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.

 

Any one have any idea? g = s x v²

page: 1
5
<<   2  3 >>

log in

join
share:

posted on Jun, 18 2009 @ 12:49 PM
link   
For the respected minds of those on this board.

There is a thread I have been following for quite awhile,not for belief but amusement.

I have my views of certain things and they certainly do not go along with anything put
by commander fruit loop.

This formula was presented: g = s x v²

Can any one within this board enlighten on this?

[edit on 18/6/09 by gallifreyan medic]




posted on Jun, 18 2009 @ 01:18 PM
link   
reply to post by gallifreyan medic
 


Could you post the context from the other thread that this formula was written in?

It is a Force equation, but it is not gravity. F=ma, or F=m v^2, but I am not familiar with an equation using g and s for variables in regards to force.



posted on Jun, 18 2009 @ 01:25 PM
link   
Commander ly-on (the person who gave us this formula) was asked to write an equation that allows space travelling and fits with physics laws.

He actually gave me this formula. He claims to be an extraterrestrial.


Kaifan, Beamish and all the “skeptics”

You don’t believe and, surprisingly, you get back to the post, desperately trying to convince we are not who we are. You post long messages, very peculiar, very complete, like a lawyer’s resume, like a medical response, answering the posts cutting them in small parts in to have the answers of each point.

We repeat: we do not force anyone to enter this post, as many opened around the World.
But, you still enter, without a clue who you are writing to.

Are we better than humans? Never said that, as we learn from you.

My question to you now: if you are sure Commander ly-on is a fake, and very intelligently you answered to all posts like you have the last words, have you ever thought why:

1) you still come back to this “ridiculous” post
2) you don’t succeed to make this post to be closed or, generally speaking, make this post to have less and less interest
3) you still don’t have ANY gift the Confederation Guides give to the chosen human beings
4) why you look to the skies at night, and we know you do, searching for spaceships thinking “when?” without knowing that before seeing us you should look for the humbleness inside of you.

We are above all skies, visible and invisible. But we serve only pure and genuine human beings.


Spinotoror

We know your question comes in order to proof.

Please remind an important thing: you would hardly receive technical and secret information about the forthcoming X44 USAF plane if you ask the USAF headquarter, would you?

Here’s your formula Guides use to travel

g = S x v²

where S is the Sun Constant, which gives spaceships its “fuel” as the energy any planet receives for every cm² each second from the nearest star, depending on the planet angle from the Sun and, consequently, its AU

You have all your life time to discuss this formula with scientists.

Remember also that terrestrial scientists still don’t know how to get to Mars.

Ly-on



Argentus:

g of course is gravity
v is speed

It's a complete formula.


[edit on 18-6-2009 by Spinotoror]



posted on Jun, 18 2009 @ 01:28 PM
link   
reply to post by getreadyalready
 


Here is a link to the post in the thread.
Try to avoid the fruit loopiosity.

post by commander ly-on


Not sure if I did this right.Will edit if need be.



[edit on 18/6/09 by gallifreyan medic]



posted on Jun, 18 2009 @ 01:35 PM
link   
reply to post by gallifreyan medic
 


Well I am assuming that the "x" is a multiplication sign, since he does not mention its value anywhere.

If "S" is the Suns energy output and v^2 is velocity squared. The "g" is gravity, what is the value? The Universal Constant? The equation is not possible to solve without further information.



posted on Jun, 18 2009 @ 01:39 PM
link   
reply to post by jkrog08
 


That's what I did think but I'm not to good with equations.
So I put it out for those more likely to know in case I wasn't thinking the right way.



posted on Jun, 18 2009 @ 01:39 PM
link   
LOL. I teach both college and high school physics. Let me take a crack at it. Now, I am assuming you don't know what the variables mean. In all honesty too it should be said since we don't know the meanings of the variables this could be anything. However it looks like someone is having fun at your expense, let me explain.

Basic physics. A distance delta x is x initial added with your initial velocity times time and added with 1/2 times acceleration times time to the second power. So when x initial is 0, your initial velocity is 0 you are left with 1/2(a)(t^2). My theory is someone gave you a basic physics formula.

Since my posting skills aren't great, can you tell me how you inserted mathematical script in your post?



posted on Jun, 18 2009 @ 01:42 PM
link   
reply to post by gallifreyan medic
 


All, I was writing my original post when all of the other posts and information came into existance. If my original response is off it might be due to that.

Edit:
Note also I did not know this was from a Commander Ly-On post which I was trying to stay out of.

[edit on 18-6-2009 by GTORick]



posted on Jun, 18 2009 @ 01:43 PM
link   
reply to post by GTORick
 


Thank you for that.


It was a copy and paste from the thread.I know I shouldn't have.
Did it so as to make sure it was put the same as.
Wondering if that was how the poster did it,or does he know another way?



posted on Jun, 18 2009 @ 01:43 PM
link   
Well capital S as he called the "Sun Constant" is used in Thermodynamics for Entropy. Entropy is defined as a system's ability to do work.
It is key in the Second Law of Thermodynamics.

It would seem relavent in the context of space travel. The little g does not normally signify gravity, and the v^2 is probably acceleration (represented incorrectly).

Gravity? = Entropy x Acceleration

It is interesting, because some fringe scientists are redefining a "system" to include all of the universe. In that context, we can derive "free" energy from something without violating the laws of conservation of energy.

