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.

 

Full Bob Lazar/George Knapp UFO Congress Session video is up!

page: 11
52
<< 8  9  10    12 >>

log in

join
share:

posted on Aug, 30 2015 @ 08:53 PM
link   

originally posted by: zazzafrazz
a reply to: stormbringer1701

I found that interesting as before I hadn't heard him say it was an assumption, (well he ambiguously says that) rather he was clear in saying it was 115 and he even had a sample of stable 115. The successful 115 decayed immediately. Not huge news but a small change in the story I noticed.
it gets muddier. the synthesizing lab and the independant replication team together identified 2 isotopes. both unstable. but one intriguingly lasting a loooooong time (as such things go.) so it does kind of point to a stable form being possible. plus the way these things work neither the original or the replicating team were set up to detect anything but unstable decay products. so they could not have confirmed any stable atoms even if they were produced.

and someone, i do not remember who, altered the original stable element in Lazar's story to one that was stable if stored in a strong magnetic field. I do not know who made this post synthesis claim but if it was Lazar then that would be very very bad for his story.
edit on 30-8-2015 by stormbringer1701 because: (no reason given)




posted on Aug, 30 2015 @ 09:57 PM
link   
Using my intuition i think this thing would probably have to work on possibly far less than 500KW making reasonable assumptions about the life span of the 115 wedge the size of it and reasonable assumptions about the reactor dome, the thermal converters and stuff like that.

tiny antimatter reactions make tiny amounts of energy. I'll see if i can find an understandable figure...

if all of the antimatter ever produced at cern were to have been saved and then used to power a 100 watt light bulb it would light up for three seconds. that's it. yeah the density is great but a couple of tiny particles make for a couple of tiny tiny exponentially small numbers multiplied by that admittedly really big number and the little number wins big time unless you use about a nanogram or more. then you're beginning to get to the big leagues. but only if you use it all at once.



posted on Aug, 31 2015 @ 04:22 AM
link   
a reply to: stormbringer1701
And where did you get those numbers again?



posted on Aug, 31 2015 @ 04:39 AM
link   
So Bob's co-worker throws a golf ball at the reactor and it bounces around the room. Anyone else get the feeling Bob has been watching Men in Black to much.?



posted on Aug, 31 2015 @ 04:52 AM
link   
a reply to: Soloprotocol

Either that, or apply 75/25 BS rule. That´s the problem. I mean when you have John Lear stating in an interview that some people start to make up things because they have nothing to tell...I know he was not talking about Lazar in that interview.
However, I respect John Lears work and all but I can´t dismiss I have the feeling he likes all that attention a little bit too much.



posted on Aug, 31 2015 @ 05:12 AM
link   
God, please don't bring up mieir on this thread. Mieir is a cult leader, to the point where his believers can't even see how bad his evidence is



Anyway, bobs case has always interested me. He could of made a lot of money out of this, but chose to distance himself from it, which says alot.

But, as interesting as it is, we will never know 100% if this is real, or just a lie.

He is very convincing, and he definatly is a clever man, but what we need is proof. . Evidence that no one can argue with.



posted on Aug, 31 2015 @ 06:46 AM
link   
a reply to: verschickter

john lear was most likely talking about himself.

you know, he seems to have some specific friends. like project camelot.



posted on Aug, 31 2015 @ 07:20 AM
link   
a reply to: jedi_hamster
Funny that was the impression I got too.
Or it was his way of saying in order to live after spilling some beans you have to cover it with some bull#.
I would not call them friends but yeah.



posted on Aug, 31 2015 @ 07:33 AM
link   

originally posted by: Jay-morris



Anyway, bobs case has always interested me. He could of made a lot of money out of this, but chose to distance himself from it, which says alot.




In the World of Jet Propulsion Bob Lazar is a well know character and somewhat a bit of a celebrity. I'm pretty sure him having worked in S4 and the UFO story gets bob and his companies lots of work.

Hell, if i was involved in Jet propulsion i would at least want to talk to the guy to see if he had something up his sleeve better than the competition.

Bob is doing ok out of the name Bob Lazar.



posted on Aug, 31 2015 @ 07:40 AM
link   

originally posted by: Soloprotocol

originally posted by: Jay-morris



Anyway, bobs case has always interested me. He could of made a lot of money out of this, but chose to distance himself from it, which says alot.




