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.

 

The History of the Vymanika Shastra

page: 3
1
<< 1  2    4  5 >>

log in

join
share:

posted on Mar, 27 2005 @ 02:13 PM
link   
Well Indigo i will make my point again regarding Nazca ballons before adressing the rest of your idiocy.

With the ballons an experiment was carried out. A practical experiment. Not gibberish readings of indian legends. A ballon also explains the Nazca lines with greater ease than a mercury ion engine. That, admittedly is not perfect proof. But it is better than anything you have provided. Sorry


Heres an article for you Inca Ballons!

Its as good as any history. Wouldn that be as good as the History of King Arthur perhaps? A probably British warlord in the 5th century who may or may not have existed but is accepted as history? You have to do better!

Your evidence is lacking, your ability to summarise things is poor, your arrogance in assuming that you, without once visiting any of these places, have completely rewritten ancient history is astouding. To then go on and criticise those who disagree with you in a childish tantrum is amazing.

You want us to discuss the evidence, I thought that Vagabond was doing that with this thread, though i think its now a little sidetracked. The problem with your evidence is that it isnt compelling, you continually refer to ancient legends as if they are facts and extrapolate your theories accordingly. You dont provide sound arechaeology, and when you do its vauge


there is an an entire ancient urban city found with a underground sewage system that is as good as most modern sanitations systems


There is no referenceing, and when read like that, not even any evidence for the point you are trying to make! Where is the evidence of advanced civilisation? The Romans built good sanitation systems, yet i dont see you claiming that they flew around the world, had nuclear wars etc etc.

There we go, a piece of your evidence has been discussed! And then it was found to be lacking those essential characterisitcs of evidence, little things like proving your point!

When the evidence stands up it will be discussed, instead we discuss your methods because frankly they are useless. You declaring things to be facts without providing evidence. And then, whe you find people dont accept your viewpoints you say things like


I am not even going to try convince you. You don't matter to me

or the wonderful



Can anyone actually properly and categorically debunk this, because if you can't, then it must mean it's true.


The signs of a poor historian. You have to convince others, if they dont find your evidence or your methods satisfactory then you refine them. If you cant see that your ideas may be flawed somewhere then you have to learn to look at things objectively. Insisting that because you cant be proved wrong you must be right is crap im afraid. Proove my ballons idea wrong, provide better evidence against the idea than i have for it. If you can i must be right


Sorry mate but to convince anyone beyond internet based loonies you have to publish your evidence. Preferabley in a historical Journal such as English History Review but a decent book would also do. In that book you would write your ideas, present your 'evidence' answer the questions that have been raised here (very important point, no case is perfect, questions are there to help! ) and wait for the feedback. Read 1421: The Year China Discovered the World, an author attempted to do what you want, and rewrite the history of global explanation. Read this book, read your own work, and see where you go wrong!

Vagabond, thank you for answering Indigo's points in a far more eloquent way than i am managing, and apologies for really having nothing to say to do with the topic at hand.




posted on Mar, 27 2005 @ 05:02 PM
link   
Is there anywhere I can buy a copy of this book? I have looked around on the internet and found sites with selected passages and the like but I would really prefer a hard copy version of the book. Also this mercury based engine story is intriguing, but I would like to read the actual book preferrably with references to the experiment and any technical schematics that are related.



posted on Mar, 27 2005 @ 09:32 PM
link   
If memory serves, it is the second longest book ever written. You can find the entire thing at www.sacredtexts.com but it would take you forever to print a hard copy.
I'm not sure, but I think Indigo challenges the accuracy of those translations, so you may want to ask if there is an alternate source so that you can compare passages from two different translations and try to make a determination for yourself instead of just taking the word of me, sacred texts, or anybody else, uncontested.

Anyway, I'm gone for the week, so my annoying avatar which you all have been complimenting me on so often lately wont be popping up in anything new. I'll see you all next weekend.



posted on Mar, 28 2005 @ 01:10 AM
link   

Anyway, I'm gone for the week, so my annoying avatar which you all have been complimenting me on so often lately wont be popping up in anything new. I'll see you all next weekend.


Desperate people even accept flattery. Vagabond, it amuses me that you are so naive to think that your avatar is something worthy of being complimented and praised.

Your avatar makes a statement. That is, you have made a claim that you have not substantiated even after being challenged several times. To me, it makes you look like a fool. Come on, at least try to substantiate your claims.

