It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.

Please white-list or disable 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: 2
<< 1    3 >>

log in


posted on Jun, 18 2009 @ 03:00 PM

Kaifan, Beamish and all the “skeptics”

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


Hmm the description of S make it sound like the sloar constant.
The solar constant specifies the light energy per area you get each second
at the distance 1 AU (Earth-Sun Distance) from the sun.

The value is 1367W/m^2 = 1367 J/(m^2*s) = 1367 kg / s^3

Now this value has a direction(vector) ..from the sun outward and you can only get that amount of sun energy with an area that stands normal to that direction. If you tilt the area you have to take the angle into account.
But this is for a smal flat area like a solarpannel.

For the whole planet the planet angle doesn't play a rule. When you want to know the total energy the earth gets from the sun radiation then you simple can calulate with the intesection area of the whole earth.
So talking about the planet angle in connection with this sounds a little strange to me.

Now we have no clue what g and v stands for.

My guess would be that v is the velocity which is a vector.

Then I guess that the meaning of s x v
with s as vector and v as vector is a corssproduct.
x is often used for crossproduct.

If we now check the units we have kg /s^3 * (m/s)^2
which gives you the unit kg * m^2 / s^5 for g which is byway then also a vector and stands normal to s and v

with this g then can not be gravity

now kg*m^2/s^5 is a unit that doesnt really makes sense for me.
The best thing you could do with that is to split it into (kg*m^2 / s^2) / s^3 which would be an Energy density but not in room but in time (s^3).

Now before you think this is high tech should se ethat the solar constant with the unit kg / s^3 would be interpreted by the units the same way thats then a mass density not in room but in time.
Which for sure is very unfamilare to us.

So when my asumption about s and v are correct then I have no clue what this result g shall be.

One last remark maybe..with this formula you best have the velocity orthogonal to the sun radiation for a maximum g.

so.. dunno what to think about this.

edit to add:
what speaks against the corss product is that it is not
s x v but s x v^2

[edit on 18-6-2009 by g210b]

posted on Jun, 18 2009 @ 03:18 PM
reply to post by g210b

The 'g' could be Gibb's Free Energy which is the maximum amount of 'work' that a system can do in a 'reversible' reaction.

In this case it would be related to S or entropy.

Using g21's units, we could also get J/s^3, or W/s^2. Since Gibbs Energy is used in reversible actions, maybe the "alien" was relating his travel to how much Energy was available on a certain planet in comparison to it's nearest star. In that case, the velocity of travel there could be variable that would change depending on where you were travelling.

I was thinking just this past week that all energy on earth is actually "solar" energy! Our fossil fuels are stored energy from organic compounds that grew from the sun's energy over millions of years. Our wind power comes from atmospheric conditions caused by heating of the air and waters. Our tide and wave action come from gravitational influence of the sun and moon, and wind action. All our heavy metals and radioactive sources come from fusion within the sun. Solar energy is fairly obvious. Even pedalling a bicycle hooked to a generator is made possible from the calories ingested that originated in a plant (or an animal that ate a plant) and the plant produced those calories utilizing solar energy! Our geothermal, or volcanic forces are made possible due to heavy elements (from sun fusion) and gravity! The very fact that the earth coalesced into a solid orb in this orbit is due to the influence of the sun's gravity! (Religious implications ignored for this example.)

We have ZERO energy that did not originate from the sun in one way or another!!!!!

Therefore, it would make sense on a cosmic scale to relate everything to solar energy and time! The current amount of energy being received, and the total of the energy received since inception. We hypothetically calculate exactly how much stored energy the earth has in all forms by taking the energy/second and extrapolating over time! It won't matter if we extract it in radioactive, petroleum, geothermal, or solar form, the total will be the same!

[edit on 18-6-2009 by getreadyalready]

posted on Jun, 18 2009 @ 04:08 PM
He states that s is the output of the Sun, but if this is the key to space travel at FTL (as I am logically deducing) then why would it be dependent on the output of only our Sun? Anyways I am guessing that this is bs, there is just too many unknowns. It could be true but I don't think it is anything we should waste our time with, not without a proper explanation anyways.

posted on Jun, 18 2009 @ 04:29 PM
Oh I didnt read that thread.

