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.

 

Is holography currently available for use and misuse?

page: 23
4
<< 20  21  22    24  25  26 >>

log in

join
share:

posted on Jan, 30 2008 @ 02:55 PM
link   
reply to post by OrionStars
 


“When you have eliminated the impossible, whatever remains, however improbable, must be the truth.”

If holograms aren't the explanation, as their impossibility of producing the results asserted, then one must accept that another explanation must be the case. In my world, the explanation is that it was an airplane.




posted on Jan, 30 2008 @ 02:59 PM
link   

Originally posted by BlueRaja
reply to post by OrionStars
 


“When you have eliminated the impossible, whatever remains, however improbable, must be the truth.”

If holograms aren't the explanation, as their impossibility of producing the results asserted, then one must accept that another explanation must be the case. In my world, the explanation is that it was an airplane.


I have stated in many posts, in this forum, you are certainly entitled to your opinions, as is anyone else to their opposing opinions.



posted on Jan, 30 2008 @ 05:05 PM
link   

Originally posted by OrionStars
I have stated in many posts, in this forum, you are certainly entitled to your opinions, as is anyone else to their opposing opinions.

Yeah, but many of us here are not looking for oppinions, but the truth instead.


I will say this again: When i started posting to this thread, i considered the possibility of "holograms". (the reason i keep putting the word hologram between ".." is, that it is the wrong word, as it already means something else).

I actually believed three dimensional volumetric projection in some sort of medium are possible. I wanted to believe they are possible.

This is because many companies claim to offer, and many videos claim to show ,"holograms".

At first i thought it only wouldn't work in daylight.

But after going through all the evidence and analyzing the scientific aspect of it, i came to the conclusion, that such mid air 3D "holograms" are not even possible in complete darkness, even with a lot of smoke.

Those companies and videos only offer and show a 2D version of Pepper's ghost or, a plain old projection on a transparent sheet or a fine mist.

I found only two possibilities of creating real 3D volumetric projections:
One is that crystal, which gives a glowing point where two laser beams cross.
The other is a powerfull IR laser, which explodes the air, where the beam is focused into a tiny spot.

Crystals are obviously out of the question and the other possibility creates glowing balls of plasma at any spot in mid air up to a certain distance.

Plasma again gives off light, the colour of which depends on the gasses it is made of, so in daylight, it would look like some glowing thing. And in the night it would look like some even more glowing thing.

BTW: Have you ever seen a ball of plasma? I have. It's so brightly glowing, buzzing and sparkling, that it gave me a weird headache, after demonstrating it three times in a row. Oh, and it started melting a hole in a piece of metal.

Anyway, it will be possible to create a nice light show with it. If they can manage to give it colours, they can perhaps even project (loud) virtual objects in mid air. It would even be interesting in daylight, but it would be obvious it is not a real object.


Real objects absorb most of the light, reflect only some of it, block light from the background and cast a shadow.

Light (even laser beams) can do none of that. They can only create more light. They can not make an appearance of something dark. They can not stop in mid air they can not block light from the background and they can not cast a shadow.


So, even tho i wanted to believe such mid air 3D projections are possible, i had to come to the conclusion, that they are not.

I really want you to understand this: I want it to be possible! I would love for it to be possible! I would want to have it and use it. And i would love to agree with you, that it is possible! Really, i would!

But wishing can't make it true.

I learned something from this thread. Many people posted questions, that made me think and try to find an explanation on how it might work. I'm also very greatefull for your questions, propositions and persistance, because they made me think outside the box.

But still, after considering all the evidence we have and all the science behind how light and lasers work, i had to accept, that it can't work.

And these are not oppinions, but facts. Cold hard and unfortunate facts.

If mid air 3D projections were possible, they would require science and not oppinions. Things can't work on oppinions alone.


I would also hope, that you learned at least something from this thread, but i guess that's up to you.


Oh, and something else:
I agree, that there are many unanswered questions about 911. But there is one thing i can tell for sure. It wasn't "holograms".



posted on Jan, 30 2008 @ 05:05 PM
link   

Originally posted by OrionStars
www.abovetopsecret.com...