Do you know how intellectually impoverished you look by making a claim and then not supporting it.


Byrd, I'll get back to you in a while mate




[edit on 28-3-2005 by Indigo_Child]



posted on Mar, 28 2005 @ 01:28 AM
link   

With the ballons an experiment was carried out. A practical experiment.


As I said you're a hypocrit. You are willing to accept that Incans had balloons, because of an experiment done recently in modern times to show the lines could have been done with balloons and anecdotal stories of flight in Incan times. Which mind you, there are documentaries on how the Pyramids could have been made using slave labor, ramps and rope, and there still is no working hypothesis for how the Pyramids were made.

You are making the conclusion that because this experiment was done, it must be Incans had balloons. Yet, lack the same physical evidence, you are demanding from me.

However, in the case for advanced technology in Ancient India, not only are there several ancient texts on aeronautics and countless accounts of flying vehicles and advanced technology much more descriptive than the Incan accounts of flying canoes and agree largely with modern technology(sound seeking missiles for instance) There are also entire existing texts on advanced physics, surgey and medicine. There are also very credible reports of the flight of an aeroplane in 1895 in India.

Finally, there is empirical evidence for the VS and 7 new devices and materials have been fabricated and documented in India's most prestigious and oldest scientific journals. All supported by the highest scientific community even India's space organization. There are also several books by Sanskrit scholars from as early as the 19th century discussing ancient Indian flight.

So there IS anecdotal, factual and empirical/experimental evidence for the VS. And you call this gibberish. Yet, a documentary showing how balloons could be used by Incans and stories of flying canoes, is proof for balloons?

As I said: you're a hypocrit. A hypocrit telling another hypocrit how well he is doing. I suppose your one of those people who've been complimenting him(
) I've decided to ignore you now. There is only so much ignorance I can take. It leaves a very bad taste in my mouth.

[edit on 28-3-2005 by Indigo_Child]



posted on Mar, 28 2005 @ 08:46 AM
link   

Originally posted by Sugarlump
Is there anywhere I can buy a copy of this book? I have looked around on the internet and found sites with selected passages and the like but I would really prefer a hard copy version of the book. Also this mercury based engine story is intriguing, but I would like to read the actual book preferrably with references to the experiment and any technical schematics that are related.


I have only partial success in trying to find a copy online. The closest I found is this:
ebusiness.ada.gov.in...

Now, while I don't find the complete text, the very long discussion there does raise a lot of questions. I'll just stick with ONE section (because this question is never answered by anyone) about the metal ores.

No one mentions mercury ores in India (and it isn't an important commercial area for this.) However, the section on metals and where they come from and what gets mined for the "special metals" certainly has a lot of problems that point at a "channeled inspiration" and not "something done before or duplicated by science."



CHAPTER – 14 METALS FOR VIMANAS -LOHADHIKARANAM:

Out of many topics of ‘Vymanika Shastra’, the one picked up by most Indian researchers is on metals and materials. In particular metals conclusively categorised for use on vimana have incited curiosity.

Three ancient scientists quoted are Shownaka, Manibhadra (in his Manibhadra Kaarika) and Saamba.

All the three sages commonly point at three kinds of root metals for aviation applications - Somaka, Soundaalika, and Mourthwika. Apart from lightness, metallic property targeted is heat absorbing / resistance.

The root metals [in ore form] are described to be available at identified layers of earth’s crust out of about three thousand metal bearing layers. Different layers contain different metal ores in varying grades.


There's some huge problems with this concept that are glaringly obvious to rockhounds (mineral hunters) and geologists: 1) "layers" isn't well defined here. 2) metal ore veins may go through a number of layers (since they are volcanic in origin.) In fact, depending on how the ore is produced, it could have been put into the area by a number of different processes and may be embedded in a number of different formations.

The text above, for instance, suggests that silver will always be found in a certain type of layer of stone. A look at silver mine geology quickly puts this to rest.

Perhaps there's another interpretation, but the facts seem to contradict this.
www.321gold.com...



Loha Kalpa and Lohatantra are described as the master texts on metallurgy.

(note: Text says"Besides sage Bharadwaja, other seers of name and fame in mythology such as Goutama, Shounaka, Vashista, Agastya, Atri, Narayana, Lallacharya and many others made in-depth contribution )

Lallacharya’s classification of metals is distinct in it’s own way and it is source- related as follows.

