Experiment could prove The Theory of General Relativity wrong...

Originally posted by havanaja
reply to post by Shark_Feeder

 

So, now it's official: there is truth to gravito-magnetic effects. "Biefeld-Brown" anyone? So many prior private inventors are now proven correct. Yes, I agree with someone previously in this thread who suggested this is all too coincidental a release NOT to be a leak.

This opens up many windows. Ponder the following sequence of events:

1 Supreme Court decides only weeks ago that corporations are persons and can donate without cap (so they now can openly shape America's political and Industrial policies)
2 Obama reassigns DARPA to pure research. Now DARPA's tek advances can now be handed over to private industry)
3 NASA space operations were recently privatized. Now space exploration is unleashed in the hands of highly focused private enterprises. Lockheed-Krupp-Mitshubishi anyone?

With these three open doors, plus the new technology, in 2 to 3 years we can expect to see a quick Bye-Bye to Newtonian chemical rocket propulsion and a transition to magneto-gravitic space craft propulsion!! Especially with Room Temp superconductors, and quantum computers, becoming available soon (Capitola Drones, PARC, ISAAC?!!!).

By 2012----1 week travel time to Mars! Warp to Alpha-centauri! By 2020 - quantum entaglement teleportation. We are now really on the up-leg of an exponential technology explosion. (And just in time!!! imho-another thread)

That's how I see it too. 1947 Roswell technology will finally take center stage at the Kennedy Space Center. That will be their new 'heavy lift vehicle'. And only a generation or two over due.

reply to post by Shark_Feeder




I agree. Perhaps i was misunderstood. I only wonder what methods the Germans used to push for the insightful thinking that was portrayed. They had outstanding ideas, and mathmatical breakthroughs. They invented many things like rocketry, night vision, and nuclear tech (Einstein wasn't born in Kansas).

I am not talking about reseraching on Jews, or any other human. I am talking about the cultural aspects that fostered such brilliant science in other aspects, non-biological.

There is not doubt that the experiments done in relation to atmospheric pressure and hypothermia ended up benefiting humanity, and there is no doubt that the people murdered to get this research for the Nazi's are not justified by the benefit that their deaths created. Ethics MUST guide our decisions.

The "anything goes" i refer to is not in relation to ethics. I mean it in relation to out of the box thinking. for example, they sought scientific insight in religious texts. This is "anything goes" when juxtaposed to the current atmosphere in science.

NASA gained its science by pilfering the Nazi intellectual gold, in the form of people like Von Braun and papers, such as the one that outlined the basis for the Saturn V booster (which was an iteration of the "V" rockets Von Braun invented in Germany).

The military, on one hand, fosters brilliance in their labs. but they stifle it by shuffling away all good talent, away from public view, to carry on their work in secret. See my thread on the missing Dr. Ning Li. A great example of a tangible breakthrough bought out by ARL, and the science shuttled out of public view.

I have a couple of obvious questions here.

About CERN...

Who is profiting from CERN? You don't spend BILLIONS of dollars on a project without some sort of profit. That's VERY bad business. So who profits? Humanity? Yeah...right.

I'll ask the same question about this experiment. Who profits?

Research, research, research. We spend billions on research each year, and who profits from it? There are very few things in this world being done for the benefit of humanity. I wanna know who's gettin the bucks.

reply to post by bigfatfurrytexan


Indeed I did misunderstand. In your context I think an "anything goes" policy or the nearest thing ethically to it would best serve the advancement of science.

Creativity is the mother of progress, if you stifle free thought you potentially strangle truth

reply to post by bigfatfurrytexan

NASA gained its science by pilfering the Nazi intellectual gold, in the form of people like Von Braun and papers, such as the one that outlined the basis for the Saturn V booster (which was an iteration of the "V" rockets Von Braun invented in Germany).

I may be wrong but I think Werner was an opportunist who knew which way the wind blew, went with it, and did quite well for himself while further developing his art.


err. Quite irrelevant. sorry.

