It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.
Please white-list or disable AboveTopSecret.com in your ad-blocking tool.
Thank you.
Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.
originally posted by: Aliensun
a reply to: PandaLord
All of this busywork discussing and supposedly studying ways to travel fast are so elememtarily stupid that I about cry every time I read such an account. Seriously. Deny UFOs (these days both theirs and ours) as government and industry does, and you can carry on and on with this drivel. You get the picture? It is all for show and/or done by the unassuming thinking that they are on the cutting edge.
Anyone that has witnessed an active UFO defying gravity and most importantly, mass as long ago as half a century, knows quite well that you don't need some impossibly complex method to travel fast.
The UFOs have demonstrated since day one of their efforts to make themselves known in 1947 (if not earlier) that they contain in those rather compact devices a use of physics that cancels their mass and allows what we consider impossible feats of movement. --They don't fly! They do not use air for lift or to enable propulsion. They produce a very localized, mass-cancelling field around themselves and can move in any direction with scarcely a push. Probably their locomotion is acquired as an aspect of the craft by a mere warping of their encompassing field.
The sooner the public starts demanding this technology to be unleashed commercially, the quicker we can learn the true facts of why no shuttle replacement, possible Moon military bases and even perhaps even on-going manned expeditions to Mars. So it is not just about the US government having the technology of the UFOs in the black triangles as military weapons, but it about a very large chunk of our destiny and supposed existence in a free and democratic country.
originally posted by: stormbringer1701
this just in: the latest mathematical plots of EM drive data look exactly like the alcubierre warp metric graph.
originally posted by: stormbringer1701
before anyone gets excited. the math plot resemblance to the graphic used to illustrate the alcubierre metric is purely coincidental. the same plot shows up for lots of other things less exciting that a space warp.
originally posted by: zatara
We live in remarkeble times...isn't that what every generation says?
Anyways, is it safe to say that this whole theory of relativity is built around the speed of light?
Is the speed of light not the fastest speed perceptible and identifiable by scientists to this day
and therefore considered an absolute persistent benchmark?
originally posted by: GoShredAK
Stupid question: if travelling at warp speed, how are you to determine that you're not heading straight on a collision course with some other object? (asteroid, space debris, planetoid, something unknown)
Map out the route you plan on travelling before hand?
Surely you couldnt maneuver much at that speed.
I just imagine a spaceship warp driving directly into an asteroid along the way and being blown to smithereens.....
originally posted by: GoShredAK
Stupid question: if travelling at warp speed, how are you to determine that you're not heading straight on a collision course with some other object? (asteroid, space debris, planetoid, something unknown)
Map out the route you plan on travelling before hand?
Surely you couldnt maneuver much at that speed.
I just imagine a spaceship warp driving directly into an asteroid along the way and being blown to smithereens.....
Yeah i was really excited for a while. But then the more knowledgeable NASA experimenters pointed out that this is natural for a cycling e field in a cylinder or cone in some resonance modes. also on musical drum heads and in a sloshing bucket of water. Still, in my defense, i have to say that the initial reaction of some of the actual engineers and physicists was: "Oh. My. God!" when the 3D graphic plot was first posted.
originally posted by: JadeStar
originally posted by: stormbringer1701
before anyone gets excited. the math plot resemblance to the graphic used to illustrate the alcubierre metric is purely coincidental. the same plot shows up for lots of other things less exciting that a space warp.
Ah nevermind...
originally posted by: mbkennel
originally posted by: GoShredAK
Stupid question: if travelling at warp speed, how are you to determine that you're not heading straight on a collision course with some other object? (asteroid, space debris, planetoid, something unknown)
Map out the route you plan on travelling before hand?
Surely you couldnt maneuver much at that speed.
I just imagine a spaceship warp driving directly into an asteroid along the way and being blown to smithereens.....
At near lightspeed driving directly into a speck of invisible dust is enough to blow you to smithereens.
www.astronomycafe.net...
Just the hydrogen particles will cause lethal radiation without even hititng dust.