What energy source do aliens use to power thier machines?

reply to post by DanDWF


so you assume Ununpentium is the "source" of their power? That is like saying nuclear submarines are powered by Uranium.

that is a fuel, not a source. the power itself comes from a steam turbine.

Fun fact: nuclear power plants are identical in almost every regard to steam power, except instead of burning coal to heat the water, they utilize nuclear fission as the source of heat.

bang on the money...

you have your fuel, to create the energy, but how do you utilise it....steam turbine in space aint going cut it

reply to post by DanDWF


Interesting Dan. Have you considered the 'auto-writings' of that Stan Romanek guy? It seems some of his first drawings/writings outlined an interaction with Helium and that 115. Any thoughts on this?

I get the later stuff about increasing the Schwarzchild radius of an object larger than it's physical radius to displace into the 4th dimension, and that electromagnetic spin is required to do so. Would the interaction of He with 115 generate the voltage needed to make a sufficiently powerful stabilized field around the craft? And/or do you think this would just be the overall fuel source for their generators?

I wonder though, they may not need to continuously run their generators once the craft's hull is charged up, but only to maintain it or when they travel along the 4D.

Im not a heavy physics guy (even thought Im interested in it) but if you are displacing the 4th dimension, arent you infact displacing time??

And if you ARE displacing time in some manner, then wouldnt that potentialy be a bad thing? You do a 60 light year trip that seems like a year to you, only to find out that 30 years after you went, there was a war and everyone died?

Thats not really FTL, thats more, HHIYYO....(Ha Ha Im Young Your Old!)

This is an impossible question to answer definatively. Perhaps they are so advanced they use their minds to travel, but for some reason still need something to encapsulate them while they travel. Or they use the worst possible universe polluting natural resource which we havent yet discovered. There are too many variables to calculate. Some aliens for example use beat up fords that they turn into rafts to float from MeHeCo.
Imagine the humour some alien races have at the the expense of other alien races, thats a way more funner exercise in futility.

reply to post by fuserleer


Hahaha, age is only in your mind, right? I'm not a big physics guy either, but I know enough to be dangerous to myself, I guess.

Well as one reaches the event horizon of a singularity, time/space reciprocate, according to theory. So yes, it would seem you would go 'back in time', in a sense, IF you could survive, but a Schwarzchild blackhole is a bit different though, not a singularity.

We don't know exactly what happens in either, but 4D displacement could occur by artificially increasing that radius. The more you increase it artificially, the more you displace on that axis, thereby creating a sort of short cut through our space/time to other points... hyperspace. The question is how to do that. Romanek's writings/drawings seem to be touching on just that.

If you could increase the Schwarzchild radius past the actual physical radius (or condense the mass until it passes it. Atom bomb anyone?) then physics as we know it breaks down. Poof, your going back in time. BUT, you probably wouldn't be able to reduce past the event horizon because time would stand still forever at that point, resulting in terminal stasis... or annihilation... again, assuming you could survive up to that point.

*Interesting that there's a thread here on ATS mentioning 'objects' (large ships?) going in and out of our sun. The sun, and any other massive object, has an event horizon.

www.ufologie.net...

in crop circles are found 'tiny balls of iron' (iron and oxygen containing magnetite and hematite). supposedly this is the source of fuel.

so they create crop circles and and refuel at the same time. perhaps it is the real reason for creating crop circles - to make fuel. perhaps the fanciful patterns distract us from the real gem.

it's all just information i remember reading on the net a while back.

if ever a crop circle is made nearby, i'll try to make my dune buggy fly.

Ok I will take a guess at this. Involves crystals (clear quartz) and a manipulation or variation of the principles of piezoelectricity, which we have not yet discovered.

en.wikipedia.org...

Originally posted by Flux8
*Interesting that there's a thread here on ATS mentioning 'objects' (large ships?) going in and out of our sun. The sun, and any other massive object, has an event horizon.

No, it does not. An event horizon specifically a point past which nothing which occurs inside it can affect the outside universe because it is impossible to escape. It is quite easy to escape the sun, as evidenced by the fact you can see it .

and RE: 4 dimensions and time travel, not necessarily. while time is often described as a physical dimension, it is not necessarily the "fourth" one. In all likelihood there are quite a few physical dimensions we cannot (and never will be able to) perceive. I would recommend reading the book Flatland if its hard to wrap your mind around the idea of physical dimensions past three.