In the World of Jet Propulsion Bob Lazar is a well know character and somewhat a bit of a celebrity. I'm pretty sure him having worked in S4 and the UFO story gets bob and his companies lots of work.

Hell, if i was involved in Jet propulsion i would at least want to talk to the guy to see if he had something up his sleeve better than the competition.

Bob is doing ok out of the name Bob Lazar.


Not saying he has made no money from this. But if he made all this up to get rich, then he is doing a very bad job of that.


edit on 31-8-2015 by Jay-morris because: (no reason given)



posted on Aug, 31 2015 @ 08:13 AM
link   

originally posted by: verschickter
a reply to: stormbringer1701
And where did you get those numbers again?
Energy released is equal to the annihilated mass of both particles multiplied by the speed of light multiplied by itself. the problem is the mass of individual particles is so small that even multiplying it by C^2 doesn't help it much.



posted on Aug, 31 2015 @ 08:25 AM
link   
a reply to: stormbringer1701

Can you show me the math not just saying its E=mc².
You throw around numbers here like a champ but never ever do you post any math.

Btw it´s called "speed of light squared", not multiplied by itself. One can say that but it´s not something someone with knowledge and training would say to another.
All you ever do is circling around my questions.
If you are honest at least show some evidence and if you cant stop playing the physicist here.
Because I have a degree in electro engineering and I´m not fooled by your avoiding behavior.

Edit: I informed myself about Dr. Martin Tajmar and you know what I found out? Let´s see if I get him on the phone, he speaks German.
Also, the results were not replicateable and it was shown that there was a misinterpretation in his results.


Didn´t know that, huh




the problem is the mass of individual particles is so small that even multiplying it by C^2 doesn't help it much.

That was the last nail needed to proof you´re talking absolute bull-#
edit on 31-8-2015 by verschickter because: (no reason given)



posted on Aug, 31 2015 @ 09:08 AM
link   

originally posted by: verschickter
a reply to: stormbringer1701

Can you show me the math not just saying its E=mc².
You throw around numbers here like a champ but never ever do you post any math.

Btw it´s called "speed of light squared", not multiplied by itself. One can say that but it´s not something someone with knowledge and training would say to another.
All you ever do is circling around my questions.
If you are honest at least show some evidence and if you cant stop playing the physicist here.
Because I have a degree in electro engineering and I´m not fooled by your avoiding behavior.

Edit: I informed myself about Dr. Martin Tajmar and you know what I found out? Let´s see if I get him on the phone, he speaks German.
Also, the results were not replicateable and it was shown that there was a misinterpretation in his results.


Didn´t know that, huh




the problem is the mass of individual particles is so small that even multiplying it by C^2 doesn't help it much.

That was the last nail needed to proof you´re talking absolute bull-#


no. it is true that if a few particles of matter annihilated with a like number of matter particles right there where you are standing you would not even notice anything at all. the mass of a proton, electron or neutron is just too tiny individually or in small groups.

by Now Cern has produced millions of antimatter particles. even if you annihilated what they have made so far all at once it would only power a light bulb for a few seconds.

Now you said i am talking bull stuff. So i turn it to you: ready?

Do YOU dispute that you need far more antimatter than the amounts we have made so far to power even so much as an electric toothbrush?

Do YOU dispute that the power from one annihialtion reaction though impressive at a micro level is insignificant at human scale?



posted on Aug, 31 2015 @ 09:28 AM
link   
a reply to: stormbringer1701
Answering questions with questions

I´m out don´t bother with a reply



posted on Aug, 31 2015 @ 09:30 AM
link   
For the electron and positron mass both: The invariant mass of an electron is approximately 9.109×10−31 kilograms.

thats 10 to the negative exponent of 31.

that is tiny.

mass is one of the components considered in figuring the energy component of the famous E = MC^2 equation. The other being kinetic energy. meaning that the kinetic energy as well as the mass energy equivalent of the electron and positron are totaled when considering the energy of annihilation because mass and energy are conserved properties. they cannot just vanish or neglected.

it is what is multiplied by the square of the speed of light.

