posted on Jan, 17 2008 @ 04:53 PM
I don't know about the specifics laid out by Fouche regarding pressurization, rpm, or whatnot... but like I posted in another thread on this subject
the theory is sound. In theory )
Once I'd heard/seen the hubbub about the "Astra" on youtube.com, I decided to do some research so as to make a better opinion on it. Following
some of the reported "technologies" presented by folks commenting on the airframe on wikipedia.org led me on an interesting journey of discovery on
quantum mechanical theories being proven mathematically (and a few reputed live experiments). The theories behind this aircraft are sound.
Whether they've *actually* got the technologies working is another
If this IS a hoax or 'cover story' it's close enough to burgeoning modern-day physics discoveries to be remotely plausible. Most interesting to me
(even more so than the varying characteristics and application of metallic quasicrystals) is the Magnetic Field Disruptor. One paper that I read
stated that if you take certain liquid elements and rotate it at a high velocity, it will actually rotate on two axis in a torroidal shape. Meaning-
if you rotate a donut shape of a certain element with superconductive capability, it will not only spin centrifugially but it will also rotate
uniformly from outside loop to inside loop. They stated that this combination of spin causes a magetogravitic warping that diminishes the effect of
gravity across the plane of spin in the center of the torroidal ring due to the characteristics of a superconductor to repulse a magnetic field
(persumably Earth's in this example.)
I suppose what they are suggesting is that mercury at X atmospheres of pressure at X degrees Kelvin at Xrpm will generate enough of a
magnetogravitic displacement to hoist 4 guys, a nuke reactor, and a big arse airframe with very little additional thrust.
Again, I'll state that I'm not suggesting that this bird is real, but... even a Quantum Mechanics for Dummies course (like I gave myself) is enough
to suggest that you need more argument than "It's just not possible" to debunk it.