In essence, if you want to include the entire solar system as a static system in equilibrium, you could slingshot something the size of a 747 across the solar system at the speed of light by utilizing stored energy in this system, while affecting the net energy of the system very little. The mass of a 747 is so negligible in comparison to the mass of the solar system that it can be basically ignored in the calculation, in essence giving "free" energy to the 747, and not violating any laws of physics!

Gravity? = Entropy x Acceleration

I guess (it's a reach) you could look at accelerating the system, and keeping the spaceship stable (Star Trek Tech), then the Force (gravity) would be exerted upon the ship? I think it is more a case of someone misquoting a formula!

There is good research at Cal Tech, and there is one NASA scientist that has designed a space ship and proven his "free energy" drive motor on a very small lab scale. It involves supercooled silicon wafers "repelling" one another and influencing gyroscopic "inertial" drives.

www.cphonx.net...

jnaudin.free.fr...

Your "alien" could be well-versed on these technologies, or he would just be a sci-fi junkie!!

[edit on 18-6-2009 by getreadyalready]

[edit on 18-6-2009 by getreadyalready]



posted on Jun, 18 2009 @ 01:46 PM
link   
reply to post by Spinotoror
 


Cheers fella for doing that.
I was having trouble,got the link put in but what you did was better.



posted on Jun, 18 2009 @ 01:47 PM
link   
Not only do we need to know specifically what "g" and "v" represent (we can *assume* that they represent something to do with gravity and velocity, but assumptions don't carry much weight when solving or understanding equations), we need to know the units the various terms are expressed in.

I'm also a bit confused by the one term he does define with *any* specificity...the "Sun Constant" is, per given definition, the amount of energy receives for every square centimeter, every second, from the given star. As noted, we need to know the units of energy measurement, but as if the omission of units isn't confusing enough, we then learn that this "constant" is dependent on the "planet angle from the sun, and, consequently, its AU".

"Planet angle from the sun" ? Is this the orbital inclination w/ respect to the solar equator? The axial tilt of the planet in question? And how does the "Planet angle from the sun" impact its "AU" (presuming that AU is being used in its conventional meaning as a measure of distance from the sun)?

There's a great deal missing from the explanation of this expression, and what *is* given makes no sense.



posted on Jun, 18 2009 @ 01:53 PM
link   
reply to post by getreadyalready
 


Or (more likely), he is just pulling known formulae and using different letters. That is the problem when we see these type of threads is that you just never know what they really mean and they rarely offer proof or how they came to this universe changing supposition.



posted on Jun, 18 2009 @ 01:56 PM
link   

Originally posted by GTORick
reply to post by getreadyalready
 


Or (more likely), he is just pulling known formulae and using different letters. That is the problem when we see these type of threads is that you just never know what they really mean and they rarely offer proof or how they came to this universe changing supposition.


Someone has a quote from Carl Sagan in their signature, it says, "We live in a world driven by science and technology, in which no one knows anything about science and technology." Or something similar to that.

It always reminds me of a book I read as a child. A wayward alien lands in someone's backyard where his ship breaks down. They try to help him, but he doesn't know anything about how the ship works, and of course neither do we. The people are incredulous that he could come all this way in a space vehicle and not even no how it works. Ironically, we talk on cell phones, communicate on the internet, and drive cars that we could not begin to describe the tech in!



posted on Jun, 18 2009 @ 01:59 PM
link   
reply to post by getreadyalready
 


Ahh.Good ahh not ouch ahh.
That's some interesting thinking from the fringe.Would prefer something more sleaker than a 747 though.


Definitely sci-fi junkie I would say.Pity though,with an imagination like that he could put it to better use in a more serious area of the sci-fi arena.



posted on Jun, 18 2009 @ 02:00 PM
link   
Obviously the poser of the equation g = s x v² is a being deliberately obtuse.

His musings are probably a reflection of his confused understanding of vector dimensions.

Vector dimensions is about incremental and accruing motion in a given space. It refers to anything occupying the first, second and third dimensions. It can be electromagnetic, components of elemental matter such as electrons/quantum, electricity and magnetic force.

The potential of these things, such as the space occupied by a magnetic field, define the vectors of its movement through space and matter.

This theory is fairly straightforward and providing explanations for the equations giving the proofs is long winded and beyond my abilities. You are better off contacting electronics scientists at universities and microchip manufacturing companies.



posted on Jun, 18 2009 @ 02:00 PM
link   
wasn't commander ly-on debunked already?



posted on Jun, 18 2009 @ 02:09 PM
link   
reply to post by masonwatcher
 


I was thinking about that. Does he mean s cross v^2 or s dot v^2 ??

getreadyalready, I understand your view. The thing with these posts is someone who would make contact would probably know we would ask for proof and know it. Otherwise, I completely agree with you.



posted on Jun, 18 2009 @ 02:12 PM
link   
reply to post by dannyfal
 


It doesn't matter. There are a slew of them and the more debunking done it seems the more people dig into their belief in them. I thought Commander Ly-on was a leader of a cult.



posted on Jun, 18 2009 @ 02:18 PM
link   
Thank you to all of you,for your time and your input.
Gratefully received.



new topics

top topics



 
5
<<   2  3 >>

log in

join