Originally posted by JScytale
No, it does not. An event horizon specifically a point past which nothing which occurs inside it can affect the outside universe because it is impossible to escape. It is quite easy to escape the sun, as evidenced by the fact you can see it

.

The 'event horizon' of a singularity is the point at which time/space break down. Gravity is so intense that nothing can escape. The effects speculated at the event horizon are the reciprocating of space/time.

The Schwarzchild radius predicts the event horizon of any body of sufficient mass/volume, including a black hole. 4pi(2GM/c^2)^2. I am talking about Schwarzchild blackholes. Same principle, different category. And these were speculated on since at least the 70s. This isn't anything new.

and RE: 4 dimensions and time travel, not necessarily. while time is often described as a physical dimension, it is not necessarily the "fourth" one. In all likelihood there are quite a few physical dimensions we cannot (and never will be able to) perceive. I would recommend reading the book Flatland if its hard to wrap your mind around the idea of physical dimensions past three.

I'm in agreement that time is not necessarily the 4th dimension. And I agree that we cannot naturally perceive the 4th, or higher.

And I am very familiar with the flatlander analogy, and I completely disagree with it. Flatlanders cannot actually exist, since every real object projects into all possible dimensions, even those flatlanders. To the degree that one can perceive them is another story. Example, if the 4th dimension is a reality (and we know this from the math) then everything (atoms) must displace in the 4th D. X * Y * Z * W = volume of displacement. What is 5ft * 5ft * 5ft * 0ft? It's 0. It doesn't exist. Those flatlanders must take up space in all dimensional axes, whether they perceive it or not. And that is the big question... how to 'perceive' it.

... Actually, there should be another more distinctive term to differentiate the 'event horizon' of a singularity and a Schwarzchild blackhole.

[edit on 23-4-2010 by Flux8]

Originally posted by NightVision

Originally posted by John_Rodger_Cornman
What energy source do aliens use to power thier machines? I mean how would you power something that could float,bend space or slow time down?

No offense, but the question itself is a bit flawed. It would be kin to asking the question:

"What fuel do humans use to power their machines?"

You are presuming that there are only one race of aliens, and they use only one energy source.

A widening of your perspective is needed.

In the meantime, Element 115 and the Bob Lazar story may answering your question regarding the Greys.

All things ultimately come from the same source. This includes any energy used to propel or exchange location.

Back to the subject. Energy source of 'alien machines'. I assume you mean their ships/craft. I can tell you from what I've seen, there is some kind of voltage, to the degree that they glow/illuminate in a purplish plasma at times. So something that either generates super intense voltage, and/or efficiently uses high voltage. The element 115 is one idea/speculation. Magnetic currents, or rather magnetic circuitry, is another. I always liked the idea of a 'flux capacitor' but, you know...

Originally posted by Flux8
Back to the subject. Energy source of 'alien machines'. I assume you mean their ships/craft. I can tell you from what I've seen, there is some kind of voltage, to the degree that they glow/illuminate in a purplish plasma at times. So something that either generates super intense voltage, and/or efficiently uses high voltage. The element 115 is one idea/speculation. Magnetic currents, or rather magnetic circuitry, is another. I always liked the idea of a 'flux capacitor' but, you know...

The flux capacitor is something that stores energy from the alterations of 'virtual particles'/holes in the dirac sea in the form of 'permanent' electrons. It may have originated in sci-fi, but it is certainly a very real technology and exists today. One simply needs to google 'casimir cavity' to understand how it works.

Eventually.. "flux capacitors".. (environmental input capacitors) will be used to power everything from cities.. to solar systems.

Originally posted by Flux8
The 'event horizon' of a singularity is the point at which time/space break down. Gravity is so intense that nothing can escape. The effects speculated at the event horizon are the reciprocating of space/time.

The Schwarzchild radius predicts the event horizon of any body of sufficient mass/volume, including a black hole. 4pi(2GM/c^2)^2. I am talking about Schwarzchild blackholes. Same principle, different category. And these were speculated on since at least the 70s. This isn't anything new.

The Schwarzschild radius is nothing more than an imaginary line. It is, basically, "if all the mass contained in this object were compressed into an object this wide or smaller, it would collapse into a singularity". That's it. It does not represent the object's event horizon if it were a black hole, and it does not serve any purpose except simple laws such as "any object smaller than its Schwarzschild radius is a black hole". It has no special significance whatsoever.

I'm in agreement that time is not necessarily the 4th dimension. And I agree that we cannot naturally perceive the 4th, or higher.