I just now see that it is answerd:

commander ly-on

reply to post by argentus



g of course is gravity
v is speed

It's a complete formula.

Well if so then this formula makes no sense at all.

It is also no valid physical formula because this does not add up with the units.

posted on Jun, 18 2009 @ 04:32 PM
I think it's silly. Energy acquired from a star has no bearing on the velocity of a ship, or the gravity of a planet. If this was true, the galaxy would literally collapse on itself. Such energy from all those stars all together would cause any matter near it to be going many times faster than the speed of light. The center of a galaxy would spin so fast, and have so much light, that it would rip a whole in the time space continuum and begin falling back into time. This vortex would rip the galaxy into two sections. An inner super-star, and and outer ring. The center of the galaxy would be a very large star, with a black hole within it. You would literally have a black hole powered star. A star sucking into itself, but so large that the black hole cannot absorb it all. The black hole would spit out energy that would be so slowed and compressed that it would immediately turn back into mass. A perpetual black hole, of sorts. The outer galaxy would become a ring orbiting this super star, and would be superheated. The force of all that energy being shot out would also scatter this ring outward.

posted on Jun, 18 2009 @ 05:19 PM

Originally posted by GTORick
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.

Depends on what is the intention. If your are trying to control strong ambipolar electric field effect of a conductive metal such that electrons in concentrations and with mobilities of a given amount per volt-second with induced gate voltage, it is s / v^2. Single and two dimensions in say circuit boards. I read somewhere that in newer circuit technology electrons will be exploited for their quantum characteristics and in metals with contrasting valences will be used to allow individual electrons to occupy more than one space at the same time. I suspect that if the metals on the same paths with different properties used it may allow bizarre results. Perhaps even perpetual loops with the conservation of energy - but what will the introduction of quantum electrons do? Will there be a multiplication of energy produced in a 'closed loop'?

If you are intending to induce a scalar effect, I surmise s - v^2 to create a weakening cascade or diminishing wave form. This relates to vector dimensions in my earlier comment. Three dimensions.

s multiplied by v^2 you will have to read up on Feynman rules and it relates to the string theory. It is about the conservation of momentum in the submolecular. Basically a waveform that lasts forever having been initiated by energy that is not expended. You might say it is a self sustaining loop. Imagine a subelemental object existing and travelling in a life sustaining field of energy.

[edit on 053030p://pm3049 by masonwatcher]

posted on Jun, 18 2009 @ 05:41 PM
You guys remember the thread about a new intelligent search engine?

It seems mostly good for math since its based on a math computation program called Mathmatica.

So I plugged it into the Wolfram Alpha search engine.

Here is the result


So, there you go.
Clear as mud.

[edit on 6/18/09 by makeitso]

posted on Jun, 18 2009 @ 10:26 PM
reply to post by makeitso

I don't understand how this proves anything. S was made up by him. It's not something the computer knows.

posted on Jun, 19 2009 @ 07:20 AM
No problem, gallifreyan medic.

I have just contacted four universities. Hope we get a clear explanation soon.

[edit on 19-6-2009 by Spinotoror]

posted on Jun, 19 2009 @ 08:38 AM
reply to post by Spinotoror

Wonder what they can make of it then.
They have the time and the ken to work on it and look at the variations of what
the letters could represent.

I'm still thinking its nothing.
But got to laugh as well at the thought that if something is formulated from it,it
would have come about from the ravings of a fruit loop so to speak.

posted on Jun, 19 2009 @ 08:42 AM

posted on Jun, 19 2009 @ 09:44 AM
yes let;s talk math or phiysics

posted on Jun, 19 2009 @ 11:23 AM
wait wait wait people...
i thought commander ly-on was a cult leader in south america or some crap

why are we picking apart some equation he pulled out of his ass?

i got an equation for ya

gullibility + you = this thread

posted on Jun, 19 2009 @ 11:51 AM
Reply to post by Tentickles

Hi tent,hope you,re keeping well.Some ones already posted it by the way.

