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.

 

How does one gain access to super advanced tech?

page: 2
0
<< 1    3 >>

log in

join
share:

posted on Feb, 16 2006 @ 09:44 AM
link   

Originally posted by StalkerZERO
If brand new technologies exist so much that the gov't isn't even aware that they should grab hold of it....
How would one gain access to that kind of stuff? Apart from the super secret gov't projects the regular gov't and society as a whole aren't aware of anti-grav tech or something along those lines.
So how does the average joe who wants to learn more about that stuff....learn about that stuff?

What if I wanted to build an anti-grav device or something more advanced than conventional tech? Would I really have to raid some top secret facility or can I simply consult public sources of info?


You would have to get AT LEAST a bachelor's degree in physics or mechanical engineering. That will get you to a GS-5 pay grade - about $30,000 US. If you get hired as a supplementary scientist at a government research facility, you may have to get "Secret" security clearance.

After a year, you can get promoted to GS-7, and then GS-9 a year after that. Typically, GS-9 is where your promotion level would end for a supplementary scientist. You can apply for a Project Scientist position after that, which will start you on the GS-11, GS-12, GS-13 promotion level. By then you'll be making around $70,000-$90,000. If you have performed well and have maintained your "Secret" clearance, you may be asked to participate on more advanced projects requiring "Top Secret" clearance.

You can go ahead and get a PhD in physics if you have a 3.0 GPA. Almost every single graduate school will actually PAY YOU to be a science grad student and will waive your tuition. Getting a PhD in physics typically takes 6 years, and will allow you to jump to GS-11 or GS-12 immediately.

Anyway, in the end, you will have to be hush-hush about the stuff you work on. If you get to help work on an anti-grav device, you won't be able to take it home, and you certainly won't be allowed to make you own at home because of intelletual property laws.

Anyway, the government ALMOST NEVER researches new stuff. This is capitalist America, where jobs like that are privatized. The government says "we want someone to design this-and-such, and it needs to do this, and have these qualities. We will award a multi-million dollar contract to the team that makes the best proposal."

The government WILL, however, do its own testing on the new prototypes once they have been completed. The government learned during WWI and WWII that they can't trust the manufacturer's own tests simply because they are anxious to get huge contracts from the government and will sometimes lie.




posted on Feb, 16 2006 @ 12:54 PM
link   
Well, if you had a million dollars or so just laying about the home, you could always just buy some of this advanced tech. I think an electron microscope will run you over the $1000k+ range.



posted on Feb, 16 2006 @ 05:13 PM
link   
Pdo3,
Trust me, I realize the M-60 was outdated. Read the rest of my post. I stepped into the M-1 while it was still in the "proving" phase. That was my point.

Lex



posted on Feb, 16 2006 @ 05:19 PM
link   

Originally posted by Frosty
Well, if you had a million dollars or so just laying about the home, you could always just buy some of this advanced tech. I think an electron microscope will run you over the $1000k+ range.


After the bubble burst you could get one for a palty 60k-100k from Bankruptsy auctions as they are widely used in Microelectronics Manufacturing and as we all know alot of those Manufacturers(the smaller ones) went out of business.


[edit on 16-2-2006 by sardion2000]



posted on Feb, 17 2006 @ 08:27 AM
link   
All of this sounds so silly but is probably true. It makes me want to slap my forehead and shake my head in disgust.
In anycase I'm not interested in any of that depressing stuff which is primitive society. I'm interested in advanced tech for its own sake. But to a degree I'm going to have to do alot of research and get alot of training done myself before I could consult anyone else. Would there be any advantages of making a project open source? Would anything get done faster?

[edit on 17-2-2006 by StalkerZERO]



posted on Feb, 17 2006 @ 08:41 AM
link   
Making a project open source isn't a good idea. The problem with that is that anyone can grab the idea. If you are stuck at a point in your project , someone else could take all the data you gathered and changed a few things about the process and then finish it. They would of gotten the credit for it because as you well know no one ever got an award for almost finishing something. Thats why most projects aren't open source. Whjile the sharing of information is good and the ability to have this massive pool of intellectuals to tap is, the proble is that at least on person in the group would have an agenda. That one person could ruin the whole project when they decide to modify it and then make it work to their advantage.