And I am very familiar with the flatlander analogy, and I completely disagree with it. Flatlanders cannot actually exist, since every real object projects into all possible dimensions, even those flatlanders. To the degree that one can perceive them is another story. Example, if the 4th dimension is a reality (and we know this from the math) then everything (atoms) must displace in the 4th D. X * Y * Z * W = volume of displacement. What is 5ft * 5ft * 5ft * 0ft? It's 0. It doesn't exist. Those flatlanders must take up space in all dimensional axes, whether they perceive it or not. And that is the big question... how to 'perceive' it.

It is nothing more than an analogy used to make understanding the concept of extra physical dimensions easier. You're reading into this WAY too much. Also, dont treat the 4th spatial dimension for a purely three dimensional object as zero - it is, as a minimum, the "width" (for lack of a better term) of an individual atom along the fourth axis. Also, it is and always will be utterly impossible for a human being to perceive four or more dimensions. We are build to see and comprehend three, and that's all we can handle. At best we could see three dimensional slices of 4d objects.

... Actually, there should be another more distinctive term to differentiate the 'event horizon' of a singularity and a Schwarzchild blackhole.

There is one. "event horizon".

Originally posted by JScytale
The Schwarzschild radius is nothing more than an imaginary line. It is, basically, "if all the mass contained in this object were compressed into an object this wide or smaller, it would collapse into a singularity". That's it. It does not represent the object's event horizon if it were a black hole, and it does not serve any purpose except simple laws such as "any object smaller than its Schwarzschild radius is a black hole". It has no special significance whatsoever.

Incorrect. per wiki, for ease of reference...

Wikipedia

One might naturally wonder what happens when the radius R becomes less than or equal to the Schwarzschild radius r[sub]s[/sub]. It turns out that the Schwarzschild solution still makes sense in this case, although it has some rather odd properties. The apparent singularity at r = r[sub]s[/sub] is an illusion; it is an example of what is called a coordinate singularity. As the name implies, the singularity arises from a bad choice of coordinates or coordinate conditions. By choosing another set of suitable coordinates one can show that the metric is well-defined at the Schwarzschild radius. See, for example, Lemaitre coordinates, Eddington-Finkelstein coordinates, Kruskal-Szekeres coordinates or Novikov coordinates.

The case r = 0 is different, however. If one asks that the solution be valid for all r one runs into a true physical singularity, or gravitational singularity, at the origin. To see that this is a true singularity one must look at quantities that are independent of the choice of coordinates.

Originally posted by JScytale
You're reading into this WAY too much.

No, the flatlander idea is a bad analogy. It's incorrect. So I rebutted.

Originally posted by JScytale
Also, dont treat the 4th spatial dimension for a purely three dimensional object as zero - it is, as a minimum, the "width" (for lack of a better term) of an individual atom along the fourth axis.

I didn't. Perhaps you misunderstood me. If we know that there are at least 4 dimensions, actual Euclidean physical dimensions then you must apply all axes to all objects, or in simpler terms, every atom displaces across all dimensional axes. Therefore, any real physical object must displace along all dimensional axes, otherewise it cannot exist.

Originally posted by JScytale
Also, it is and always will be utterly impossible for a human being to perceive four or more dimensions. We are build to see and comprehend three, and that's all we can handle. At best we could see three dimensional slices of 4d objects.

I would argue that we do not see 3 dimensionally, we see 2 dimensionally and extrapolate a 3 dimensional reality via foreshortening, shadow, proximetrics, etc. True 3 dimensional perception would we be closer to hearing. Given that, I believe we are capable of extrapolating 4+ dimensional phenomena, but we lack a general reference by which to gauge it by. Hence, paranormal experience(s).

reply to post by John_Rodger_Cornman


well you could read books by victor schauberger on natural energy. he probably knew the answer. which is why he was used by hitler in the war to build flying saucers.

tesla also had a go a building flying saucers.

Originally posted by Flux8
Incorrect. per wiki, for ease of reference...

Wikipedia

One might naturally wonder what happens when the radius R becomes less than or equal to the Schwarzschild radius r[sub]s[/sub]. It turns out that the Schwarzschild solution still makes sense in this case, although it has some rather odd properties. The apparent singularity at r = r[sub]s[/sub] is an illusion; it is an example of what is called a coordinate singularity. As the name implies, the singularity arises from a bad choice of coordinates or coordinate conditions. By choosing another set of suitable coordinates one can show that the metric is well-defined at the Schwarzschild radius. See, for example, Lemaitre coordinates, Eddington-Finkelstein coordinates, Kruskal-Szekeres coordinates or Novikov coordinates.