the decimal is moved to the left by 31 columns so you are talking about .00000 "blah blah blah blappity blah blah and furthermore blah!" followed by 9109 at some point to the right of the decimal. (thats really, really, really etc...tiny)

^ that is what you multiply by the square of the speed of light. and though the speed of light is very large it cannot make up for that first figure's tiny dimensions except when done millions and millions of times at the same time.
edit on 31-8-2015 by stormbringer1701 because: (no reason given)

edit on 31-8-2015 by stormbringer1701 because: (no reason given)

edit on 31-8-2015 by stormbringer1701 because: (no reason given)



posted on Aug, 31 2015 @ 09:53 AM
link   
to power a light bulb (in lectron volts and joules units ) you need:

~624 EeV (6.24×1020 eV): energy consumed by a single 100-watt light bulb in one second (100 W = 100 J/s ≈ 6.24×1020 eV/s)

Both particles have a rest energy of 0.511 mega electron volts (MeV).

an electron volt is equal to 1.602176565(35)×10−19 J

you can find various unit conversion calculators online for example here is on that will convert electron volts to watts:

www.unitconversion.org...

and joules per second to watts: www.rapidtables.com...


(the whole point of this tedious exercise is to convince my dubious friend that annihilating a little quantity antimatter does not even amount to setting a fire cracker off or making a fireflies' butt glow. Something that should be evident with a lot less trouble than we are having here.)


edit on 31-8-2015 by stormbringer1701 because: (no reason given)



posted on Aug, 31 2015 @ 10:05 AM
link   

originally posted by: verschickter

Edit: I informed myself about Dr. Martin Tajmar and you know what I found out? Let´s see if I get him on the phone, he speaks German.
Also, the results were not replicateable and it was shown that there was a misinterpretation in his results.


Didn´t know that, huh




actually i am aware that Tajmar retracted. i am also aware that his alleged reason for doing so was that he came to believe the cryogenic coolant was releasing gases which imparted spurious signals to his measurements. considering his set up that is actually not that likely because he and Podkletnov before him acually measured effects too far away from the disk to be effected by air currents resulting from sublimated gas from the coolant. If he were only getting signals from the obvious flow path around the device it would be a different matter. In short i am more of the opinion that Dr Tajmar decided it would not be a wise career move to continue to support such a controversial claim in the academic world as it is (dogmatic and political.)

furthermore because others using similar experimental apparatuses have made similar findings i think it is the retraction and not the original claim that is bogus. Dr Podketnov is still making claims on his prior art (predating Dr Tajmar's work) and on follow up experiments continuing to this day.

edit on 31-8-2015 by stormbringer1701 because: (no reason given)

edit on 31-8-2015 by stormbringer1701 because: (no reason given)



posted on Aug, 31 2015 @ 10:12 AM
link   
oh and if you are an engineer you know exactly what the hell i am talking about with reference to the energy released by antimatter matter annihilation.

you also no doubt know that most popular sites over simplify the annihilation reaction process. that it isn't even a particle level reaction but is dependent in baryonic matter on quark anti-quark annihilation and as a result sometimes particle and antiparticles bounce off with no annihilation taking place. roughly a 33.3333 percent chance in 3 quark particles like protons and anti-protons.



posted on Aug, 31 2015 @ 10:33 AM
link   
an interest fact about Dr Tajmar... he is involved in the EM drive controversy as well as his own previous magnetogravitic controversy. he is on a replication team for Shayer's EM drive work in the UK.

isn't that interesting? evidently Dr Tajmar wades into the fringe. probably at great academic peril. And still he is a top tier scientist.
edit on 31-8-2015 by stormbringer1701 because: (no reason given)



posted on Aug, 31 2015 @ 10:40 AM
link   

originally posted by: verschickter
a reply to: stormbringer1701
And where did you get those numbers again?
all of it except the 500KW guesstimate are on the web. it is an issue of scale. while antimatter is tremendously powerful. it's a question of scale. a few particles annihilated still produce a negligible amount of energy when viewed from a human scale. you cannot even detect the effect of such an annihilation without sensitive instruments.



new topics

top topics



 
52
<< 8  9  10    12 >>

log in

join