot stand the heat get out of the kitchen.
FAQ # 6..do you have a patent Sir?
Answer..#6..Yes. Each patent application is abandoned by law when next higher level of property protection is sought and number issued. US patent application was abandoned when international patent application PCT number was issued (13 countries under the Patent Cooperation Treaty(PCT). As my invention operates in deep space far beyond the 12 mile high legal jurisdiction on all nations patent laws, I abandoned the PCT application when I was required to extend National, International and Maritime Patent law covering acts of Piracy, Patents, Property and Human rights on the high seas to deep space. I wrote Universal Patent Law with tooth and claw issuing Universal Patent Number 1 for Starship.and issued Starship Operators license number 1 Star Ship Commander.
FAQ # 7..Thomas I am not trying to be skeptical here but if your idea really works then why hasn't the government or any major aerospace type organizations latched onto your idea or given it funding?
Answer..#7..I fund it myself. Should others want to make, use or operate my invention then they are encouraged to apply to me for license and my permission for a nominal fee of $10.00. I do not sell my starships for they are for lease only. I decide who makes uses and operates my invention.
FAQ # 8..I read about it on the "Warp Drive When?"
Answer..#8..Obsolete NASA site proving Chemical rockets and Rube Goldberg type nuclear rockets cannot get to warp speed. Rube Goldberg inventions worked but so inefficient they could not be reduced to practice(made practical). At 2.8 quadrillion dollars per ounce antimatter stays Rube Godbergish and not reducible to practice.
FAQ # 9..Thomas have you had any other scientists verify your claims that your design is actually possible?
Answer..#9..What part of "my invention is made, working and reduced to practice" did you not understand. The proof of principle test was performed by Hypertherm in 1962 with their water injected plasma torch invention. Temperatures measured 9 times the surface temperature of the sun. The test bed exhaust velocity measured recently at 62% light speed before being sent to the liquid nozzle. There its exhaust beam diameter was compressed increasing calculated to very near light speed and its temperature increased measured by color to hotter than a blue white star.
FAQ # 10..In a on topic reaction. If you make the assumption that FTL is indeed possible, wouldn't any image we get from an object passing by at FTL speed, appear to be moving away from us and backward (assuming we know what front and back are)? No matter whether it approaches (approached us) or is leaving us.
Answer..#10… light has to hit your retina to be seen by brain. Light from or reflected from a object traveling away from you at light speed or more simply does not reach eyes to be seen… ever. Do not over think this. It is Newtons relative velocity physics.
FAQ # 11..Don't suppose I can select a claim as well?
Answer..#11..Go for it, though most just ask to see my patent application to learn how to make my invention.
FAQ # 12.. I find it interesting that this idea keeps the temperature of the plasma below the melting point of the radioactive metals and yet be in the range of a blue white star, which has a surface temperature of 10,000K to 28,000K. Both values are about twice that of a G-class star like the sun. Or do you mean something else?
Answer..#12..See FAQ 2 and FAQ 9 and David Haun's neutron gun.. Put radioctive metal in lead pipe closed at one end. What comes out open end is exhaust for my simplest rocket. – FAQ # 13..Also, I find it interesting that your device, as described, can achieve FLT speeds, when nuclear pulse propulsion methods, like Project Orion, develop plasma temperature far above of the value you indicate, and yet only manage to achieve about 14% of light speed.