-Aza



posted on Feb, 17 2006 @ 09:11 AM
link   
Really now. You obviously have no idea how OS works. Any piece of code you contribute to a project HAS to be credited to you and if someone steals your work then it's in your right to pursue legal recourse as alot of new and older more experienced programmers use those pieces of code and contributions in their Resume and Portfolio. I know a couple of Programmers who taught themselves without going to school and in order to get a job they joined the OSS community which is supported by the likes of IBM, Sun Microsystems, Google, Redhat and dozens of other companies. When they gained a reputation the job offers started flowing in DESPITE THEIR LACK OF FORMAL EDUCATION! Just because something is Open Source does not mean it's unlicenced and completely open to theft. There are rules and restrictions that are tagged on EVERY OSS project. Please learn what you're talking about before you go and pass judgement
BTW The number of OSS programers is growing faster then the number of Proprietary Programmers because there are more opportunities in the Support services game which is one of IBM's most lucrative businesses. They don't make money off of Selling Software, they make money off of SUPPORTING OS Software which is an unending revenue stream.



posted on Feb, 17 2006 @ 09:35 AM
link   

Originally posted by StalkerZERO
Dunno seems like I would have to waste years before I could get to the point where I could finally do work on any personal projects.


Not true. Although I didn't do any research in my undergraduate courses, others did. And I certainly did research while getting my Masters'.


Anybody remember the movie "The Fly"? The one with jeff goldblum. I liked the part when he said he wasn't as smart as some other brilliant people. And all he did was ask some smarter people than himself to build him a particle accelerator this and someone else to make him a laser emitter that and all he did was put them together.

Erm... no offense, but that's a MOVIE. They don't have to interface with reality at all in movies. Remember BAMBI, with talking deer and rabbits?


Maybe I could be someone like that? I could have an overall vision of a project and just consult smarter people than myself. What do you think?

Yep. You could do that if you're a billionaire. But... just because YOU have a vision doesn't mean that it's possible to achieve. I might have a vision of flying like Superman or Superwoman but that doesn't mean I can find (even with Bill Gates' fortune) someone to make me some Kryptonite based formula that will make me invulnerable, give me X-ray vision, and allow me to fly.

When I was programming, I encountered a lot of projects like that, where we had to sit people down and gently explain that no, there was no way on the face of the Earth that we could accomplish what they were describing.



posted on Feb, 17 2006 @ 01:53 PM
link   
Well the problem I could see there is that the person shared their entire vision. Whatever the project was could have been broken down into smaller sub visions to find out what WAS achievable. Did the person/persons ran away teary eyed/crushed or was their project ever finished?


Originally posted by Byrd

Originally posted by StalkerZERO
Dunno seems like I would have to waste years before I could get to the point where I could finally do work on any personal projects.


Not true. Although I didn't do any research in my undergraduate courses, others did. And I certainly did research while getting my Masters'.


Anybody remember the movie "The Fly"? The one with jeff goldblum. I liked the part when he said he wasn't as smart as some other brilliant people. And all he did was ask some smarter people than himself to build him a particle accelerator this and someone else to make him a laser emitter that and all he did was put them together.

Erm... no offense, but that's a MOVIE. They don't have to interface with reality at all in movies. Remember BAMBI, with talking deer and rabbits?


Maybe I could be someone like that? I could have an overall vision of a project and just consult smarter people than myself. What do you think?

Yep. You could do that if you're a billionaire. But... just because YOU have a vision doesn't mean that it's possible to achieve. I might have a vision of flying like Superman or Superwoman but that doesn't mean I can find (even with Bill Gates' fortune) someone to make me some Kryptonite based formula that will make me invulnerable, give me X-ray vision, and allow me to fly.

When I was programming, I encountered a lot of projects like that, where we had to sit people down and gently explain that no, there was no way on the face of the Earth that we could accomplish what they were describing.



posted on Feb, 17 2006 @ 02:12 PM
link   

Originally posted by StalkerZERO
Well the problem I could see there is that the person shared their entire vision. Whatever the project was could have been broken down into smaller sub visions to find out what WAS achievable.



Money, this kind of research cost money. Time spent on a particle acclerator is very valueable time. You don't think physicist just spend all day with this technology do you, smashing atoms and firing lasers? Don't confuse reality with Jeff Goldblum movies, because there aren't any dinosaurs either.

For the most part, there is a long list list to use the certain machines like particle accelerators and there is a very high chance you will only run an experiment once. That's the way it is.

