Triangle UFO on Nasa Photo

Originally posted by Phage

As far as leaving our "gravity field", you'd have to go to the end of the universe to do that. But it's still pretty strong even at 250,000 miles (though this is far less than that), strong enough to keep the Moon in orbit.

[edit on 4/18/2009 by Phage]

You don't have to leave the gravitaional field, all you have to do is make it's pull less on an individual craft. Tests were done in the 50's at Edwards AFB that proved conclusively that electricity is stronger than gravity by a ratio of 10 to the 39 power. Meaning that a craft using a static generator and exceedingly high voltages (around 55KV and 400-500 Amps) the effects of earths gravitational field can be reduced significantly.

Also, I've read this entire document here, Wright-Patterson AFB REPORT on Electrogravitic Systems , and it's states that T Townsend Brown's Electrogravitic test rigs (which were saucer shaped) achived an air speed of 32FPS(foot per second) using the systems which are described in the report. And whats more interesting is that a man by the name of Boyd Bushman(sp?) has also proven that magnetic fields lessen the effects of gravity signifficantly. He used to be the head researcher at L-M Skunkworks.... I'm sure you've heard of him.

Originally posted by fls13


Calling this particular triangular object "space junk" just isn't good enough.

I can go to a junk yard and see tire shaped junk . . . because it's an old tire. I can see furniture shaped junk . . . . because it's old furniture.

This object doesn't look like anything that would break free from a booster rocket or a satellite. It isn't ice. It happens to look like a ubiquitous type of UFO that has been sighted, filmed and photographed around the world. Now that may be just a coincidence, but someone should be able to identify this object as something a lot more specific than just "junk."

I'm glad we have a common understanding. Just because NASA says it's not a ufo doesn't mean their right.

Originally posted by Chovy

I'm glad we have a common understanding. Just because NASA says it's not a ufo doesn't mean their right.

And if it is in fact a tile from the shuttle, that can be easily shown and not just claimed. You would think that losing tiles off the shuttle would be a huge issue since NASA lost 7 astronauts due to the same thing.

Originally posted by Chovy

Originally posted by fls13

Calling this particular triangular object "space junk" just isn't good enough.

I can go to a junk yard and see tire shaped junk . . . because it's an old tire. I can see furniture shaped junk . . . . because it's old furniture.

This object doesn't look like anything that would break free from a booster rocket or a satellite. It isn't ice. It happens to look like a ubiquitous type of UFO that has been sighted, filmed and photographed around the world. Now that may be just a coincidence, but someone should be able to identify this object as something a lot more specific than just "junk."

I'm glad we have a common understanding. Just because NASA says it's not a ufo doesn't mean their right.

Just because folks around here SAY it IS a UFO doesn't make it right, either.

As for it not looking like any junk you've ever seen, you're relying on the very dubious arguing tactic of 'Arguing From Personal Ignorance.'

How about a broken tile?

Let's go find out if the missing tile on the star tracker housing looks anything like the flat object slowly tumbling past the shuttle window.

Here are two stories that lend some context to the imaging:

Generic discussion of why shuttles 'see' what look like 'UFOs'
www.jamesoberg.com...

Why it's important in space to watch out for 'UFOs'
today.msnbc.msn.com...

Originally posted by W3RLIED2 And whats more interesting is that a man by the name of Boyd Bushman(sp?) has also proven that magnetic fields lessen the effects of gravity signifficantly. He used to be the head researcher at L-M Skunkworks.... I'm sure you've heard of him.

Project Winterhaven Lear Inc was a contractor

gravitymagnet.com...


Boyd Bushman on Anti Gravity
www.youtube.com...

UFO-Electromagnetic Levitation Demonstration
www.youtube.com...

Originally posted by JimOberg

Just because folks around here SAY it IS a UFO doesn't make it right, either.

As for it not looking like any junk you've ever seen, you're relying on the very dubious arguing tactic of 'Arguing From Personal Ignorance.'

How about a broken tile?

Let's go find out if the missing tile on the star tracker housing looks anything like the flat object slowly tumbling past the shuttle window.

Here are two stories that lend some context to the imaging:

Generic discussion of why shuttles 'see' what look like 'UFOs'
www.jamesoberg.com...

Why it's important in space to watch out for 'UFOs'
today.msnbc.msn.com...

If it's a tile, you should have no trouble whatsoever proving it. Period. No ifs, no ands, no buts. The tile fell off the shuttle, then there should be a section of the landed shuttle that clearly shows a missing triangular section where tile should be. Where's your proof?

A report? Where's the backup? Where are the photos of the returned shuttle? Shouldn't this issue be a priority with NASA since missing tiles caused the Columbia disaster?

Originally posted by fls13
And if it is in fact a tile from the shuttle, that can be easily shown and not just claimed. You would think that losing tiles off the shuttle would be a huge issue since NASA lost 7 astronauts due to the same thing.

If it was me out there I would make an attempt to grab it and glue it back on. I can imagine the conversation..

"Hey guys... errrr looks like our heat shields is loosing tiles again, should we be worried?"

"Nah we have plenty more..."

reply to post by zorgon

Cute. The only problem is that the craft could only only fly very low over areas which are covered by conductive material.

Bushman says he doesn't understand Lenz's law? Hell of an engineer...or something.

Originally posted by zorgon

Originally posted by fls13
And if it is in fact a tile from the shuttle, that can be easily shown and not just claimed. You would think that losing tiles off the shuttle would be a huge issue since NASA lost 7 astronauts due to the same thing.

If it was me out there I would make an attempt to grab it and glue it back on. I can imagine the conversation..

"Hey guys... errrr looks like our heat shields is loosing tiles again, should we be worried?"