Kritaka or artificial
Corrupted
Mud-born
Aquatic
Mineral-born
Vegetation born
Evolved from vermin
Flesh born
Grown from salt
Hair born and egg born


Now, I'm not a professional geologist, but I *do* know that ores do not "evolve from vermin" or come from vermin in any shape or form. Nor do they come from flesh, hair, or egg.

There's quite a bit more to quibble with at that site -- however, I note that the India Defense Ministry apparently found their paper unconvincing for there aren't any indications that this is being studied.

A full copy of the text would, of course, be more revealing.



posted on Mar, 28 2005 @ 09:13 AM
link   
Further notes:



This is a schematic of a "Vimana".

Maybe your eyes are better than mine, but I don't see a single thing to propel the craft.

The "propeller" is clearly inadequate for the job (though about the size of the propellors on an old biplane, I should add).

Although this supposedly works on a "plasma mercury vortex" there is no indication that it's powering anything other than a screw or a propellor. So here you have this thing that's acheiving 2,000 degrees F... and it's only running a small screw propellor instead of blowing superheated air out the rear and propelling it forward?

In case we've all forgotten, here's how a jet engine works: www.grc.nasa.gov...

It clearly isn't using ion thruster technology, since that requires a BigHorkingHole in the back... which would melt the rudder in this design:
(definition of ion thruster engine): www.answers.com...;jsessionid=3444b6ede0hf6?method=4&dsid=2222&dekey=Ion+thruster&gwp=8&curtab=2222_1&sbid=lc01a

(spacecreaft propulsion methods: www.answers.com... )

Now... THIS design (only) ... apparent design flaws include:
* no forward thrust engine, and a propellor that small can't turn fast enough to get up any REAL speed.
* If you say the side ports are for thrust, then you have a REAL problem in stability when you try to execute a complex maneuver and things like rolls and loops aren't possible with just two out vents.
* with no air intake vent, there is no way to pull air IN (unless you're sucking it from passengers and crew... not advisable) fast enough to get up to any speed.
* Why put a whole row of tires on the bottom when two rows will suffice (as we've proven countless times)? That adds weight and drag.

Things I note but need someone who flys to eyeball:
* is it just my ignorance, or is that rudder design something that won't work on aircraft (i.e., needs a longer attachment point to be really workable)?
* I don't see any way of raising (or more importantly lowering) the nose.



posted on Mar, 28 2005 @ 11:31 AM
link   
Regarding the rudder, no I don't think it would be effective at all in controlling yaw. In order for a rudder to function it needs a smooth flow of air to deflect. The size and position of this rudder, combined with the shape of the craft where the rudder is attached, would seem to place it directly in the wake vortices of the craft itself.

It is lacking a horizontal airfoil to control pitch, not sure how vertical attitude changes were supposed to be affected.

One other thing, I dont see anywhere a pilot might sit or any way he/she might be able to see where they are going.

[edit on 28-3-2005 by Donner]



posted on Mar, 28 2005 @ 02:32 PM
link   
Sorry Indigo, you reamain blind to the flaws in your arguement. Ballons are easy to build, mercury ion engines are not!

Sorry but a balloon makes sense as a method of flight in ancient times.
Your evidence consists of legends, legends are not facts.

Since you have already chosen to ignore all who disagree with your methods then this is probably a waste of time but i really do reccomend that you look for physical evidence and dont just look at legends. Build a mercury ion engine, make the bizzare contraption discussed here and fly it, just a scaled down model would do. One little shred to suggest this is any more than imagination.



posted on Mar, 28 2005 @ 03:15 PM
link   
Byrd, Luke, Uncle Joe, Donner, Vagabond, et. al.:

What is wrong with you folks?

You can no more use logic against Indigo Child than I can with Norman, my cat.

Indigo Child has a very strong need to believe in this Ion Mercury Engine Hindu Ananda Panda stuff, and has built an incredibly ornate and detailed weltanschauung in order to keep it going.

It's like his stuff about being some sort of uberman with the whole "Indigo Child" routine.

You are never going to change that!

It's like arguing over the whichness of what or how many libertarians can dance on the head of an IRS agent.