Posted Via ATS Mobile:

[edit on 19/6/09 by gallifreyan medic]

posted on Jun, 19 2009 @ 12:01 PM
Reply to post by dannyfal

Just a little tip for you a fellow member.It kind of comes in handy when in a forum.READ THE BLOODY THREAD FIRST.

Posted Via ATS Mobile:

posted on Jun, 19 2009 @ 12:07 PM

i thought commander ly-on was a cult leader in south america or some crap

why are we picking apart some equation he pulled out of his ass?

Well, I'm not wasting any money investigating his equation (well, at least the cost of internet).

And, what can we lose learning physics?

He 'updated' his words:

Argentus and German91

I did not put S as Solar Constant as a real constant. It could be valid for planet Earth, for example, but every S changes according to the Planet.

Let me present the formula in other words

I wrote “this is the way Alien Spaceships travels”

Some of you are aware of physical reactions in outer space, which are much different from the terrestrial ones. Are you sure string theory works alone? Or it needs holographic laws in order to solve the warm’s paradox?
You must consider: this is the way spaceships travels, which are made inside warms until reaching, in our case, terrestrial atmosphere.

After, Ufos use orthotenic lines as their highways to connect quickly a place to another, in our dimensions.

The formula I gave you works INSIDE those highways

[edit on 19-6-2009 by Spinotoror]

posted on Jun, 19 2009 @ 12:11 PM
Uh, this is a reply to Commander Ly-on, if G is gravity and S is sun constant multiplied by V which is speed to the second power its just variables without numerical representation and just a law written, I think I dont know that much about algebra or calculus or psychics. If it is just a law a given then if you attach deeper value to the lines symbols letters what they represent (infinately) and how wrapping your head around an equation of the universe of with the laws of gravity equaling sun constant (fuel) multiplyied by speed to the second power (multiplying itself by itself) would give you a universal law. I know pie, I know E=MC2(squared) and a little about the theory of relativity , sorry if I dont really understand or out of league. Uh the math sort of resonated upon a possible foreseeable future I was trying to avoid (in my head) so I just started writing , cause in that bizarro reality everything is distorted and unreal then I have to lie down in the fetal position shaking. Sorry I guess it could be worked out differently the equation.

posted on Jun, 19 2009 @ 12:14 PM
ive read the post and have seen nothing come out of it... i am genuinely wondering what the motivation is for solving this equation when it (most likely) is just something someone said to confuse everyone.

i thought we were trying to stay away from misinformation and ignorance here :/

posted on Jun, 19 2009 @ 01:38 PM
Wolfram Alpha handles

g = s x v²

as an equation where g,s,v and x are variables and then it solves to each one. The equation is g = s * x * v^2

Since g = s x v²
with g: gravity, s = solar constant, v = velocity and the
x asumed as the operation multiplication orcrossproduct (last not really possible with v^2) you get a violation in the Units. Or simple expressed BS because it is no valid physical formula. In all valid physical formulas the units have to add up.

The only way out might be to interprete this equation like Wolfram Alpha where x is not an operation but a variable and s x v^2 are simple multiplicated with each other.

However again to get a valid physical formula the units have to add up.
When g, S and v are given what they are then x must contain all the rest units that it add ups and gives a valid physical formula.

That unit of x is exoctic (s^3/(kg*m) ) and you really have to wonder what exotic physical parmeter x then should be.

This fromula looks fabricated by one without much knowledge about physical valid formulas.

Also the idea that gravity should be calculateable out of the solar radiation is funny. I think the 4 university you sent this will have a good laugh.

I started to read that specific thread now it seems to me that this person is really pulling the legs for what reason ever.
To my knowledge. Meier is fake. Titor is Fake. The number 144000 is an old stroy. And this formula looks all fake.
So far no convincing story at all to me.

posted on Jun, 19 2009 @ 01:42 PM
reply to post by g210b

You are just stating a basic algebra equation without the convention of a, b, c.

new topics

top topics

<< 1    3 >>

log in