Answer..#13..There is no known upper limit to the temperature of my rocket engine. Theodore Taylor's Orion was another Rube Goldberg device trying to make a rocket out of bomb which is a completely different device. His rockets notorious inefficiency is obvious. You are not going to get to very fast when your engine is turned of most the time for the pusher plate to cool down. This duty cycle = time on over time off is a tiny fraction. In addition as the exhaust pattern is a semi-omni shape vector analysis gives exhaust momentum of 1/2 opposite the rocket and the other half of the exhaust vector is perpendicular to the direction of the rocket. Multiplying the energy produced by converting mass to energy times the duty cycle and `1/2 the exhaust momentum and you get a 0.000000001 percent efficient rocket at best not even counting the shock absorber mass. Devide the 14% light spped value you estimate by that efficiency percent and you get an idea just how fast a real atomic rocket goes. – FAQ # 14,,You also don't mention how you work around the problems of breaking the light speed barrier, as described here: http://www.nasa.gov/centers/gl…..pstat.html
Answer..#14..There is no light speed barrier for my rocket to get around. Dr. Paul Karl Hoiland…. quote …. "When Einstein wrote down his postulates for special relativity he did not include the statement that you cannot travel faster than light. There is a misconception that it is possible to derive it as a consequence of the postulates he did give. Incidentally, it was Henri Poincare who said "Perhaps we must construct a new mechanics, … in which the speed of light would become an impassable limit." That was in an address to the International Congress of Arts and Science in 1904 before Einstein announced special relativity in 1905." end quote…. There is zero evidence such a mechanics was ever constructed
FAQ # 15..How many other scientists can verify your claims and how many scientists exactly do you work with?
Answer..#15..Part one… I do not care. Part two…My uncle built atomic bombs for the Air Force in 1955 and taught me how to build them at age 6. I Built my first miniature atomic bomb at age ten. Before I could drill two concentric holes in the iron casing and insert the constructed gun assembly arm it and screw in the containment plug, I was caught by my teacher with the blueprints at my desk and taken to the prinipal's office. As he did not take me or atomic bombs seriously enough, (I did not care which) I took the constructed gun subassembly hid in bushes near dusk and shot a hole in his office window with the guns radium bullet after all had gone home.
Exactly how many scientists I have worked with including those I meet on the Internet. I do not know exactly must be multitudes by now.
FAQ # 16..In a bio I found elsewhere it says your from Oklahoma, and if your engine really is as hot as an type O star like Rigel, and they burn at a max of 30k kelvin(half million degrees F), then wouldn't you have singed the hair on my head(or burnt me to a crisp) here Missouri?
Answer..#16..I am from Tucumcari New Mexico the Land of Enchantment. Moved to Oklahoma in 1966 and have been disenchanted ever since.
I like your enterprising dog picture and no animal or human has ever been harmed in my lab work so your safe ……;for now.
FAQ # 17..Do you speak for everyone? And why would you not be interested only because it has no proof of existence, when there is a possibility of existence?
Answer..#17..Not question for me but better stated I speak only for myself as "Absence of evidence is not evidence of absence"
FAQ # 18..Thinking about a career in theoretical physics?
Answer..#18..I dabble a bit in theory but have no desire to be a prophet wannabe predicting the future events. I will stick to applied physics longing for a time when false prophets and theorists found wrong were thrown from cliffs. I have a dark side..
FAQ # 19.. would ask God if I could, "Which star system is closest to us that has intelligent life?"
Answer..#19..Were I God I would say "It does not matter. you can get to anywhere in my universe in 4 years ship time. What matters is will you go or be left behind.
FAQ # 20 Thoughts of FTL are interesting, but I would suggest that we shelve the idea for near term practical applications, unless if you know of a method for testing out a specific theory (how would one approach doing the FTL research?)
Answer..#20..Bad suggestion…hmm? I would moderate this group and toss out any that belive in no FTL. I would toss those out just chatting and not doing research and development. Development is king not research. Make more FAQ and invite more questions.
4:24 am
May 18, 2012
Offline
The Relativistic Rocket [Originally posted as the Java applet, which that wouldn't load]
Copy paste blue field to your work space like so:
Trip length: 4.25 light years.
Acceleration: 1.0 g.
Time on earth: 5.8780560467144 years.
Time Trip length: 4.25 light years. Acceleration: 1.0 g. Time on earth: 5.8780560467144 years. Time on ship: 3.544401860293398 years.on ship: 3.544401860293398 years.
4:34 am
May 20, 2012
Offline
@THJ
Thanks for the link. The link within contains a rather interesting bit of information within.
5:10 am
May 18, 2012
Offline
Your welcome Nuclearman. My edit button on previous post was disabled after your edit of it so pardon the garbled text above.