[edit on 28-3-2005 by Off_The_Street]



posted on Mar, 28 2005 @ 03:47 PM
link   
Yeah I agree with Off_The_Street, just ignore him you ain't going to convince someone who says
"If you cannot immediately debunk it then it must be true!" or something to that effect.



posted on Mar, 28 2005 @ 04:04 PM
link   
While I still remain curious about whether there are some shreds of truth in this manuscript, that diagram has provided me with some much needed levity. Now that I have stopped laughing so convulsivelly that I can once again type I'd like to throw in my two cents.
First off the craft as drawn appears to be two boat hulls sans keel mated to each other with their sterns forward. Second the rudder appears to have no external actuator of any sort which assuming the hull of the craft was made out of wood with 1800's era technology it would without a doubt need. Third the propeller doesn't appear to have a propeller shaft or in fact be attached to anything, so unless it was added on so as not to frighten the natives when they saw a flying walnut it seems to be useless.


On a side note Thank you byrd and everyone else who provided me with links to parts of the manuscript. I appreciate your willingness to provide others with the raw material necessary to form their own opinions. On the other side of the coin I tend to wonder why Indigo seems to have no interest in providing links to those who are curious and open minded. And because of this he hurts his own argument very much especially with people like me who want more than anything to believe that something like this could in fact be genuine.



posted on Mar, 28 2005 @ 05:07 PM
link   
Now, were talking. Thanks Byrd. You raise valid and well
researched points and I really appreciate that. It shows
that you are serious and sincere in your efforts to discuss
this.


I will take your main points one by one:

Mercury in Ancient India:

Your first apprehension is whether the ancients Indians
knew how to extract mercury. I will put this to rest immediately,
referencing to Indian metallurgical and alchemical sciences,
as Mercury was considered to be the highest metals. It was called amritadhatu and Rasendra. It was specifically used in Ayurveda for it's healing and paraphysical properties, and is still used today in modern Ayurvedic medicine.

The sciences of chemistry and medicine was highly developed
by vedic Indians. There are entire existing texts on extracting metals
from the ores, distillation of perfumes, preparations of medicines and poisons and fermentation of wines. Of course it is clear the science of chemistry was highly developed given the fact that steel and zinc were being manufactured industrially. Which require complex metallurgical processes to manufacture.

I have covered this in some depth in my original topic 'Proof: Ancient Advanced civilisation existed' the following is a excerpt from it on page 7.

The Sanskrit text, Arthshastra, (which is really a text on political science and government, though also discusses metallurgy) describes how certain metals were extracted. Tutthodgata, as in silver, was extracted from Tuttha which is refined 17 times to obtain it. Brass as Arkuta and liquid ore and refers to burning of a metal to produce an eye salve or zinc. The text also discusses how the director of Mining of metals were suppose to examine old mines and locate new ones by analysing the physical properties of ores and then to establish factories for copper, lead, tin, brass etc.

The Minerals or Rases were divided into two categories: Maha(superior) and upda(subsidary) The Maharasa were known as Abhra(Mica), Vaikranta(Kimberlite dust), Masika(Pyrites), Vimala(Chalcopyrite), Adrija(Bitumen), Sasyaka(Copper Sulphate) and Capala(Zinc Carbonate) while mercury was called Rasendra - the king of the minerals. Mercury was a very important metal in ancient India and was also known as Amritadhatu(metal of immortality) and Indians claimed through alchemy elixirs could be produced from it.

There should therefore be absolutely no doubt that the ancient Indians knew how to extract and process Mercury.

The Mercury Vortex Engine:

Again, to quote the often repeated translation from the Samaranga Sutradhara

Inside the circular air frame, place the mercury-engine with its solar mercury boiler at the aircraft center. By means of the power latent in the heated mercury which sets the driving whirlwind in motion a man sitting inside may travel a great distance in a most marvellous manner. Four strong mercury containers must be built into the interior structure. When these have been heated by fire through solar or other sources the vimana (aircraft) develops thunder-power through the mercury.