That was not the purpose of the discussion. The purpose is the serious consideration, of the high probablity, holograms could be successfully used, because they most assuredly existed on 9/11/2001 to a highly sophisticated degree. Developed by the Pentagon and DOD through their own and private labs.

When people cannot see an impact prior to explosion, something is definitely wrong. Explosions are always delayed reactions after impacting another object. So far no one has been able to prove any impact took place at four different locations on 9/11/2001.


But we're not talking about the impacts are we? That is not what the thread is about. As you say, "The purpose is the serious consideration, of the high probablity, holograms could be successfully used,"
Evidence has been posted to show holograms of that level of sophistication can't and don't exist. Now the burden to disprove everything posted, falls on you and anyone who agrees with you.

You further write, "because they most assuredly existed on 9/11/2001 to a highly sophisticated degree." You keep making this statement but not once have you every provided a shred of evidence to back it up. So are you a troll or do you really have the evidence you claim to have? If you have it, post it.



posted on Jan, 30 2008 @ 05:08 PM
link   

Originally posted by OrionStars
The following website has a picture of the hole after a plane did not completely penetrate, with a large part hanging to the outside, pulled out from the inside, and then broke up all over a Manhattan city street.

www.freerepublic.com...

www.nytimes.com...

www.esbnyc.com...


Smith's final blunder came when he passed the Chrysler Building. Had he kicked the left rudder, he would have been safe; instead, he went right rudder and directly on a path to the Empire State Building. At 200 miles per hour, the unarmed trainer bomber screamed down 42nd Street and banked south over 5th Avenue. The pilot tried desperately to climb, but it was too late. At 9:40 that Saturday morning, the B-25 slammed into the 79th floor of the Empire State Building.


If anyone else has an authenticated series of something showing an actual plane made contact on impact, pentetrated, and was swallow intact whole by any building, I am certainly willing to look at what anyone might have as specifically described.



As you have pointed out earlier, this is not what this thread is about. Please stick to the topic. Thank you.



posted on Jan, 30 2008 @ 05:12 PM
link   

Originally posted by OrionStars
reply to post by xmaddness
 


Yes, that is the title. People have stated they do not agree it is possible. Others have stated they agree it is possible. Neither opinion is right or wrong when it comes to possibility vs impossibility.



Actually the difference is that many posters have presented actual evidence against the existence of the super sophisticated hologram. Evidence is not an opinion. Nobody who believes in the 9/11 holograms, has presented any evidence to suggest they exist at that level of sophistication. So we have facts on one side and opinions on the other.



posted on Jan, 30 2008 @ 05:24 PM
link   

Originally posted by jfj123
Now the burden to disprove everything posted, falls on you and anyone who agrees with you.

Well, what has been posted is basic science, so we can't ask of him to disproove it.

But OrionStars, if you really believe some sort of mid air 3D projection is possible, then you should at least provide some theory, as to how it could work.

Saying "DoD probably has some advanced stuff, that we don't understand, but can make it possible", is a wild speculation.

You need a REASON to believe something. Guesses and speculations are not a good enough reason for believing something. Especially, when there are explanations available, that are 100000x more probable, not to mention possible, and also easier, cheaper, more effective and A LOT safer and more convincing!

Even if such "holograms" existed, it would be foolish to use them, when there are MANY simpler ways of doing it available, with better results and and less loose ends.



Originally posted by jfj123
You further write, "because they most assuredly existed on 9/11/2001 to a highly sophisticated degree." You keep making this statement but not once have you every provided a shred of evidence to back it up.

Well, this statement came from a misunderstanding of "lasers have been used in holography since the 50s".

While this is true, these holograms are those films containing 3D information about an object.

So basically, his basic premise and his best piece of "evidence" have been a simple and very common misunderstanding of the word hologram.

And OrionStars, i'm not trying to be offensive with the last sentence, since i was fooled myself, untill examining the facts.


But still, if you have any information about the possibility of creating real 3D projections in air, i would love to see it! I'm sure many of us would.