[edit on 2/26/2010 by Phage]

reply to post by Larryman



anything that negates the gravitational effect without carrying with it a cost comparable to the current rocket technology will not be allowed to come into the publics eye. Why? Consider the effect on the economy if we were able to negate the gravitational effect on planes, cars, and other transport. Reduced fuel usage, reduced road and rail wear, reduce strain on parts, reduced everything. 10% reduction in weight via some gravitational shielding or "antigrav" would have a completely destabilising effect on the world economy.

Add in the effect that true, "Roswell" tech would bring. Free energy means devastation. Energy beam weapons already exist, but lack deployable capacity due to the massive energy needs. Mankind would obliterate itself within 5 years of the introduction of "free energy".

On one hand i hope we can restore the economy and right the ship. On the other hand, i hold out hope that if our nation and world economy crumble, it will remergy corrected, and not dependent on fiat money or oil. If this happens, we can at least see some energy breakthroughs. Imagine a world where we didn't have to even pay attention the the Middle East, and could let them go on killing each other without us have to even talk to them. We could leave them completely alone, just like Osama keeps saying he wants.

and the cow jumped over the moon.

Originally posted by Semus
I have a couple of obvious questions here.

About CERN...

Who is profiting from CERN? You don't spend BILLIONS of dollars on a project without some sort of profit. That's VERY bad business. So who profits? Humanity? Yeah...right.

Not sure if I understand, this thread has been discussing the article in the op, which has no relation to CERN. The only references to CERN so far have been implied, and are merely conjecture.

We have also discussed other pieces of research such as the gravity probe b project.

Originally posted by Phage
reply to post by bigfatfurrytexan

 

NASA gained its science by pilfering the Nazi intellectual gold, in the form of people like Von Braun and papers, such as the one that outlined the basis for the Saturn V booster (which was an iteration of the "V" rockets Von Braun invented in Germany).

I may be wrong but I think Werner was an opportunist who knew which way the wind blew, went with it, and did quite well for himself while further developing his art.


[edit on 2/26/2010 by Phage]

Possibly. We likely will never know, truly. And it may be a little of both, mixed (he certainly was aspirational, thus likely an opportunist).

But being an SS officer, and originally considered a dangerous hardcore Nazi, before being reconsidered to prevent him becoming a Soviet.

When NASA first started working on the Apollo mission, supposedly, they were unable to get a rocket off the gound. The story goes that they called in some of the Paperclip scientists, who were able to successfully launch within 2 weeks.

The Nazi's were critical to the US space program. Without them, we never would have been able to acheive the Apollo mission. At least, not on the timeline we followed.

The Saturn V rocket was just a V series rocket renamed using NASA nomenclature.

reply to post by bigfatfurrytexan

No.
The "V" is the Roman numeral.
The Saturn series started with the Saturn I which bore little resemblance to the V (Vergeltungswaffe) rockets, consisting of a cluster of engines.

But I digress...again.

reply to post by Phage


Man the soviets must have missed out on the wholesale nazi buyout. Seems like they had more accidents involving their early space programs than we did.

But as you said we are getting a bit off track here.

reply to post by bigfatfurrytexan


I think we are past the point of worrying about damaging the economy. I think it is in full self-destruct mode. But maybe they could add an anti-gravity and free-energy tax to usage of those technologies to balance it out. TPTB have been known to do such things as that.

reply to post by Shark_Feeder

The Soviets had Korolev, easily as brilliant as Von Braun. But he was severely shackled by Russian politics and institutional paranoia.

Dang...did it again.

reply to post by Phage


yes, i was aware that the V means 5.

I will leave the nazi's out of this fine thread. perhaps we can discuss it again some day.

my apologies.

Originally posted by Phage

Dang...did it again.

That's ok, I love learning new things.

Remind me to start a thread on the scientific advancements of that time period so you can school me in detail. I love the bizarre experiments, and ideas(not sick ones, of which there are many) that they came up with at the time.

Originally posted by Shark_Feeder

Originally posted by Semus
I have a couple of obvious questions here.

