It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.
Please white-list or disable AboveTopSecret.com in your ad-blocking tool.
Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.
Well, considering it takes months to create just one single element of it and it has a half-life of a fraction of a second after you do, the bigger problem is anybody having any to detect don’t you think?
Originally posted by johnlear
Element 115 cannot be synthesized. It occurs naturally. I made a post about 2 years ago on ATS of exactly how and where this happens. I wouldn't know how to find that post but maybe somebody reading this can. It would be very helpful.
Not sure if one of these is the right one, but I found...
Hope one of those helps.
OK I’ll bite… actually you might be surprised (or as I suspect not) to discover how close for the most part the literature is to the state of the art… perhaps on the order of only a few years…
… progress would come to a halt if nobody else in your field knew what you were doing. This is bad for all interested parties so consequently basic (fundamental) scientific research (where the really big discoveries are made) isn’t classified. On the other hand how you’re applying that knowledge currently to develop (engineer) something useful could very well be.
A good example of this was the Manhattan Project. At the time the project was started any nuclear physicist worth their salt who was keeping up with the literature would know the atom could be spilt and that this process (nuclear fission) theoretically could be used to create a self-sustaining nuclear chain reaction (i.e. the BFB) but few if any outside the project knew it actually had been done until it became all too painfully obvious to Japan
I was just trying to point out that some of the ascerbic anti-lazar claims in the linked timelines insinuate untriths. In particular, being part of a contractor does not mean you aren't in deep. In fact, it may be the other way around.
Now don’t go getting all defensive
No doubt there are politics involved in any given field. I’m curious. What is your field and the most relevant peer review journals to it?
True but armed with the facts about his education
and personal history
and a little common sense about basic science
it should be obvious why Lazer’s claims of magical properties for 115 is pure fiction…that is if there was ever any doubt to begin with
I see you rephrased that question, probably a good idea
Hmm… are you sure that’s why he had to wait?
Tiny Comets' Spots Called Artifacts
Actually, it was a “black” project, and it’s a perfect example of how difficult it is to keep a “really big secret” for very long.
That’s funny, that doesn’t sound like any of my colleagues
You might be able to erase his records but you can’t erase the people he went to school with and the teachers who graded his papers.
You’re right, I wouldn’t believe. You see that’s the beauty of science, it’s inherently self-policing… people like that never get away with it for very long.
If he didn’t want people trying to verify his education and whereabouts then maybe he shouldn’t have been making such extraordinary claims with no way to back it up.
Then why does it sound like you’re defending him?
An open mind is a terrible thing to waste.
But that’s what it sounds like you’re insinuating…
Originally posted by johnlear Does anybody have any information, thoughts or comments on SMU's and chargons?
Chargons, which have a charge of -1/3 or +1/3 bind to SMU's by the Gravity "A" wave of 7.46 Hz in orbits separated by 120 degrees. All full atoms have exactly the same number of positive chargons as negative chargons.
All matter is made up of protons, neutrons and electrons which themselves are made up by quarks. The quarks are either an up quark or a down quark and themselves are made up of one smu and 2 positive chargons for the up quark and 1 smu and 1 negative chargon for the down quark.
An electron is made up by 3 negative chargons by themselves (without an smu) which gives it a net charge of minus 1. (3 x -1/3).
A neutron is made up of 1 upquark and 2 down quarks. The up quark is made up of 1 smu and 2 positive chargons. The down quark is made up of 1 smu and 1 negative chargon. So for the neutron we have:
1 up quark=2 positive chargons (2x +1/3) and 1 smu
2 down quarks=2 negative chargons (2 x -1/3) and 2 smu's
for a total of 3 smu's
This gives us a net charge of 0 and a net mass (at rest) of 3.
The proton is made up of 2 up quarks and 1 down quark, which gives us:
2 up quarks=4 positive chargons (4x +1/3) (2 smu's each with 2 chargons)
1 down quark=1 negative chargon (1x -1/3) (1 smu with 1 negative chargon)
for a total of 3 smu's
This gives us a net charge of +1 and a net mass (at rest) of 3.
A neutrino has 3 negative chargons and 3 positive chargons for a net charge of 0 and a net mass (at rest) of 0. Like the electron it has no smu.
BTW do you know how hard it is to come back from the dead? I had to mathematically reprove the whole universe exists. Please be more careful in the future John
7.46 Hz sounds an awful lot like the Shumann Resonance. How can a macroscopic wave have an interface in a subquantum environment? And what is the "B" wave (assuming that "A" designates one of several letters describing gravity?)?
Originally posted by johnlear...let me tell you a little story. In 1990 or 91, around there somewhere I was visiting my older daughter and her husband in Washington , D.C.
Sorry. I have a reputation to maintain as a science machine. I cannot afford to have people thinking that I have an open mind. Access denied.
Could you tell me what the other generations of quarks are made of?
What is the muon and taus structure?
What are the spins of the chargons, 1/2?
and the spin of the mass unit?
Is the origin of mass understood?
Is Bob OK Or did someone finally get to him...?
Originally posted by Ectoterrestrial...one could make a weapon to dissociate matter instantaneously, anywhere in the universe. That would be bad for creatures anywhere, not just earth. That would be a good reason for secrecy and extraterrestrial involvement.