Unfortunatelly, without it, you can't just expect people to believe it is possible. Otherwise it's just a belief. A completelly ungrounded and unreasonable belief.



posted on Jan, 30 2008 @ 07:38 PM
link   
Correct. The topic is: Is holography currently available for use and misuse?

I opine that is is. I have no idea how to disprove anyone else's opinion. For those who know how, please do provide the key to how that would done. Please stay on topic at the same time.



posted on Jan, 31 2008 @ 05:15 AM
link   

Originally posted by OrionStars
Correct. The topic is: Is holography currently available for use and misuse?

I opine that is is. I have no idea how to disprove anyone else's opinion.


You're not supposed to disproove other's oppinions, nor facts, that we have posted.


I'm just saying, that if you think "holography" is available, you must have a reason to think so. Some supporting evidence. Anything.
If you do, please show it to us, we would love to see it. If you don't, then it is your belief, and not oppinion.


And yes, everybody is entitled to their own beliefs and oppinions. But the name of your thread sounded like a question. A question, you thought you answered with that quote from a document about lasers.

Unfortunatelly, when that document said "lasers are used in holography, ..." it meant those pieces of film that contain 3D information about an object. Not mid air 3D projections.


In a way, you were right. Holography is available, and it is sophisticated. In the beginning you had to use a laser to see a hologram. Now you can see it in normal white light. It can even show a 3D object in motion in that piece of film.
It is used to protect money, cheques credit cards and so on.
And it is misused to forge these same things.


But so far we haven't seen a single example of a mid air 3D projection (not the same as hologram). Not even one, that could work in complete darkness, never mind daylight.



Originally posted by OrionStars
For those who know how, please do provide the key to how that would done. Please stay on topic at the same time.

I tried my best to come up with at least an imaginary theory, on how it could be done. I also described why it wouldn't work.
I also went through hundreds of pages of info about lasers, holograms and projection systems.
I even asked some people, who know a hell of a lot more than me about lasers.

And all these pages and people had to say was, that it is impossible, because light would have to stop in mid air & do some other things it can't.


And if you think i don't want to agree with you, please reread that post, where i described that Japanese discovery, that could for the first time ever allow us to project at least glowing white pixels in mid air and in 3D. Some day, maybe even in colour. But again, since it will consist of glowing balls of plasma, it will give off light, so it won't be possible to present something darker than the surroundings. In darkness it might even look partially convincing, but in daylight it will just be a (loud) glowing thing.

I would love to agree with you, if only i had a reason.
Without a reason, your position is not an oppinion, but a belief.


You know what the best way of making something appear in mid air in daylight is?

It's very simple: You just put it there. Or fly it, in this case.

It's cheaper, easyer, more effective, more convincing and a lot better in EVERY aspect. Not to mention, that it's at least possible.


Let me ask you something else, OrionStars:
Since in the beginning you confused computer generated 3D graphics (CGI) with holograms, are you perhaps trying to say, that the videos of the planes crashing are fake?

Is that what you're trying to say?

Because that at least would be possible to do, unlike mid air projections.


Many people are trying to proove, that the videos are fake. But if there really were mid air 3D "holograms", the videos wouldn't have to be fake.

So which is it now? Are the videos real, but they are showing "holograms", or are the videos faked using CGI to cover something up?

[edit on 31/1/08 by deezee]



posted on Jan, 31 2008 @ 07:08 AM
link   
reply to post by deezee
Points well put


I can see how the suggestion of holograms on the claimed scale could be appealing if the only concepts of what they can do come from 'hollywood science' but in the light of practical experience and real physics of light & imagery it literally falls apart for numerous very sound reasons.

I'd still like to see how a full-size 767 holographic image could be created and stored for replay too. Try to imagine it played back in 800 x 600 or even 1600 x 1200 pixel resolution (severe chunkiness).

