It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.

Please white-list or disable in your ad-blocking tool.

Thank you.


Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.


element 115 and anti matter-how saucer propulsion works

page: 1
<<   2 >>

log in


posted on Dec, 16 2004 @ 09:25 PM

posted on Dec, 16 2004 @ 09:26 PM

Originally posted by PKD

what the hell kind of post is this!?!?!?

no explanation or none of your OWN words!?!?!?

BTW we know this already...

posted on Dec, 16 2004 @ 09:38 PM
There's just one teeny-tiny problem with this:

We have made Element 115. It's called Unupentium:

The properties are known, by the way. It's a metal.

posted on Dec, 16 2004 @ 09:58 PM
Ah well, that was a short lived thread, nice try.
i guess i'll be the last poster on the dead thread

posted on Dec, 17 2004 @ 07:02 AM
Not so fast... I thought they just "supposed" that they made 115, and that it hasn't actually been proven yet? (i.e. and it only lasted like a tenth of a second)

Not to mention, I somehow doubt we have the capability to be SURE that synthesized elements that we create have the exact same characteristics of such an element that might naturally occur elsewhere in the universe.

It's a bit like making a chocolate cake from a recipe for the first time, and just assuming that it tastes exactly like any other chocolate cake.

EDIT: Fairly new, so I won't one-line you on this one, but please try and provide some of your own commentary instead of just a link...thanks!

[edit on 17-12-2004 by Gazrok]

[edit on 17-12-2004 by Gazrok]


posted on Dec, 17 2004 @ 10:32 AM
yeah the reason i posted this wasn't neccesarily to talk about 115, as it is obviously not news, but rather to shed some upon the various proulsion systems that are utilized in saucer topology.
obviously these things are earth physics not involving martians, reticualns, venusians or greys. it just upsets me when i see all the shocktrooping and disinformation going on in this forum by the secretive elders who are intentionally trying to hide the facts of science behind mysticism.

posted on Dec, 17 2004 @ 10:40 AM
To be honest, much of Lazar's physics are pretty fuzzy. Still, there are good reasons for believing him (W-2, knowledge of the test flights), as well as good reasons for doubting him (education record, money problems, etc.).

My comments were more on the element itself. I think it's intriguing. On the periodic chart, it's likely to share the diamagnetic properties of Bismuth. As some may know, Bismuth is used in several home levitation science projects due to these properties.

I just think it premature for us to assume that ALL the elements are present on Earth in their natural form (or that we can synthesize them without having such a naturally occurring sample). We have no way of knowing that higher elements don't naturally occur elsewhere in the universe and in a stable form.

posted on Dec, 17 2004 @ 10:48 AM
I have read that Element 115 is supose to be used as a fuel, but what I dont understand is that since it decays so fast, how could it be used for fuel at all? Meaning that in a very short time period it is not longer element 115.
Could any one exsplain that?

posted on Dec, 17 2004 @ 10:58 AM

Originally posted by Red Golem
I have read that Element 115 is supose to be used as a fuel, but what I dont understand is that since it decays so fast, how could it be used for fuel at all? Meaning that in a very short time period it is not longer element 115.
Could any one exsplain that?

Yeah you see the theory goes that they aquired some of this stuff through their secret contacts with the ETs in exchange for who knows. I believe they said it can naturally form in some systems and is stable.

posted on Dec, 17 2004 @ 11:17 AM
Gaz, when they name an element that means that it's been created and that several labs have created it following the processes that the first lab used. The link I gave was to just one of many sites on it... but I figured nobody wanted to whack their way through a nuclear physics paper.

The properties of elements follow a set pattern. Now, if other ultra-heavy atoms in this series (say, element 105 through 114) had shown odd properties such as antigravity or time bending, then yes we could say that the properties of Element 115 would be even greater in this respect.

But NO elements have ever shown any of this.

The physical properties of chemical elements are derived from the structure of the atom -- which is how we know how it behaves and what it looks like and how it acts when we create it (otherwise we'd never actually know when we created a new element.)