The power is latent within the Mercury
The mercury-engine is placed inside a circular air frame
It contains four containers/chambers built into the interior structure for the Mercury.
The mercury is then heated by solar rays which develops thunder power
This sets a whirlwind motion and develops thunder power from the latent power in the Mercury(obviously ejected to produce thrust)

Now, the modern Ion engine by NASA:

solar-electric propulsion engine or solar-ion propulsion engine,.
The engine works by bombarding vaporized Mercury(Cesium and Argon are also used) with electrons from solar cells, which ionizes the gases. The Mercury vapor contained in the container is released into the ionization chamber, where it is then bombarded by electrons generated by the solar cells to ionize the gasses which causes it to heat up, which then is accelerated out of the nozzle to achieve thrust.

The power is latent within the Mercury(the ions)
The engine is placed inside the frame of the craft
It contains several chambers/containers built into the interior structure for the Mercury
The Mercury is bombarded electrons, produced from solar rays, which generate electrons that ionises the Mercury vapor and causes it to heat up
This causes the acceleration of hot ionized mercury vapor which is then ejected of out of nozzle to achieve thrust

I have already shown you on before that that this engine works and is nearly identical to the engine recently devised by NASA called the ion engine or the solar-electric ion engine. You are way off on the solar reactor. The engine works due to the Mercury being ionized by the photoelectrons produced from the solar rays. However, other sources such as electric fields or nuclear propulsion can be used too. That is that the atoms loses electrons and becomes a positively charged ion. This causes the mercury to to heat up rapidly, by controlling this reaction and acceleraring the positively charged ions out of the back of the craft it causes thrust in the opposite direction(Newtons 3rd law) It is really a jet propulsion engine using charged ions instead of hot gasses.


ion engine
Rocket engine that uses ions (charged particles) rather than hot gas for propulsion. Ion engines have been successfully tested in space, where they will eventually be used for gradual rather than sudden velocity changes. In an ion engine, atoms of mercury, for example, are ionized (given an electric charge by an electric field) and then accelerated at high speed by a more powerful electric field.


Source: www.tiscali.co.uk...


How might an ion engine work? -- DAA, San Diego, CA
One possible ion engine uses mercury as a propellant. The mercury starts as a liquid in a small tank, but its atoms slowly evaporate to form a low-density gas. An electric discharge through this gas, such as occurs inside a fluorescent lamp, knocks electrons off some of the mercury atoms. When a mercury atom loses an electron, it becomes a positively charged mercury ion and can be accelerated from the discharge by electric fields. In the ion propulsion engine, an electric field extracts and accelerates the mercury ions toward a hole in the side of a spaceship. The mercury ions are ejected into space at enormous speeds. As they accelerate, the mercury ions exert reaction forces on the engine and these forces are what propel the spaceship forward. Overall, the mercury ions accelerate in one direction while the spaceship accelerates in the other direction. To keep the spaceship electrically neutral, the engine also ejects electrons into space. However, mercury ions provide most of the engine's thrust.


Source: rabi.phys.virginia.edu...


There really should be no doubt that this engine works. What is more important that this engine has been flown and documented and witnessed by a large crowd of people. One, including the Maharaja of Baroda, who was also knighted.

The Vimana Schematics

I have already covered this and I honestly feel you have wasted your
time analysing those schematics. I see many are laughing at them,
but what you don't seem to know or notice, I am laughing at them too.
You will get absolutely no argument from me on whether they can
fly or not.

Likewise, the the Indian researchers at ADA are not taking
them seriously either:

But between 1919 and 1923 there is evidence of ‘add on’ textual content to the work in the form of description and diagrams of four types of representative vimanas--Sundara, Shakuna, Rukma and Tripura vimana. The work of making drawings was entrusted to a draughtsman T.K. Ellappa working in an engineering school. The drawings were prepared by him and appended as approved by Sri Subbaraya Shastry on 2nd December 1923. This is the last occasion that any material went into the Sanskrit transcript.
General Remarks on Vimanas diagrams and drawings:
· Inclusion of diagrams and drawings was an add on activity by Sri. Shastriji from 1919 – 1923 AD. This was done through a local draughtsman under the pandit’s guidance. It is difficult to accept that this process also was under the divine influence. It appears that in projecting the contents of the work through pictures and drawings their own interpretations seem to have influenced. Possibly this has corrupted narration to some extent. We are therefore not inclined to accept the drawings till further study. It is learnt that attempts are under way to build a prototype of one of these vimanas by a researcher in Hyderabad.


So, where is the issue, when neither I or the ADA are arguing for the diagrams. We are not. Here is why, it's obvious, but obviously not obvious enough:

* The diagrams were not a part of the original channeled text. They were not psychically inspired.

