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.

 

Long Lost Bob Lazar Video: "How Do UFOs Fly?"

page: 2
12
<< 1   >>

log in

join
share:

posted on Sep, 6 2015 @ 07:29 PM
link   
I don't think that is right.i think you approach this from a relativity standpoint in which there is no need for a graviton. However gravitons are still respectible and expected in QM theories and in SUSY theories.




posted on Sep, 6 2015 @ 07:43 PM
link   
so what if you can't find a graviton because a graviton is really two guons doing the nasty?

www.preposterousuniverse.com...


Along the way, Zvi, John Joseph and Henrik, thanks to the time-honored method of “just staring at” the loop integrand provided by unitarity, also stumbled on a new property of gauge theory amplitudes, which tightly couples them to gravity. They found that gauge theory amplitudes can be written in such a way that their kinematic part obeys relations that are structurally identical to the Jacobi identities known to fans of Lie algebras. This so-called color-kinematics duality, when achieved, leads to a simple “double copy” prescription for computing amplitudes in suitable theories of gravity: Take the gauge theory amplitude, remove the color factors and square the kinematic numerator factors. Crudely, a graviton looks very much like two gluons laid on top of each other. If you’ve ever looked at the Feynman rules for gravity, you’d be shocked that such a simple prescription could ever work, but it does.


say... does that remind you of something Lazar said a couple of decades before these guys won the Sakurai prize in theoretical physics for this work?


edit on 6-9-2015 by stormbringer1701 because: (no reason given)



posted on Sep, 6 2015 @ 08:03 PM
link   

originally posted by: stormbringer1701
I don't think that is right.i think you approach this from a relativity standpoint in which there is no need for a graviton.
Bingo! General Relativity would be the leading theory for gravity, and there is no graviton in the leading theory. In fact the Standard Model of particle physics doesn't explain gravity and doesn't have a graviton:

home.web.cern.ch...

Even though the Standard Model is currently the best description there is of the subatomic world, it does not explain the complete picture. The theory incorporates only three out of the four fundamental forces, omitting gravity.



However gravitons are still respectible and expected in QM theories and in SUSY theories.

Respectable hypothesis? Yes but with significant problems.
Leading theory? No.



posted on Sep, 6 2015 @ 08:11 PM
link   
wrt to the standard model: if the graviton is a compound particle made of gluons... then it would fit the standard model.


also it would possibly provide a mechanism for Mach's principle which Einstein tried for a year or two to include in relativity but had to give up on. a graviton might only exist at the instant of interaction between gluons at subnuclear ranges.



posted on Sep, 7 2015 @ 04:53 AM
link   
a reply to: peacenotgreed
hey thanks for the video it looks really interesting,
cheers



posted on Sep, 7 2015 @ 11:25 AM
link   
Lazar is a fraud. He ranked 261 out of 369 in high school. Stanton Friedman researched and exposed him. Either believe the real scientist or the fake one.


www.stantonfriedman.com...
edit on 7-9-2015 by ozymandias911 because: (no reason given)



posted on Sep, 7 2015 @ 12:24 PM
link   

originally posted by: ozymandias911
Lazar is a fraud. He ranked 261 out of 369 in high school. Stanton Friedman researched and exposed him. Either believe the real scientist or the fake one.


www.stantonfriedman.com...


Lazar has been placed in Los Alamos working as a scientist. You don't get to work there in such position being a high school dumbtard.



posted on Sep, 7 2015 @ 12:41 PM
link   

originally posted by: JackHill
Lazar has been placed in Los Alamos working as a scientist. You don't get to work there in such position being a high school dumbtard.
He worked for Kirk-Mayer at the Los Alamos facility, for all we know as a janitor or similar job. Lazar actually isn't dumb, but he doesn't have the credentials to get a job as a scientist and doesn't know what a physicist would know.



posted on Sep, 7 2015 @ 03:02 PM
link   
a reply to: JackHill

'I checked with LANL’s personnel department for Lazar’s name and that of an old colleague. They found my guy, but not Lazar.