"Nah we have plenty more..."

Why would the original picture be labeled "space debris" if it was a tile from the shuttle? Mr. Oberg uses the dubious "constantly changing the story" arguing technique and then wonders why his credibility is nill.

I'm driving down the highway and my right front quarter panel falls off. Don't worry, it's just some highway junk.

This photo was taken before the Columbia disaster, so I was off on my earlier comments.

[edit on 22-6-2009 by fls13]

Originally posted by Phage
Cute. The only problem is that the craft could only only fly very low over areas which are covered by conductive material.

Like this?



Don't forget that the Earth is a rotating Dipole electromagnetic field. Take a spinning craft that has a very strong EM field of its own... what you think would happen?

You need a power source, and since no one like's Bob Lazar's ununpentium drive, we will have to use MIT's Levitating Dipole Fusion Confinement system for power...




Levitating as in floating

reply to post by zorgon


How you go about doing that?

Just hop into your everready EMU (I wonder if they were carrying any on this ission). Let's skip the nitrogen purge this time (a small case of the bends won't hurt too much). Zip on over to the thingy and grab it? Nah, unplanned EVA's are kind of tough to pull off.

Or should we just burn some delta-V and hop over to it and just grab it with the manipulator arm. Oh, but wait, the arm doesn't really have any kind of a grabby sort of thing on it. It has something called an end effector, not really too good for grabbing stuff that isn't specifically designed to be grabbed by it.

reply to post by zorgon

I guess you don't understand the effect either. If the Earth's magnetic field were strong enough to lift the coil you wouldn't need the conductive plate.

The Gyrofloater has nothing to do with electromagnetic effects. It uses permanent magnets and angular momentum. The magnets in the base simply repel the circular magnet which spins. There is no electricity involved.

Originally posted by Demonis
didn't read after the first page, but hopefully im not the first person to say

Aurora = TR-3B. Look it up.

Next time please read past the first page...

And provide links... we don't say 'look it up' here and run

Looking at the shuttle orbiter thermal protection system, I only see a few tiles along the vertical stabilizer that are triangular in shape.

Knowing that each and every tile is custom made to fit an exact spot, it shouldn't be hard to find out where a triangular piece of tile came from, right?

NASA = Never Admit the Same Answer


NASA says Space Debris
eol.jsc.nasa.gov...

NASA says...
Piece of thermal insulation tile floats near the Shuttle Columbia
science.ksc.nasa.gov...

Johnson Space Center Media Center for information on ordering a custom product says...

"Unfortunately, we have no information on exactly what the space debris is, or its origin. It is possible that it was related to the launch of the SATCOM KU-I satellite from the Shuttle during this mission."

That was the latest word as of last week

I'd take Phage over a cruddy news article where the journalist can't even get the date right.

Originally posted by Phage
I guess you don't understand the effect either. If the Earth's magnetic field were strong enough to lift the coil you wouldn't need the conductive plate.

Yup me know nothing

But ermmm what about this one?

reply to post by zorgon

That's a swell video!

I know about magnetic levitation but can you tell me what it has to do with a propulsion system or gravity? Apart from the fusion containment part of course. Unless you want to use nuclear fusion as your power source (to do...something), just how does this have anything to do with anything beyond the confines of a (very) strong magnetic field?



Please don't try to connect it to the Earth's magnetic field. That isn't nearly strong enough to produce levitation effects. A simple experiment...
Take a magnetic compass. It points north due to the Earth's magnetic field (right?). Put a very small, weak magnet next to it. What happens? Which magnetic field is stronger, the Earth's or the magnet?

The magnetic force of a small, weak magnet is orders of magnitudes stronger than that of the Earth. Earth's magnetic field = 0.00005 Tesla, small bar magnet = 0.01 Tesla. The bar magnet is 200 times stronger. I can't locate the specs for the magnet used in the LDX but a healthy lab quality magnet runs about 10 Tesla, 200,000 times stronger that Earth's field.

Take the coil out of the field of the magnet above it, and it won't move.

[edit on 6/23/2009 by Phage]

Originally posted by Phage
reply to post by zorgon

 

That's a swell video!

I know about magnetic levitation but can you tell me what it has to do with a propulsion system or gravity?

As mentioned previously - such a device could supply power to a propulsion system:

"You need a power source, and since no one like's Bob Lazar's ununpentium drive, we will have to use MIT's Levitating Dipole Fusion Confinement system for power"

Read the posts Phage...


Then read the following .pdf to see how this form of containment could be applied:
Fusion Ship II--a Fast Manned Interplanetary Space Vehicle Using Inertial Electrostatic Fusion




[edit on 23-6-2009 by Exuberant1]

Originally posted by fls13
If it's a tile, you should have no trouble whatsoever proving it. Period. No ifs, no ands, no buts. The tile fell off the shuttle, then there should be a section of the landed shuttle that clearly shows a missing triangular section where tile should be. Where's your proof?
A report? Where's the backup? Where are the photos of the returned shuttle? Shouldn't this issue be a priority with NASA since missing tiles caused the Columbia disaster?

Why bother? You'd probably just say the photo was faked anyway....

The report does identify the Star Tracker Doors photos as in Roll #1, photo #4, and in Roll #2, photo #19, and I've requested these via FOIA.

The 'hole' where the tile(s) came off doesn't have to be triangular, by the way. You can figure out why.

The issue is twenty years old. Why should it be a priority? And it wasn't a tile coming off that doomed Columbia. As in so many other cases, what people around here sincerely (but mistakenly) believe drive some of the farther-out theories, without justification -- because 'believing' doesn't make things so, by itself.

It was a shard of an RCC panel, not a tile.