* They are not drawn by Shastri, but by a local druaghtman.

* Shastri is not a technician or an engineer.

What Shastri did, is what anyone of us would do if we received and wrote such information. We would try to interpret it. As Shastri was not an engineer or technican, his best bet was to seek the assitance of a local
engineer or technician. Now, if the vimana required a microprocessor. There would be no terms to express that in that time. So, the engineer might just write circuit board.

Had these diagrams/schematics been present in the original channeled text. Then it would have been an issue indeed. It would have become quite difficult to resolve the discrepancies of the empirical evidence of the materials developed.

However, this is not the case. On the contrary, Sanskrit linguists have been able to verify that the author is indeed Maharishi Baradwaja by comparing his other texts. There are also dozens of references to other ancient texts and authors of the time. One such text is Baradwaja own text on cosmology and radiation spectroscopy, Ansu Bodhini, and this text is stored at India's Oriential institute library and is not a channeled text. How do you explain that?

Again, remember, a text called "the science of aeronautics" is known to have existed in the 10th century. Also know that the VS is not the only text that discusses aeronautics.

There is quite a large body of interconnected evidence. The VS does not stand on it's own.

To truly debunk the VS, you really need to prove that all the organizations working on VS, all the researchers and scientists are lying. As that is what the VS is based on - expert studies. However, as there are so many organizations involved and this material has even been published in India's most oldest and prestigious science journals.

You could only make a case that highest of Indian scientific and scholary community are involved in a conspiracy. To debunk this conspiracy - you will need to fabricate another. That is very ironic, isn't it?

If you are going to claim this, and I don't think you are, as you are obviously more sensible than most in this thread, then you might as well go all out and claim everything, not just the VS, but everything by India's scholary and scientific community - is all a lie.

Because, my evidence is based on the research of Indian scholars, experts, scientists, technicians. You could even go as far and say that Ayurveda, binomial theorem, calculus, algebra, atomic theory and the discovery of the urbanized ancient cities is also a lie. After all, it is the same people involved - the general group called Indian researchers.

[edit on 28-3-2005 by Indigo_Child]



posted on Mar, 28 2005 @ 06:19 PM
link   
Sugar lumps,

The reason I have not provided links or more new information. Is because
I already have over and over again in other threads. Now, I have reached
the point where I have left the case for the consideration of people who
are interested. I have also issued a challenge to the skeptics to debunk
this. This is the one of the most strongest cases ever presented for a conspiracy on ATS.

You can see clearly from this the amount of ignorance on this forum. You can also see that none of the conspiracy here will ever be proven. There is a complex at this forum. I call this the "no proof syndrome" no matter how much evidence you provide for any of the subjects, it will never be enough.
The claimant is always guilty till proven innocent.

These are intellectually dishonest doctrines. This is all ignorance.

The VS is backed by a diverse range of evidence; factual, historical, anecdotal and even empirical. I have covered everything from ancient Indian metallurgy, logic, science, physics, astronomy, mathematics, theology and philosophy, linguistics, arts, medicine and surgery
archeaology, metaphysics and mythology.

I have provided dozens of links thoughout the threads. The link you were thanking Vagabond for the relavant translations, was first given by me exactly a month ago. In fact it's in the first page of the original topic 'Proof: Advanced ancient civilisation existed' I have also answered questions
and criticism for several weeks. I have even had some research material translated with assistance from my friends. I have been very dedicated and commited to this. I've also contacted some Sanskrit scholars by e-mail for further information. I've gathered so much information and research that
I might as well make use of it and write a book, rather than waste it here.

I always feel very uncomfortable bragging. It's like selling yourself. I am a very humble and modest person, it doesn't just bode well with me. However, it seems if I don't do that, people just won't notice my contributions. I am closest you will find to an expert on ancient India on ATS. My knowledge of ancient India is very in depth and I am often complimented on it. Ancient civilisations has always been one of my interests. If there was any value in a degree in Indology - I would do one. I might do one later when I have time to pursue my interests. There are also other very knowledgeable members, who are Indian Hindus, Worldwatcher, surfup, who appreciate my knowledge on ancient India and vedic literature.

I know you are new here, so I wouldn't expect you to know. But this discussion has been ongoing for over a month now. There have been multiple threads just on this subject. Overal there are nearly 300 pages of discussions on this subject alone.