The case r = 0 is different, however. If one asks that the solution be valid for all r one runs into a true physical singularity, or gravitational singularity, at the origin. To see that this is a true singularity one must look at quantities that are independent of the choice of coordinates.

While I was incorrect on the Schwarzschild radius not being identical to the postulated event horizon's location, my point stands. You seem to think the radius has some sort of magical property - it is completely pointless to use the Schwarzschild radius to describe an object in ANY case except "if this object's mass were compressed beyond this radius, it would become a singularity".

For example, the sun's Schwarzschild radius is ~2km. this does not mean anything unusual occurs within that radius inside the sun's core. what this means is, if you took the entirety of the sun's mass and slowly compressed it, once you reached a sphere with a 2km radius, light would be unable to escape, and it would be a black hole.

I also feel you should know that a "Schwarzschild black hole" is nothing but a theoretical model that is understood to be physically impossible. It is specifically nothing more than a black hole with no angular momentum, no electrical charge, and no other objects at all in the universe it exists in.

www.daviddarling.info...

I would argue that we do not see 3 dimensionally, we see 2 dimensionally and extrapolate a 3 dimensional reality via foreshortening, shadow, proximetrics, etc. True 3 dimensional perception would we be closer to hearing. Given that, I believe we are capable of extrapolating 4+ dimensional phenomena, but we lack a general reference by which to gauge it by. Hence, paranormal experience(s).

The human eye is only capable of detecting light reflected onto itself by objects in the same three dimensional plane, being a three dimensional body. The human brain then takes the sensory input and creates a three dimensional model of its surroundings, filling in blanks. Even without stereoscopic vision, such as in the case of closing or losing an eye, the human brain still models its surroundings in three dimensions by basing things on experience. We simply aren't equipped, physically or mentally, to see or visualize a four dimensional shape. The best we can do is visualize an approximation or a simplification.

You could even put a four dimensional shape right in front of a person and he would still only perceive a three dimensional slice of it.You could rotate said four dimensional object and he would only see parts of the shape come into and leave his field of view, which remains three dimensional. This is even tackled in flatland, which you seem adamant about taking literally and don't seem able to grasp as a simplified analogy.

And it is quite a bit silly to describe "the paranormal" as being explainable by the fourth dimension. yes, an object along another axis could influence our slice of reality without making itself apparent, but linking this to ghosts and the like is, well, laughable.

[edit on 24-4-2010 by JScytale]

As an example:

I get the later stuff about increasing the Schwarzchild radius of an object larger than it's physical radius to displace into the 4th dimension, and that electromagnetic spin is required to do so. Would the interaction of He with 115 generate the voltage needed to make a sufficiently powerful stabilized field around the craft? And/or do you think this would just be the overall fuel source for their generators?

This is patently absurd. There is only one way to increase an object's Schwarzchild radius - pump mass into it! Considering that the Schwarzchild radius is, by definition, the point past which it will become a black hole through compression. In order to push it out beyond its physical radius, what you are doing is simply increasing its density.

So let's say you managed to pump so much mass into the sun that its 2km Schwarzchild radius expanded to be larger than its 1,392,000 km radius. What happens now? Simple: it is now a black hole. Of course it is far more likely that in the process of increasing its mass it collapsed into a singularity well before then, but that's semantics really. All you have done is created an object with such an extreme amount of mass packed so densely that its gravitational well prohibits light (and thus, anything) from escaping. You have NOT magically pushed an object off along a fourth axis.

[edit on 24-4-2010 by JScytale]

All this math and physics is really making my head hurt, so I'm just gonna say that they call up Chuck Norris and have him give their ships a swift kick in the rear. interestingly enough, they would only have to do this once, for, afterwards, all they have to do is mention his name and their equipment would "know better"


sure its a ridiculous theory, but tell Mr. Chuck that.

Originally posted by Redajin
All this math and physics is really making my head hurt, so I'm just gonna say that they call up Chuck Norris and have him give their ships a swift kick in the rear. interestingly enough, they would only have to do this once, for, afterwards, all they have to do is mention his name and their equipment would "know better"


sure its a ridiculous theory, but tell Mr. Chuck that.

lol

just thought i would add that pyshics only apply to what they have been tested on,just like you can make a plane crash by shutting off its engines you can change pyshics by applying a Force that doesnt apply to pyshics.

Hope that made sense