Using Einstein's equations placed in a Java Calculator http://spot.colorado.edu/~obri…..oyage.html
For a one way trip to the the closest star at a constant 1g wrt earth to mid trip point and decelerating at 1 g the remainder of
the journey.
Trip length: 4.25 light years (ly)
Acceleration: 1.0 g wrt earth
Time on earth: 5.8780560467144 years.
Time on ship: 3.544401860293398 years
As Velocity = distance traveled/ time traveled
Velocity average wrt ship = 4.25 ly/3.5 year = 1.2 C = warp speed 1.2 wrt ship
Velocity average wrt earth = .732 C
In the case of a 1 g acceleration measured wrt the ship so that the crew "feels" a constant artifical gravity field of 1 g the entire
trip the rocket man returns to earth to find his left behind evil twin his same age having warped both space and time to obtain
warp speed 1.2 wrt earth.
For a one way trip to the edge of the observable universe measuring a constant 1g wrt earth to midpoint and decelerating at 1
g the remainder of the journey.
Trip length: 1.7E10 light years.
Acceleration: 1.0 g.
Time on earth: 1.7004884192539843E10 years.
Time on ship: 45.71651222563561 years.
Velocity average with respect to (wrt) earth =
17E10 light years /1.7004884192539843 years =
.99971277707718905089055716347216 C
Velocity average wrt ship
1.7E10 light years/45.71651222563561 =
371856888.C
1 g acceleration wrt earth wrt earth Velocity = .99971277707718905089055716347216 C
Velocity average wrt ship = warp speed 371856888.7
of case one (1 g wrt earth).
In case two (1 g wrt ship)
This is also the velocity wrt earth when measuring the constant 1 g wrt ship.
Therefore, the rocket man returns to earth 90 years later to find his left behind evil twin his same age instead of ancient bones
having warped both space and time to obtain:
warp speed 371856888.7 wrt earth.
If Christ was resurrected after death and did ascended to the heavens on a 1 g rocket ship to visit his father at a 1000 ly
distant star he could return today Obeying Einstein's laws some 27 years older and he might be ticked off so behave as:
Trip length: 1000.0 light years.
Acceleration: 1.0 g.
Time on earth: 1002.2235407106124 years.
Time on ship: 13.453214568643295 years.
For the energy requirements and atomic rocket technology
for say a minimum distance to mars?
Minimum Trip length: 5.7605E-6 light years.
Acceleration: 1.0 g.
Time on earth: 0.006683627669698874 years. (1.73 days)
Time on ship: 0.00668361442242196 years.(1.73 days)
Velocity Max= 1g times time to mid distance = 687.960 km/sec
Estimating the ratio of mass final/mass initial >=.99 as atomic powered rockets are a minimum of 100,000,000 times as
powerful as
chemical rockets of the same size when operating at near 100% efficiency like current chemical rockets so for same size
payload to
given velocities the engine can be 100,000:1 for fission engines to 1,000,000,000:1 to one for fusion engines smaller by that
factor.
Algebraic shorthand operands
: denotes defined as;
^denotes exponent;
~ approximate
delta denotes "change in"
Variables
V=velocity; Vr=velocity of rocket; Ve= velocity of exhaust
E=Energy; Ek = kinetic energy; Ep = potential energy
M=Mass; Mr=mass of rocket; Me = Mass of Exhaust
Constants
1 HorsePower = 33,000 Foot Pounds / 1 Minute
C = 186,000 miles/sec as constant velocity of light
g = 1gravity= 32.2 feet/sec^2
Gearth =earth gravitational constant = 6.67 x 10^-11 N*m^2 / kg^2 (Gmars ~1/3Gearth
r =equatorial radius of Earth =6378 km
mars distance =Minimum = 54.5Ee6 kilometers; Maximum 401.3e6 kilometers
Equations(eq)
(eq. 1) MeVe=MrVr :=momen6um conservative static science equation of rockets conserving momentum
(eq. 1a) Vrfinal = Vrinitial Ve * ln([Mr Me] / Mr := nonconservative engineering dynamic rocket equation
Not useful for atomic rockets as the Mf is much greater than 10 but very useful for chemical rockets
with typical Mf much less than 1 .(082 for space shuttle) so not used below as the difference in
calculated values as it is thought insignificant if not zero and 1a introduces errors with high Mf.