I can go into a longer, much more boring, and extremely detailed answer but I don't think it's going to serve any purpose.

... and that's why we know that it isn't used in the whacky way that Lazar says it is. Just another card in his house of lies.

posted on Dec, 17 2004 @ 11:52 AM
I understand all of the above...

But when synthesizing an element, how do we KNOW we are getting it right? Perhaps it's a certain spin of the particles, or distance of orbit, or any other myriad of variables that are off in our synthesized version, versus a naturally occuring sample lending to stability? Granted, this is assuming that a natural version exists somewhere in the universe, but my point is that the possibility exists...regardless of how small the possibility is.

posted on Dec, 17 2004 @ 02:40 PM
This site (Web Elements) gives detailed explanations on what we know now of the element 115. I may have posted this link in another thread about Uup. A quick google search will give a lot of results, and some on ATS.

Use this Google search for instance.

It is very unlikely that this element 115 is used today and on earth, unless by some other than earthly civilization, and it is not likely to exist naturally anywhere. It is still possible though that some stable isotope exists, or that some technique can be used to either synthetize it on demand or derive it (kind of nuclear reactor) from some other still heavier element that itself would be stable.

And btw, as Gazrok put it, Lazar still has a lot of interesting things... Maybe he is (at least partly) right. What he said is not completely wrong, and it would not be surprising that he is in such bad positions and has such a bad reputation if what he says is true...

I also posted one day an interesting text discussing on possibilities about UFO propulsion, and to my surprise, despite several views, I had not a single answer... Interested people can find this post here.

[edit on 17-12-2004 by SpookyVince]

posted on Dec, 17 2004 @ 02:56 PM
Gazrok: actually, in chemical parlance when you synthesize an element (or a molecule) you actually do make exactly that element (or molecule)'s only when you get to large objects (say, fake diamonds) that synthesize starts to mean "make a good, but not perfect copy of" instead of "put this together".

the only real way for the element 115 story to pan out, unfortunately for lazar and company, is if there's a stable isotope that hasn't been synthesized yet; the advantage of naturally-occurring materials -- and especially the heavier elements and their compounds -- is that the samples we've found are almost always "still here" after a couple billion of years, and thus we tend to find only the stable isotopes. as a hypothetical example to make this point really clear, it might be possible to synthesize somthing like 50-eterium (a made up word for a hydrogen atom with 50 neutrons in it) but it'd be so unstable it'd last practically 0 seconds...and in some sense that's why we never find 50-terium in nature.

so for stuff we can go out and just dig up, there's enough of it around that any remotely stable isotope is likely to turn up, if only in trace quantities, and thus as far as we know the stable elements are exactly those we find in nature. when we synthesize non-naturally occurring elements -- especially the very unstable 100+ proton elements -- we have less control over the isotopes we're forming. for example, so far only the 287 and 288 isotopes of 115 have been formed: Unumpentium and we can't conclusively state that there aren't other, stabler isotopes.

so far it doesn't look good for that hypothesis, pretty much the rest of Lazar's story, unfortunately. his physics are less fuzzy than just weak; the most credit i can give him -- like i think i said earlier in a different thread -- is that he has about the physics knowledge of an electrician (like the guys who wire buildings) and maybe got an informal explanation of some advanced stuff (his gravity B waves sounds like the strong nuclear force) and tried so sell it as more than it was. that's when i'm feeling charitable; usually i just assume he's a hoaxer.

as usual, I'm rambling, but the point of this post was supposed to be: to make your question more accurate, Gazrok, you want to ask "how do we know that there isn't some isotope of 115 that's more stable than the ones we've made so far", as that's a valid the atomic level to the best of our knowledge the construction of atoms is pretty much like legos that the variables you're mentioning don't matter (or really even exist for an individual element).

Edit: SpookyVince beat me to the punch and was more succint, too. cheers!

