Bob Lazar claims: "Element 115 has a twofold purpose: First, it is
the source of a gravity wave that is unknown to Earth's scientists, the "Gravity A" wave. Second, it is the source of the anti-matter radiation
which is reacted to provide power."
(1) This is empirically and theoretically wrong and I will show this here. (updated 23-6-2004)
Why element 115 can not be used for antigravity
Since this board does not allow for sub- and superscripts, the element will have a notation of (atomic mass)-(atomic number)Element. Sorry for the
Element 115 is unstable
"The disc's reactor uses a fuel which does not occur naturally on Earth. This fuel is a super-heavy, stable, element with an atomic number of 115
and does not appear on our periodic chart."
(1) Recently a team of American and Russian scientists discovered elements 113 and 115. Element 115
has a decay time of tens of milliseconds. (3) There is no way to stop an element from decaying. In the experiment, element 115 was recorded four
times. The reactions and decay time were (5):
- 287-115Uup --> 283-113Uut + 4-2He (46.6 milliseconds)
- 288-115Uup --> 284-113Uut + 4-2He (80.3 milliseconds)
- 288-115Uup --> 284-113Uut + 4-2He (18.6 milliseconds)
- 288-115Uup --> 284-113Uut + 4-2He (280 milliseconds)
It is true that there is a hypothetical ‘island of stability’, in which the very massive elements are stable. This is because of a hypothetical stable
proton/neutron configuration in the core. However, this has not been observed in element 115.
The hypothetical island of stability is thought to occur in isotopes with around 114 protons and 184 neutrons. Element 115 has around 114 protons, it
has 115 protons. However, it only has 172 and 173 neutrons in the recorded decays. Only very few elements have 12 or more isotopes and these elements
are of a different group than element 115. It is therfore not likely element 115 can reach the island of stability.
Element 116 cannot be used to get energy from matter-antimatter reactions
'Inside the reactor, the Element 115 is transmuted to Element 116 which is unstable and immediately decays releasing antimatter."
116 is unstable, but doesn't decay into antimatter. The reaction is, as found by American and Russian scientists (4):
292-116Uuh --> 288-114Uuq + 4-2He
There is no antimatter involved in this reaction. 4-2He is simply the normal á-radiation that is common in many nuclear reactions. There are nuclear
reactions that produce antimatter, but that antimatter can never be accessed. The reaction is called beta+ decay. A proton in the core decays into a
neutron and a positron (beta+ particle, the opposite of an electron). This positron immediately reacts with an electron from one of the electron
shells of the atom. This process is called Electron Capture. This does not happen in element 116, but it can happen in e.g. 7-4Be and 11-6Ca.
In some rare cases the positron can escape, e.g. in 114-49I and 192-77Ir. This happens more frequently in the elements with a smaller amount of
electrons. Because the positron and electrons annihilate each other, a larger amount of electrons decreases the chances of positions escaping. The two
examples given above are the largest elements were positrons escape. Because element 116 has nearly twice the number of electrons, it is not likely
any positron can escape the atom without annihilating with an electron.
There is no proof of two different gravity waves
"Gravity is a wave and there are two different types of gravity. Gravity A and gravity B."
(2) There is absolutely no proof of two different
gravity waves. I don't think the author really understands what gravitational waves are. The really definition is: "Gravitational forces must not
be transmitted or communicated faster than light. This means that when the gravitational field of an object changes, the changes ripple outwards
through space and take a finite time to reach other objects. These ripples are called gravitational radiation or gravitational waves."
Normal gravity is the curvature of space-time and gravitational waves are ripples of change of this curvature. Therefore, this claim is wrong if you
use the normal definition of gravity and gravitational waves. If the author really means curvature when he/she writes gravity wave, then he/she has
chosen a very bad and non-standard term to describe it. "We're familiar with gravity B, it is the big gravity wave that holds the earth, as well
as the rest of the planets in orbit around the sun and holds the moon, as well as man-made satellites, in orbit around the earth."
But, let us for the moment assume that the author really means curvature, when he says gravity wave. "We're not familiar with gravity A. It is
the small gravity wave which is the major contributory force that holds together the "mass" that makes up all protons and neutrons."
is not true, it's the strong nuclear force that holds the nucleus together. The strong force has been described and tested thoroughly. The carriers
of the strong nuclear force are 8 different tastes of one particle, called the gluon (7). The gluon has a 'color charge' (8), but only particles
with no netto color charge can exist freely. When there is a strong nuclear force interaction between a proton and neutron (or any other combination
of hadrons), they exchange a particle with no netto color charge made of an quark-antiquark pair. These particles are called mesons and pions are the
Quantum physics predicts a spin of 2 and a mass of 0 for the hypothetical graviton particle, that carries the gravitational force. That means that
gravity has to have an infinite range, which has been observed. Pions and the other strong-force mesons have a spin of 1 and have a very large mass.
This causes the strong force to have a small range, which also has been observed. The strong nuclear force is simply not gravity. It isn’t even
slightly similar. This is what Bob Lazar says though: “When a disc travels near another source of gravity, like Earth, the Gravity A wave, which
propagates outward from the disc, is phase shifted into the Gravity B wave, which propagates outward from the Earth, and this creates lift.”
Gravity A waves appear to be just like Gravity B waves, but with a different phase? This is impossible, because the strong force has a definite range.
Other problems include that the strong nuclear force only works on color-charged particles, while gravity works on all matter and the fact the strong
force becomes more powerful when you pull two color-charged particles apart, while gravity becomes weaker when you pull two particles apart. (12)
There is a possibility that we can unify the strong nuclear and gravity into one big theory of all forces. Theories like string theory and quantum
loop gravity are well underway. We can’t use this as an argument to unify the strong nuclear force and gravity in respect to atoms. The energy at
which this unification occurs is so extremely high than atoms and probably also the neutrons and protons no longer exist. This unification occurs at
particle energies 1019 GeV, similar to a temperature of 1032 K. (10) The largest particle colliders only reach 103 GeV, 10000000000000000 times less
Other problems with the Lazar's explanation of UFOs
Let's assume that the theory is right and that all mainstream science and observations are false. Let's assume you can get 'gravity' from element
115. The article claims: "This amplified Gravity A wave is so powerful that the only natural occurring source of gravity that could cause
space/time to distort this much would be a black hole!"
(1) The force of something with the gravity of a black hole pulling at your spaceship
would tear your spaceship apart, because the pull on the difference in gravitational pull on different parts of the ship is larger than any known
material can withstand. Not really handy for interstellar travel if you ask me.
© 2004 Amantine
This article can be reproduced freely, as long as you keep the entire text and this message intact.
[Edited on 15-3-2004 by Kano]
[edit on 23-6-2004 by amantine]