(eq.2) Ek = (MV^2)/2 := kinetic energy
(eq.3) Ep = MC^2 := potential energy
(eq.4) Ve=MrVr/Me := exhaust velocity
(eq.5) Vr = MeVe/Mr := rocket velocity
(eq.6) Vescape=square root ( 2GM/r)
(eq.7) Thrust =Mr * deltaVr/delta T = -Ve* delta Me/delta t
(eq. specifc impules(Isp) = Thrust /mass flow rate times g or = Mass flow rate* Ve; or
Isp = Ve/g
(eq.9) V=AT = acceleration times time
(eq.10) Mf= Mass fraction= (Mr Me)/Me
Calculated constants or Specified constants
Mr=100,000 tons
Me~=1000 tons
Thrust== -436 trillion horse power
Mass converted to energy ~= 1 ton
Total Impulse Momentum(Itot) =2887799039640 tons- feet/minute (deep space)
Isp = 1,494,200 seconds = specific impulse in earth's gravity field
Vescape from Earth = 11.2 km/sec; acceleration time at 1.2 g = 97.2 minutes
Vescape from Mars ~= 3.7 km/sec; acceleration time at .53 g = 32.4 minutes
Vrpeak at mid point=687.960 km/sec
Tmin = minimum distance one way trip time= 1.73 days 129.6 minutes = 1.82 days
Tmax = maximum distance coasting at zero mid journey for 1.45 days Tmin = 2.64 days
Round trip = 5.3 days (plus 1 day minus 3 days) depending on where Mars is at launch time using line of sight navigation 
10:47 pm
May 19, 2012
Offline
@Thomas Hulon Jackson,
-
You write "There is no known upper limit to the temperature of my rocket engine."
-
And is this a testable statement?
Because I'm willing to bet that it's not going to survive at the temperature of a supernova.
-
Also, your statement regarding the Orion ship does not mention the alternate design that doesn't way for the pusher plate to cool off. Is there a reason you don't mention it? Or were you just unaware of it?
-
I also find it odd you state that you do not care if scientists can verify your claims or not.
I would assume, then, that you are unaware of the value of peer review in science?
11:19 am
May 18, 2012
Offline
Grand Lunar said
@Thomas Hulon Jackson,-
You write "There is no known upper limit to the temperature of my rocket engine."
And is this a testable statement?
Tom sez, does not matter.
Because I'm willing to bet that it's not going to survive at the temperature of a supernova.
Tom sez, You would lose. Scientist do not bet. You bet nothing can exceed light speed…you lost..failing to prove it but proving you are not a scientist.
-
Also, your statement regarding the Orion ship does not mention the alternate design that doesn't way for the pusher plate to cool off. Is there a reason you don't mention it? Or were you just unaware of it?
Tom sez, Does not matter. If you want to go to the stars on a pogo stick toy rocket go for it.
-
I also find it odd you state that you do not care if scientists can verify your claims or not.
I would assume, then, that you are unaware of the value of peer review in science?
Tom sez. Does not matter Peer review has zero value. Einstein was so disgusted with his first peer review process he refused to have another work peer reviewed. I refused to have my first work peer reviewed, nor have I found any value or use for peer reviewed literature.
Next question please….