About CERN...

Who is profiting from CERN? You don't spend BILLIONS of dollars on a project without some sort of profit. That's VERY bad business. So who profits? Humanity? Yeah...right.

Not sure if I understand, this thread has been discussing the article in the op, which has no relation to CERN. The only references to CERN so far have been implied, and are merely conjecture.

We have also discussed other pieces of research such as the gravity probe b project.

Well, my point is that even with this new experiment, as with the old, there stands to be someone that profits. So the question IS related to the OP.

Bringing up CERN was a reference that some other poster had mentioned. Sorry to have confused you. I should have been more specific.

I am as excited as the next guy, but I'm also a little skeptical because someone somewhere stands to make a profit. I'd just like to know who that is. I believe it's a valid question concerning the topic at hand.

If this does turn out to be our next leap in technology, I think the world will no longer be the same. I am very excited about this and will be following this thread. I do hope this turns out to be genuine and I hope that eventually it will take us to places we can only dream about today. How much will it cost?

[edit on 27-2-2010 by Semus]

Originally posted by Semus

Well, my point is that even with this new experiment, as with the old, there stands to be someone that profits. So the question IS related to the OP.

I am as excited as the next guy, but I'm also a little skeptical because someone somewhere stands to make a profit. I'd just like to know who that is. I believe it's a valid question concerning the topic at hand.

Ahh, sorry I misunderstood.

According to the research thus far the good Doctor who performed the original experiment works at the European Space Agency.

That would at least imply a connection at NASA in the US in my opinion, possibly other government organizations or NGO's with influence as well.

We need more snooping it seems.

We need more snooping it seems

.

I would have to agree with you there =)

[edit on 27-2-2010 by Semus]

Figures it's a physics topic to get me to finally register. Hiya!

For those wanting a great explanation of the theory of relativity, what it means, and why physicists still believe it to be true, read Brian Green's "The Elegant Universe". It's in pretty much any decent bookstore, or order it online. He writes in English (not math!) so it doesn't take a math degree to understand him. Relativity is not the final word on physics, but it has been demonstrated to make good predictions in all sorts of testable areas - just none that you will run into in your everyday life!

On this study in particular - anyone else notice that they're using a "weak field approximation" to Einstein's equations, then using powerful strong fields in their study (up to 18,000V), and comparing the results to one of their own previous studies?

Rather than their results "disproving" Einstein, I'd say their results more likely show that either their approximation or their method isn't valid.

On dark matter - I'm currently struggling through an astronomy course taught by Dr. Navarro (see en.wikipedia.org...)
He's full of great reasons why dark matter needs to exist. For starters, if gravity was just stronger, it wouldn't explain why there's such a strong field so far away from the centers of galaxies. The best explanation is that there's something heavy way out there that we can't see

Originally posted by m-theory
Figures it's a physics topic to get me to finally register. Hiya!

Welcome aboard, I am pretty new myself.

I can tell I am going to like having you around.

The best explanation is that there's something heavy way out there that we can't see

This is the one I have to disagree with. It may be the best explanation from some perspectives, but if this test does turn out to be legitimate(which it may not) it would introduce a whole new field effect into the picture. Which just may alter the larger theory as we see it.


Don't mind me I am a beginner scholar myself, I started this thread and feel like I came into class half way through the semester...

Absolutely amazing thread!

Since there has been quite a lot of branchhing discussion "off topic", i thought i would pitch in as well;

The reason so many are confused with concepts such as time travel or time dilation is imho due to the way we think about time. One tends to think of time as past-present-future when you should think of it as how-fast-does-things-happen

There is no past, no future. There is only the now, and time as the speed at which things interact. The amount of 'time' each and every particle in the universe has experienced is varying according to where it has been and how it has interacted - Take two identical satellites, one that has been sent in orbit and one that staid on earth. Now measure how old they are. One will be younger then the other.

Has it travelled back in time? no. Has it experienced less time? yes.


[edit on 2/27/2010 by above]