Proof: Ancient Advanced civilisation existed
www.abovetopsecret.com...

Vedas and Physics of light revisted:
www.abovetopsecret.com...

The Aryan race:
www.abovetopsecret.com...

Vedic Physics:
www.abovetopsecret.com...

Mysteries surrounding the downfall of Indus Valley Civilizations

www.abovetopsecret.com...

Although Byrd arguments have been weak, she has made a sincere effort and has researched her points. She is the only real skeptic on this subject. I hope it remains that way. The others are fakes - ignore them. They don't do any reading or research. They just make it difficult for people who are interested in serious discourse to do so. Like noise in the background. You just have to learn to filter them out.

Vagabond, the author of this topic and who claims to have debunked the VS, the first time he responded claimed the author Maharishi Baradwaja was some guy in the 20th century. Just a few months ago from this he was claiming the Ancient Indian epic Mahabharata was a nuclear war from a story he saw on the net. Again - ignore.

Shouldn't you ask this character that if he's made a claim, which he shamelessly advertises in his avatar, then prove it. If I make a claim, I have to prove it. Why, doesn't he? Double standards is also another manifestation of ignorance.



posted on Mar, 28 2005 @ 08:14 PM
link   
Thank you for your response Indigo, I am sorry if my response came off as anything more than a subtle dig signifying my dismay with not getting a response from you who seems to have more of the manuscript than others do.
As I said before I find the entire subject intriguing and have been following this thread since I saw it appear. Due to my lack of general knowledge on the subject however I have been reluctant to comment.



posted on Mar, 30 2005 @ 01:34 PM
link   
I have a question, too...


Originally posted by Indigo_Child

Inside the circular air frame, place the mercury-engine with its solar mercury boiler at the aircraft center. By means of the power latent in the heated mercury which sets the driving whirlwind in motion a man sitting inside may travel a great distance in a most marvellous manner. Four strong mercury containers must be built into the interior structure. When these have been heated by fire through solar or other sources the vimana (aircraft) develops thunder-power through the mercury.


Okay... I understood that part. But I don't understand the "driving whirwind."




The mercury is then heated by solar rays which develops thunder power
This sets a whirlwind motion and develops thunder power from the latent power in the Mercury(obviously ejected to produce thrust)


Are you saying that the solar power heats the mercury and then the ship goes forward by spewing hot mercury (which is terribly corrosive and dangerous, right?) out the back??

Couldn't they do it with something that was lighter (like water) and not poisonous? If I remember my high school chemistry, some compounds and atoms are easier to break apart into plasmas than others. Or if they're all the same, then why not use something that isn't poisonous?



posted on Mar, 31 2005 @ 03:15 PM
link   

Originally posted by Indigo_Child
Mercury in Ancient India:

Your first apprehension is whether the ancients Indians
knew how to extract mercury.

...There are entire existing texts on extracting metals
from the ores, ...

Could you give me some sources? I know I'm stubborn, here... I have no problem with understanding how they distilled and extracted perfumes and medicines (I'm a little puzzled about the wine, though, because I thought it was forbidden.)

And, of course, mercury is easy to extract... again, no problem. My real question is (since there's supposed to have been so many of these machines): "where did the ore come from, and where are the slag piles from the refining?"

I haven't found any evidence of mercury mining in India, which is why I ask.


highly developed given the fact that steel and zinc were being manufactured industrially. Which require complex metallurgical processes to manufacture.

Okay... I was skeptical of this but I did find a paper on furnace techniques: ( www.topforge.co.uk... ) and a paper on metallurgy in India:
antiquity.ac.uk...

I'm going to doublecheck that article's sources. The writer pulls a few tricks like mentioning a metal in two different areas of the world (like Egypt and China) and a date (like 2000 BC) and then starts talking about India and leads the reader to conclude that India had it at the same time.

Gentle Reader is skeptical, here, but that's his problem. I'm just acknoweldging that I do see some confirmation of some of the metals you talk about being produced in India from 1800 BC onwards.






The Mercury Vortex Engine:
The power is latent within the Mercury
The mercury-engine is placed inside a circular air frame
It contains four containers/chambers built into the interior structure for the Mercury.

Okay.... got it to there. No problem.