2:15 pm
May 18, 2012
Offline
Hmm… i remember a movie… where the guy was in a mental institute..claiming he was a alien inhabiting the person…lol.. and that he could FTL by his mind…lol..they were in a planetarium…and they all asked to show.. so he blinked.. and said there.. he traveled somewhere and back in that instant..lol.. >.< tomas you kinda remind me of him.. I just quickly read the new 4 pages in this thread since i last viewed it.. and you say its built and works… how do you know it works.. (im not talking about some bolted to the ground Rocket type test i mean a test like flying to mars and sending a signal/message back to earth with video/timestamps befor leaving, there, and after return.. that can be recieved and triangulated by Gov agencies/News Agencies/Ameature Astronomers) after all its FTL even at just lightspeed its only what 14 minutes to get to mars… theres satalites that would pickup/retransmit to add further credibility to the feat.. and you would be back at the end of your lunchbreak
2:41 pm
Thomas Hulon Jackson said
Tom sez. Does not matter Peer review has zero value.
Mark sez nor does talking the Talk without walking the Walk. Blathering on for weeks about a gadget with zero offer to demonstrate it is par for the course when it comes to internet crackpots. Put up or shut up.
3:15 pm
May 18, 2012
Offline
Thomas Hulon Jackson said
to answer your question light has to hit your retina to be seen by brain. Light from or reflected from a object traveling away from you at light speed or more simply does not reach eyes to be seen… ever. Do not overthink this. It is Newtons relative velocity physics.
Actually there is no light reflected from an object traveling away FTL as the Light cant catch it to be Reflected from it..also everything to the side or front or angled areas i would assume be severly Red shifted (actually front would be oposite Red Shifted as it would momentarily be accelerated built up and forced to the side some of the side /angled light would also be opposite redshifted i ..) it would i assume be an amasing sight to behold none the less.
I agree Mark…
Science is all about verifiablity of theories to turn them to fact.. that .. cannot be done alone .. to turn theory to fact you must have it verified by the scientific community … so Thomas doesnt actually do anything related to science
if i had a working FTL drive… (would take out loans to build a ship around it) .. nobody would ever see me again.. i would start a galactic tour .. never to be seen again .. i sure wouldnt be here designing defensive armor.. or surfing the net.. arguing that i had it yet no proof ..
11:07 pm
May 19, 2012
Offline
Thomas Hulon Jackson said
Grand Lunar said
@Thomas Hulon Jackson,-
You write "There is no known upper limit to the temperature of my rocket engine."
And is this a testable statement?
Tom sez, does not matter.
Because I'm willing to bet that it's not going to survive at the temperature of a supernova.
Tom sez, You would lose. Scientist do not bet. You bet nothing can exceed light speed…you lost..failing to prove it but proving you are not a scientist.
-
Also, your statement regarding the Orion ship does not mention the alternate design that doesn't way for the pusher plate to cool off. Is there a reason you don't mention it? Or were you just unaware of it?
Tom sez, Does not matter. If you want to go to the stars on a pogo stick toy rocket go for it.
-
I also find it odd you state that you do not care if scientists can verify your claims or not.
I would assume, then, that you are unaware of the value of peer review in science?
Tom sez. Does not matter Peer review has zero value. Einstein was so disgusted with his first peer review process he refused to have another work peer reviewed. I refused to have my first work peer reviewed, nor have I found any value or use for peer reviewed literature.
Next question please….
Next question? Sure.
-
Do you intend to respond with a condenscending attitude all the time?
Or you will you at least pretend to act like a descent human being?
-
I find it funny how you begin several of your answers with "Does not matter".
For the questions posed, it does matter. For example, it most certainly does matter if you claim your rocket engine has no known upper limits for temperature, and yet you can not answer if this is testable or not. If your engine can not withstand a temperature of a billion or so Kelvin, then that would invalidate your claim.
-
Also, in an earlier post, you mention the experiment that seemed to show FTL neutrinos. Obviously, you never read about the data that refuted that claim. You can not cherry pick your information.
-
You are correct in that I am not a scientist. Never said I was one.
Oh yes, and I do recall bets being placed by scientists prior to the detonation of the Trinity device. Care to revise your statement then?
6:24 am
May 18, 2012
Offline
ALRIGHT ENOUGH OF THE DRAMA. Sheesh.
Unless you can put down sufficient proof that you have a constructed, fully functioning FTL Drive I believe this conversation is over. I have a funny feeling that that will be the case, as no man in his right mind would create the greatest scientific breakthough known to man and then argue about it on a website.