[edit on 17-12-2004 by sisonek]

posted on Feb, 27 2005 @ 09:21 PM
I understand what all you guys say about 115 not being able to do what lazar says it does. But you have to remember that we really dont know what the true properties of 115 are because we have never had enough of it for a long enough amount of time to figure out exactly what its properties are. I know that we can theorize about its properties due to its similarities to other elements. But the fact remains that we just dont know FOR SURE whats its properties are.

Nevertheless, I do find it quite interesting that Lazar said that the sports model used a kind of not yet recognized heavy element...and what happens?? We find that there are several more heavey elements to be created, ones whose properties are still unknown to us!

posted on Feb, 28 2005 @ 12:06 AM
Okay, now this is a matter of belief to some, to me it a scientific fact. Before scientific studies into the phenomena of the biogenic field(aura) not much was known about it, yet this phenomena was present around everything. Similarily, if element 115 does have some unusual properties, then it does not necessarily follow, that we would be able to detect it and now how to use it.

So, element 115 may indeed have these properties. It does not prove Lazar wrong. But, having said that, I get fraud vibes from him lol

posted on Feb, 28 2005 @ 08:33 AM

Gazrok, you want to ask "how do we know that there isn't some isotope of 115 that's more stable than the ones we've made so far", as that's a valid question..

Thank you, that is exactly pretty much the way I'd rephrase my point...

This question actually applies to any of the "over 100" elements....

We simply don't know until we've made them all....

posted on Feb, 28 2005 @ 09:39 AM
According to a Phd's theory, element 115 is the special ingredient for gravity repulsion used in a type of centrefuge. The project mentioned is known as 'Looking Glass'.

An EBE species that are from the future known as J-Rods are the visitors from thr Orion system providing stabilized element 115 to the secret goverment, and being utilzed at A-51.

The usual supercooled to 150 Kelvin, rotating at 60,000rpm and presurrized to 150,000 atmospheres apparently still applies. Which turns El115 into translucent structure, which repulses gravity.

Weird - huh?

The rest of the interview about other J-Rod things in our future is absolutely mind-boggling. And Scary.


posted on Feb, 28 2005 @ 09:57 AM
How about a link to it?

I've heard the "J-Rod" name before of course, though not in this context...

posted on Mar, 19 2005 @ 03:25 PM

Originally posted by Gazrok
How about a link to it?

I've heard the "J-Rod" name before of course, though not in this context...

Gaz:  try a google on J-rod interview -- here's today's "Results 1 - 5… of about 1,990":
(following info provided for reference/educational purposes, no © infringement intended)

  • Illuminati News: Jeff Rense Interview With Bill Hamilton Regarding Dan Burisch. ...

    • Illuminati News: The Saga of Dr. Dan Burisch
      ... According to the J-rod "yellow book" that shows past, present, and future ...
      Sterling D. Allan Greater Things News Service REFERENCES: Burisch Interview with Bill ... - 16k ...

  • UFO Area The Strange Story of J-Rod, An EBE
    ... Some insiders have implied that J-Rod might have been part of EBE-3's team, but I ...
    EBE-2 was described during an interview on March 5th, 1983 with former AFOSI ... - 18k ...

  • Bill Hamilton Interview with Dr. Dan Burisch on October 18, 2002
    ... The Transcript of Dr. Burisch's “Last” Interview of Sept. ...
    Given my experience at Sector 4, I knew fairly quickly that I was dealing with a J-Rod sample. ... - 66k ...

  • Subliminal Euphoria, J-Rod, extraterrestrial scientist at Groom ...
    ... State University of New York, Stoneybrook), also describes an assignment to study the biological fluids and tissues of an EBEN called J-Rod inside S ...
    Interview: ... - 17k ...

  • ...

Q. for Mr. Dallas:  Is one of these the "interview about other J-Rod things in our future" you referred to, or is it another ?
Who was the 'interviewee' ???

posted on Mar, 19 2005 @ 03:28 PM
[edit on 19-3-2005 by Mr_Dybel]

top topics

<<   2 >>

log in