If you also want to have your ideas funded, remember this stuff cost lots of money and has realitively zero $ given back (maybe a publication is all, if that), you would need to graduate top of your class. It does no good to be the C student who struggled during grad school.

Besides, you are deriving your ideas from a movie, I would recommend to you that you study physics and math for a great while.

And always remember, you have to convince your financer/donor/government/school/etc, that what you are doing is meticulously thought out, well planned, well worth the experiment, and that you will hire and sign on people that know what they are doing. Your reputation may very well be at stake. Because there is no chance that any money is going to be made off such experiments, it really does not happen.



posted on Feb, 17 2006 @ 03:03 PM
link   
The jeff goldblum movie has nothing to do with any of my ideas. I just noted the example of what his character said about breaking a project down into several parts and assigning each part to a specialist or team of specialists. Then at the end all he did was assemble the parts. Software for instance, isn't thats whats done for super mega large programs like microsoft's zillion line coded OSes? I'm just generalizing here.


Originally posted by Frosty

Originally posted by StalkerZERO
Well the problem I could see there is that the person shared their entire vision. Whatever the project was could have been broken down into smaller sub visions to find out what WAS achievable.



Money, this kind of research cost money. Time spent on a particle acclerator is very valueable time. You don't think physicist just spend all day with this technology do you, smashing atoms and firing lasers? Don't confuse reality with Jeff Goldblum movies, because there aren't any dinosaurs either.

For the most part, there is a long list list to use the certain machines like particle accelerators and there is a very high chance you will only run an experiment once. That's the way it is.

If you also want to have your ideas funded, remember this stuff cost lots of money and has realitively zero $ given back (maybe a publication is all, if that), you would need to graduate top of your class. It does no good to be the C student who struggled during grad school.

Besides, you are deriving your ideas from a movie, I would recommend to you that you study physics and math for a great while.

And always remember, you have to convince your financer/donor/government/school/etc, that what you are doing is meticulously thought out, well planned, well worth the experiment, and that you will hire and sign on people that know what they are doing. Your reputation may very well be at stake. Because there is no chance that any money is going to be made off such experiments, it really does not happen.



posted on Feb, 18 2006 @ 07:08 PM
link   
Think of something that you want to achieve and then start to build up your knowledge on how to accomplish it. You don't need a college degree in chemistry to become a revolutionary chemist. You don't need a degree in physics to understand how to solve the world's energy problems. Although you will be chastized and fed misinformation every step of the way. You just have to go with intuition with what you beleive to be true.

The world seems to be highly corrupted (especially the United States). You may end up with getting tranquilized in the arm one day and interrogated. Or tortured into contributing your knowledge to .gov/or others whom it may concern.

Before you do anything, learn how to make cyanide pills and always keep one stored in your gums. Or inject yourself with deadly toxins that needs specific antibiotics, then when .gov comes to see what your up to, you wont live long in captivity. Unless they torture the cure out of you before you die.

Or you can by luck live under the radar and try to patent something and THEN get shot or your idea stolen.

Either way, good luck. When you meet the grey's or see some cool stuff, make sure you post it here.



posted on Feb, 18 2006 @ 10:46 PM
link   

Originally posted by sardion2000
It's quite simple. Become an Engineer. Takes several years of schooling but it's worth it....I hope
(Currently studying to be a Nanomechanical Engineer)

ahhhhh...That explains a lot...You always seem like you know a lot about whats going on in the "nanoworld".


You need to stop talkin on ATS, and get to work on that 62,000 mile long cable, you Slacker!


[edit on 18-2-2006 by Murcielago]



posted on Feb, 18 2006 @ 11:24 PM
link   

Originally posted by Byrd
etd.unisa.ac.za...


I'm not very impressed by this. I can't believe someone would actually try to use time travel for a dissertation. That's crazy. There are way too many unknowns.

Look at this guy:
He's talking about using wormholes (which haven't been proven to exist yet)
He uses a few elementary linear algebra techniques to go with advanced calculus... I'd think his matricies would be a bit more complex (that could just be me).
He's apparently stealing Stephen Hawking's view of a coned timeline, or so it appears.
Although I'm good at math, I'm not good enough to know why you'd use integration notation for -inf to +inf. How in the world would that help to describe a real world situation (the idea would be to make time travel plausable, or so I'd assume)?