CGI has its own set of problems like all the live eye witnesses with cameras for example.



posted on Jan, 31 2008 @ 07:18 AM
link   
Quantum entanglement is the only tech I know that could possibly create such a hologram without the use of a medium. However, that tech is officially decades away from the required sophistication



posted on Jan, 31 2008 @ 07:32 AM
link   

Originally posted by Cthulwho
Quantum entanglement is the only tech I know that could possibly create such a hologram without the use of a medium. However, that tech is officially decades away from the required sophistication


I know what quantum entanglement means, but how could it be used to create 3D projections in mid air?


If you know something specific about this, or have any links, i would be greatefull if you posted them.

Thanks!



posted on Feb, 2 2008 @ 08:15 AM
link   

Originally posted by OrionStars
Correct. The topic is: Is holography currently available for use and misuse?

I opine that is is. I have no idea how to disprove anyone else's opinion. For those who know how, please do provide the key to how that would done. Please stay on topic at the same time.


Nobody should expect you to disprove someone else's opinion however, you have stated you know the tech exists. Surely for you to have such strong convictions you must have evidence to suggest you are correct. Could you please post the evidence?

I am a tech head and have looked into this on a number of occasions and have not been able to find any information indicating the tech's existence. John Lear has also claimed the tech exists and I've asked him for evidence to support his statements but the only 2 items he was able to come up with was a witness who supposedly saw a plane disappear while flying over head and a USAF wish list for it's 2025 Future Tech program.

I was be very excited to know that this tech does exists so once again, if you can show it does, I'd greatly appreciate it !!! I am sincere in saying this



posted on Feb, 2 2008 @ 10:48 AM
link   

Originally posted by jfj123
I was be very excited to know that this tech does exists so once again, if you can show it does, I'd greatly appreciate it !!! I am sincere in saying this


I completelly agree. And i tried telling him that many times by now, but maybe my posts are too long..


So, again..
OrionStars: I would LOVE to believe it is possible! I would love to agree with you! We are not trying to disagree on purpose. It's just, that some of us want to know instead of just believing.

So if you know anything about such a projection system, please tell us.



On the other hand...
jfj123: I tried taking a picture of a laser beam focused into a tiny spot at a few centimeters.. I wanted to show that laser beam cone, how it starts getting thinner and thinner untill it comes to a microscopic dot and then starts spreading again. But for some reason, the camera simply can not focus on the same thing i see.

I also tried to create a mid air "pixel" by crossing four laser beams in the same spot - two red and two blue (~violet) beams.

If the beams are invisible, so is the point where they cross. If i use smoke and dim the lights, all i get is four laser beams crossing. The spot where they cross is not visibly brighter.

So other than those (loud) balls of plasma, there is no way to use lasers to project something in mid air, without the beams being visible as well. And with the beams visible, you get a laser show, not a hologram. (i've seen it mixed up before)


Oh, and i somehow managed to kill BOTH of the two blue laser diodes while doing this..


I will be mourning for two months now. That's when i get the next two.

[edit on 2/2/08 by deezee]



posted on Feb, 2 2008 @ 12:39 PM
link   
I promised to do the "air pixel" experiment, but my lasers didn't want to cooperate. One of them commited suicide, and the other was already considering it.

I snatched up my camera, as the second blue one started dying on me.

These are a few of the last pics i was able to make of it, before it went to laser heaven.


Red & Blue crossed - Pic 1

Red & Blue crossed - Pic 2

Red & Blue crossed - Pic 3


In the last one, the blue is already getting weaker from the heat. It died shortly after the pic was taken.

You can see some colour mixing in the photo, but that is more an effect of the camera, rather than the actual beams themselves.

Unfortunatelly, no "air pixel" in sight...


On the other hand, at least i have something to remember it by...



posted on Feb, 2 2008 @ 12:54 PM
link   
Sorry to hear they failed while you were going to so much trouble to show the point (holds a minute's silence).

Seems the blue lasers have a lower forward voltage rating than the others - probably needs a modified drive circuit for adequate protection. You don't get 2nd chances with laser diodes over their rating but on the bright (or dark) side you now have a couple of dark emitting diodes (DEDs)


Thanks for your efforts, it is appreciated



posted on Feb, 2 2008 @ 01:55 PM
link   
reply to post by deezee
 


Thanks for taking the time and expense to do that experiment !!