Give us proof.
Flawless, seemless and 100% undeniable proof that you can do this, or enough on the matter. It's just wasting time.
6:08 pm
May 17, 2012
Offline
Does any one know of any research into these Magnetic Vortices that might affect how we can travel through the solar system?
- If these "Portals" really are connected to the Sun, and the Sun has these type of connections all over the Inner Solar System, isn't some sort of travel through them(even just EM emissions that pass in one side and out another) a form of FTL?
- Could they be manipulated in a manner that instead of connecting to the Sun, they could connect to another "Portal" (I'd call it a Space/Time Bubble) and Facilitate Either FTL travel Physically or Electronically?
- Could they be used for Communicating in real time to the Gen 1 around Mars/or the Moon(depending on where THEMIS finds the various "portals")???
4:30 am
May 18, 2012
Offline
made
Pronunciation: (mād), [key] —v. pt. and pp. of make.
—adj. 1. produced by making, preparing, etc., in a particular way (often used in combination): well-made garments. 2. artificially produced: made fur. 3. invented or made-up: to tell made stories about oneself. 4. prepared, esp. from several ingredients: a made dish. 5. assured of success or fortune: a made man. 6. have it made,Informal. a. to be assured or confident of success: With a straight A average he's got it made. b. to have achieved success, esp. wealth, status, or the like.
Random House Unabridged Dictionary, Copyright © 1997, by Random House, Inc., on Infoplease.
Read more: made: meaning and definitions — Infoplease.com http://dictionary.infoplease.c…..z219YW1HnQ
Most Users Ever Online: 93
Currently Online: jfreakofkorn
17 Guest(s)
Currently Browsing this Page:
1 Guest(s)
Top Posters:
TOng: 775
MH: 714
MARS-2015: 442
RangerEllis: 398
Michel Lamontagne: 376
Nanard: 293
Tjcares: 242
bud: 239
Grand Lunar: 223
William Archer: 189
Mitchz95: 167
Murray: 148
Hans: 131
Alex R: 103
Cronos17: 79
Member Stats:
Guest Posters: 163
Members: 691
Moderators: 0
Admins: 3
Forum Stats:
Groups: 17
Forums: 243
Topics: 1218
Posts: 7016
Newest Members: Beached, Renato_SBC, highyield, ChrisDMarshall, Arideitor, tre, Sakis, LeilaShort23, darrenw, G777, EnterpriseDreamer, SileasResearch, pellpegg, adamatayoesme, ldomalakowreina, achord123w, arkemalena, lmenglekort, Brian Matthews, srerasruss, portiasdad, Pupakamaru, ifitzmiermada, caracare, macuser, Radioflyer01, bubby, parastvand, nemgiasoc, Philk, Felipe04, amandahernandez316, vahit, Toniixo, allen0300, Shadowrod, RangerEllis, Larryman, AKOkie, techy1157, rajesh, Dave, Agent Alisia, Tim, Elizabeth Jane, techpragency, sgalland, SystemEngineer, HenrikPopowski, Nightkeepr, retrodynamic, mrfujii2, JanusForbeare, william22, Scourge, seabee67, fretpick, phooodisgoood, Arock, willblake421, bill, Zabuza825, William Archer, GellanWhite, ghpicard, RAJ, coopengineer, Sassafrass, hansjoosten, apodjunkie, thefounder, [email protected], Omega Investments Ltd., Madmapper, altoeen, asmcint, Abhinaw, Markansas, chrysb, jmalitz, ThePolywellGuy, johnw9171, Zboril1, michel, Blackarrow, ajaxian515, xydelz9099, Reza_Abdinezhad, ruir, swage99, maluciezedez, onlineaobrao, affsalesstbelst, nwomenwndown, cbdavis7636, eyyouthsejerse, cheapacbra, nromeanman, eskassarabar, 外来总工程师
Administrators: admin (4), BTE-Dan (95), Nuclearman (1251)