ANYWAY!... back to the forum topic

If you want to work in advanced research, you'd have to be a brain or a politician. I don't believe there is any other way. I'm sure "laborers" used in high-end, highly-secretive projects are usually degreed (and experienced). A very obvious door to working on secretive projects would be to work for a major aerospace contractor. NASA, Boeing, Lockheed, Ratheon, etc.

A better question is, "will this line of work make you happy?"

Just because it sounds cool doesn't mean you'd actually like doing it.

(P.S. please excuse any spelling mistakes... my brain is taking the weekend off)


XL5

posted on Feb, 18 2006 @ 11:33 PM
link   
You don't need that much money to make something that probably works on high voltage, magnetics, diamagnetics, spinning parts and a frequency or two. Most proto-types are made like theos CEO's $5000 pen sets, you just need cheap parts, some understanding and experimentation.

I have made lasers that pop holes in thin metal for under $100, I had a chance to own/build a Pharos III laser that can pop holes through just about anything for $300. If you can find the parts for cheap and build it your self, you can keep the tech too. You don't need cal. or any hard math to make lasers and I bet the same is true of AG devices. You need to have some measuring devices, tools, parts and logic. Its not like you have to make a diamond from carbon.

As for people stealing your work, do you want the fame, money or just the device? If you just want the device, your safe, as long as you get the plans over to the public. The person who stole your idea will still be testing it to sell the finished product to NASA by the time every one knows about your work. That person may also be caught and told to shut up since there will be records of his achievements/success.

If you want to make it for the money/fame, just get into a field of study that you might like and that is a next step technology (nanotech, plasma/high energy physics, photonics (light) ). All of those fields require you to know alot of heavy math. However, if you want to know about some high tech stuff, set up a machine shop/lab near some big bases or big industries and make sure your lab is sealed off to snooping people. You will see some parts of plans that are for some cool tech if you make the parts for the kind of tech you want to see!

I suck at math.



posted on Feb, 18 2006 @ 11:58 PM
link   
Absolutely, knowlege would be very helpful in your quest. Knowlege is available from the library, college, books, the Net, etc. Keep dictionaries (including technical dictionaries) handy and dive in. Nearly anything can be grasped with proper study.


Troy



posted on Feb, 19 2006 @ 01:03 AM
link   

Originally posted by Byrd

Originally posted by StalkerZERO
Dunno seems like I would have to waste years before I could get to the point where I could finally do work on any personal projects.


Not true. Although I didn't do any research in my undergraduate courses, others did. And I certainly did research while getting my Masters'.


Anybody remember the movie "The Fly"? The one with jeff goldblum. I liked the part when he said he wasn't as smart as some other brilliant people. And all he did was ask some smarter people than himself to build him a particle accelerator this and someone else to make him a laser emitter that and all he did was put them together.

Erm... no offense, but that's a MOVIE. They don't have to interface with reality at all in movies. Remember BAMBI, with talking deer and rabbits?


Maybe I could be someone like that? I could have an overall vision of a project and just consult smarter people than myself. What do you think?

Yep. You could do that if you're a billionaire. But... just because YOU have a vision doesn't mean that it's possible to achieve. I might have a vision of flying like Superman or Superwoman but that doesn't mean I can find (even with Bill Gates' fortune) someone to make me some Kryptonite based formula that will make me invulnerable, give me X-ray vision, and allow me to fly.

When I was programming, I encountered a lot of projects like that, where we had to sit people down and gently explain that no, there was no way on the face of the Earth that we could accomplish what they were describing.


I agree with this totally. Most projects of research are very narrowly focused so as to not become diffused. The aim is to make solid what is knowable so as to have a basis for further discovery.

Testing theories one piece at a time, building concepts from the floor up these are the cornerstones of science that can take a scientist his whole career to prove or disprove a small sector of what is known



posted on Feb, 19 2006 @ 01:08 AM
link   
I'll tell you anything. What do you want to know? What kind of device would you like to make? Seriously.


XL5

posted on Feb, 19 2006 @ 01:27 AM
link   
neurocardiology, I'd like to know about any very basic gravity altering device or as much as you know about bismuth in relation to anti gravity or any other odd effects it can produce.



posted on Feb, 19 2006 @ 10:14 AM
link   
The BEST way to get ahold of super advanced tech.... is to buy an Apple computer... LOL Ok now I know I will get flamed for that but I couldnt resist.



new topics




 
0
<< 1    3 >>

log in

join