Sorry to hear about the loved ones (bows head for a moment of silence).




If we had a few more people like you on ATS, we might actually be able to get somewhere with these discussions !!!



[edit on 2-2-2008 by jfj123]



posted on Feb, 2 2008 @ 02:02 PM
link   

Originally posted by Pilgrum
Sorry to hear they failed while you were going to so much trouble to show the point (holds a minute's silence).

Well, at least one of them was stubborn enough to help proove the point, before becoming a DASAR.




Originally posted by Pilgrum
Seems the blue lasers have a lower forward voltage rating than the others - probably needs a modified drive circuit for adequate protection. You don't get 2nd chances with laser diodes over their rating but on the bright (or dark) side you now have a couple of dark emitting diodes (DEDs)


You think i could build that Anti-RGB system, if i kill a few Reds and Greens as well?


These have a much higher forward voltage than the red ones actually and i wasn't pushing them at all, i was being very gentle... The driver circuit is a constant current source and was well within it's limits.

Unfortunatelly, these are so new, that they are EXTREEMELY sensitive.

The first one fell from a very low height, which resulted in completelly different characteristics. The current did the rest.
I thought i would get luckier with the other one, and i did, it was working perfectly. The beam was MUCH brighter than in the pics.

But then i went to reposition it, and an electrostatic shock killed it, even tho it was in the circuit with all the protection around already...


This was the ONLY time i forgot to ground myself, and so i lost the other one. Project Blue Ray delayed for two months...


It's hard to imagine, how depressed i was yesturday...
On the other hand, (an expensive) lesson learned, and two new ones ordered.


Thank you for your condolences.



P.S. Oh, and i do NOT work for Project Blue Beam!
But unlimited access to powerfull lasers... Hmm, i wonder how much they pay..



posted on Feb, 2 2008 @ 02:39 PM
link   

Originally posted by jfj123
Thanks for taking the time and expense to do that experiment !!

I was interested in the outcome myself.
We now know you can't just make coloured pixels in the air with lasers.


But this experiment shows something else very nicely - the "transparency" of the laser beams.

Where it seems the two beams are mixing to produce another colour, they are in fact just transparent to each other. So even if it was possible to project "holograms" in mid air, they would be transparent. Light can not block light.


This is very hard to capture on camera. It always wants to focus on something else. And since i didn't have much time left, to figure out the best settings, i just used a very long exposure time and complete darkness.

But i also spent some time looking at the intersection from all sides, and all i could see were the two beams. No pixel, no colour mixing, nothing. Just two normal laser beams. They don't really care, if they cross paths.



Still, with those IR laser induced balls of plasma, it just might be possible, that the range is increased by intersecting two tightly focused beams.

When light travels through something transparent, or even air, it interacts with the material. It gives off some energy to the atoms. This interaction is the cause of the slowing down of the speed of light.

If the beam is powerfull enough and focused into a microscopic dot, it obviously gives off enough energy to the molecules in the air at that spot, to make the atoms lose some electrons and turn them into plasma (ionised gas).

The further away you try to focus, the longer the tip of that "cone" of light becomes, and it's effect is lost after a certain distance. But if two such beams were focused at the same distance and then intersect, they might just put enough energy in that spot again and the range could be increased a lot.


It would require a very sophisticated computer control of the mirrors and the collimator lenses, but that story about the balls of plasma "flying" above the desert might just be true.


If only i could get the camera to show what this focusing looks like...

[edit on 2/2/08 by deezee]



posted on Feb, 2 2008 @ 07:51 PM
link   
reply to post by OrionStars
 


FAS is good for imaginary things like old WWII planes and stuff
that was never built.

Lases and beams are over rated.
You can't get a stable platform to fire it.

Now planting yourself in the electrical either might be the
ideal inertial platform.

Something about tiny circulating mag fields that control the universe.
You are independent of gravity.



new topics

top topics



 
4
<< 20  21  22    24  25  26 >>

log in

join