The mercury is then heated by solar rays which develops thunder power
This sets a whirlwind motion and develops thunder power from the latent power in the Mercury(obviously ejected to produce thrust)

So you're saying that hot mercury plasma is sprayed out the back end, correct?


Now, the modern Ion engine by NASA:

solar-electric propulsion engine or solar-ion propulsion engine,.
The engine works by bombarding vaporized Mercury(Cesium and Argon are also used) with electrons from solar cells, which ionizes the gases. The Mercury vapor contained in the container is released into the ionization chamber, where it is then bombarded by electrons generated by the solar cells to ionize the gasses which causes it to heat up, which then is accelerated out of the nozzle to achieve thrust.

That's quite a bit different in design.

In the "Vimana" design, you have to wait till the solar furnace ionizes all the mercury (forming "the vortex".) So this isn't just an engine you can haul out and then fire up... you have to wait till the sun is in the right position with the right amount of light and then wait for full ionization to occur.

This could be time consuming if they're carrying any sort of payload.

In the NASA design, they vaporize the mercury with solar cells and then zap it ... you can do it a little bit at a time without having to wait to convert 100 kg of mercury into a plasma. So the NASA engine can be kickstarted on an instant. You're going ot have a long wait for the "Vimana."



and is nearly identical to the engine recently devised by NASA called the ion engine or the solar-electric ion engine.

They both use mercury, yes, and they both turn it into a plasma. The difference is that NASA starts with mercury vapor under high pressure and delivers that to the ionization chamber where it's immediately converted to ions. This isn't true and isn't implied in the "Vimana" design.


You are way off on the solar reactor. The engine works due to the Mercury being ionized by the photoelectrons produced from the solar rays.

Actually, the solar furnace (not reactor) was the only possible way that the sun could be used to heat the mercury to a high enough temperature.


However, other sources such as electric fields or nuclear propulsion can be used too.

Don't the texts say SPECIFICALLY solar rays? That's what I read.



General Remarks on Vimanas diagrams and drawings:
· Inclusion of diagrams and drawings was an add on activity by Sri. Shastriji from 1919 – 1923 AD. This was done through a local draughtsman under the pandit’s guidance. It is difficult to accept that this process also was under the divine influence.
* The diagrams were not a part of the original channeled text. They were not psychically inspired.
* They are not drawn by Shastri, but by a local druaghtman.
* Shastri is not a technician or an engineer.


Okay, so THEY are saying that this book was channeled by Shastri, right? Not that old copies existed and he's retranslating them or doing a scholarly compendium.

It's something that's channeled, according to these people, correct?



posted on Apr, 6 2005 @ 10:56 PM
link   
If the ADA did know about the advanced preferences on the VS, then why they didnt fly and establish a base on the moon. Why dont they have greatfully advanced aircraft than that of Russia, China and America. They even bought and acquired aircraft for heavens sake. Why isnt the US bowing to them. Although the AVATAR is a future light-weight hypersonic spacecraft, if it wasnt for the US- proposed Hypersoar project, they woulndnt have the AVATAR. If they really fully understand the VS in 1979, THEY COULD HAVE CONQURED OUTER SPACE!!!!!! Has anyone have thought of that



posted on Apr, 7 2005 @ 12:41 AM
link   
someone on this thread asked why the british didn't use that indian fellows flying machine for there own military. I don't feel like reading over then huge posts(where do yall find the time to type all that?) so heres a link with something at the bottom of the page about why they never used it or at least as clsoe to an answer as you'll get.

www.world-mysteries.com...



posted on Apr, 7 2005 @ 02:04 AM
link   
I don't think that page answers the question at all. Why did the British have the Maharaja of Baroda put the brakes on something like that? That's the oparative question here and thats the one part they really gloss over. The guy's wife died, somebody bought the craft, whatever- but why did the British try to stop him in the first place when he was onto something like this?

Also I would like to point out that the page there is chock-full of errors.

It claims the Nazis developed the pulsejet, which is not true. (Check Wikipedia if you like- i believe it was a Swede who invented it almost 40 years before WWII.)
It claims that a material copy of the VS was discovered in 1875 while other sources have indicated that there were no existing copies up till 1903 when Shastry channelled it.
It says Samarangana Sutradhara is Vedic, but if memory serves it is claimed to be written in the 11th century.



new topics

top topics



 
1
<< 1  2    4  5 >>

log in

join