He was publicly asked when he got his MS from MIT. He said “Let me see now, I think it was probably 1982.” Nobody getting an MS from MIT would not know the year immediately. He was asked to name some of his profs, He said: “Let’s see now, Bill Duxler will remember me from the physics department at Caltech.” I located Dr. Duxler. He’s a Pierce Junior College physics prof, and never taught at Caltech. Lazar was registered in one of his courses at the same time Lazar was supposedly at MIT! Nobody who can go to MIT goes to Pierce JC, not to mention the rather long commute between LA and Cambridge, Mass.

I checked his High School in New York State. He graduated in August, not with his class. The only science course he took was chemistry. He ranked 261 out of 369, which is in the bottom third. There is no way he would have been admitted by MIT or Caltech. An MS in Physics from MIT requires a thesis. No such thesis exists at MIT, and he is not on a commencement list. The notion that the government wiped his CIVILIAN records clean is absurd. I checked with the Legal Counsel at MIT — no way to wipe all his records clean. The Physics department never heard of him and he is not a member of the American Physical Society.

When he declared bankruptcy in the mid 1980s for almost $300,000.00 he listed his occupation as a self-employed film processor. With MS degrees from MIT and Caltech? Caltech would not have accepted him for an MS program, if he already had one from MIT.'

-Stanton Friedman,

This is coming from the original man who preached flying saucers, is a scientist and investigated Roswell.



posted on Sep, 8 2015 @ 12:07 AM
link   
He explained how he got the job.

He built the rocket car... It impressed some important people. They realized he had expansive knowledge in how things work..

They said her.. see if you can reverse engineer this craft.

Remember , they never told him it was alien. Plausible deniability.

and yes.. there is always a way to erase records, even educational ones. The government can erase a person completely



posted on Sep, 8 2015 @ 12:25 AM
link   
it does not come down to his educational records or even most of the details concerning his employment or the facilities to me. the question for me has always been: could his operational description of the craft and its technology be true? is the physics plausible? I think it is possible. as time goes on we get more scientific discoveries that at least on the face of it seem to support it to varying degrees.



posted on Sep, 8 2015 @ 03:41 PM
link   
a reply to: Lucidparadox

no. no they cannot.



posted on Sep, 9 2015 @ 09:57 AM
link   
a reply to: Lucidparadox
a reply to: Arbitrageur

Thank You guys, I understood a majority of the content but I've been counting for transcripts of the dialogue in 37 minute.



posted on Sep, 9 2015 @ 12:00 PM
link   

originally posted by: residentofearth
a reply to: Lucidparadox
a reply to: Arbitrageur

Thank You guys, I understood a majority of the content but I've been counting for transcripts of the dialogue in 37 minute.

While I found the video entertaining, there's really nothing in it worthy of making a transcript, in my opinion.

If you want to watch a video about how to make a propulsion system suitable for an interstellar spacecraft, this video is the one to watch. I think more of this information was still classified at the time the video in the OP was made so Friedman might not have even known about this (some of the information on this project is still classified):

To Mars By A Bomb - The Secret History of Project Orion (Nuclear Propulsion)

web.archive.org...://www.bbc.co.uk/bbcfour/documentaries/features/mars-a-bomb.shtml

TO MARS BY A-BOMB
BBC TWO Wednesday 13 November 2003 11.20pm-12.20am

The extraordinary yet true account of a secret US government-backed attempt to build a spaceship the size of an ocean liner and send it to Mars, Jupiter and Saturn, propelled by thousands of miniature nuclear bombs.

Beginning in 1958 Project Orion ran until 1965, employing some of the best scientists in the world, including the brilliant British mathematician and physicist Freeman Dyson. "Freeman Dyson is one of the few authentic geniuses I've ever met", says Arthur C. Clarke. "Orion isn't crazy. It would work. The question isn't whether we could do it, but whether we should do it".

The film uncovers a contemporary angle to Project Orion. Arthur C. Clarke states that today's generation are once again serious about going to Mars and that NASA has once more become interested in similar nuclear technology as used by Project Orion in the early 60s.

The film has exclusive interviews with Ted Taylor, who ran The Project Orion and who is also the most legendary nuclear weapon designer of all time; and Freeman Dyson who is one of the greatest theoretical physicists and mathematicians that has lived this century.




top topics



 
12
<< 1   >>

log in

join