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.

 

HAARP Manipulates Time-Physicist Dr. Fran De Aquino: (Very Interesting-if you can understand it)

page: 2
25
<< 1    3  4  5 >>

log in

join
share:

posted on May, 24 2012 @ 09:10 AM
link   
reply to post by adigregorio
 


Using google translate I found a page that lists the departments at the school, our Fran does not seem to be a member after all:

Ouch!

(Edit3 To explain)
Meh, ATS no likey linky. That should take you to the untranslated version of the department listings.


edit on 5/24/2012 by adigregorio because: Fixed linky


edit on 5/24/2012 by adigregorio because: 2nd try at link fixing...

edit on 5/24/2012 by adigregorio because: Zelda, I can not save you!




posted on May, 24 2012 @ 09:10 AM
link   
reply to post by QQXXw
 




He is definitely a crackpot


Pretty funny how you resort to namecalling, especially after you posted a thread about him people called you and others a troll/shill on an unfound basis.

You're doing exactly the same, way to be hypocritical here!



I am sure some posters claiming to have a "physics background" will take him seriously however.


What have you offered so far?

All you had was nasty and condescending remarks.

I posted the same thread (by mistake)

You called the guy and thread a hoax based on this thread, correct?

Well where have you seen ANY debunking going on?

Except for the pictures Chadwickus debunked, but that's why i didn't post them in my thread.

So far NOBODY has debunked any of his works and or findings, so it would be appreciated if you stopped calling him a crackpot.

Or....... put your money where your mouth is and DEBUNK the guy instead of trying to DISCREDIT him, which is another thing completely.



posted on May, 24 2012 @ 09:12 AM
link   
I, for one, believe him.

His assertion explains why crewmen on the USS Eldridge were embedded in the superstructure of the ship when it returned to real-time.



posted on May, 24 2012 @ 09:12 AM
link   
reply to post by adigregorio
 


I have already checked and he is not on the staff list at the physics department at the university he claims to represent. I have also found that the only scientific article that he published was in a journal run by a diploma mill (The unaccredited Akami university).



posted on May, 24 2012 @ 09:12 AM
link   

Originally posted by adigregorio
reply to post by adigregorio
 


Using google translate I found a page that lists the departments at the school, our Fran does not seem to be a member after all:

Ouch!


I've sent an e-mail to the university asking if they know of Fran De Aquino.

Will post here ASAP.
edit on 24-5-2012 by kn0wh0w because: (no reason given)



posted on May, 24 2012 @ 09:17 AM
link   

Originally posted by QQXXw
reply to post by adigregorio
 


I have already checked and he is not on the staff list at the physics department at the university he claims to represent. I have also found that the only scientific article that he published was in a journal run by a diploma mill (The unaccredited Akami university).



False!

Mathematical Foundations of the
Relativistic Theory of Quantum Gravity


Peer-reviewed, published in:


Pacific Journal of Science and Technology (USA) Volume 11. Number 1. May 2010 (Spring), (Physics),pp.173-232.



posted on May, 24 2012 @ 09:19 AM
link   
reply to post by QQXXw
 


Aye, I saw those posts from you earlier. As well as the other thread...

Methinks the lack of support is because of the "harshness" to your claims. One poster is now doing proper research! Which is all I was after
I will let them decide the hoaxablity of the huckster. (Not that he is one, just sounded fancy!)

Anyway, I will sit and watch cause I find time manipulation very very interesting. Due to being able to manipulate it myself



posted on May, 24 2012 @ 09:19 AM
link   

Originally posted by QQXXw
reply to post by adigregorio
 


I have already checked and he is not on the staff list at the physics department at the university he claims to represent. I have also found that the only scientific article that he published was in a journal run by a diploma mill (The unaccredited Akami university).



check his homepage for allmost all of his work

You're trying your best to discredit this man yet all you do is discredit yourself.

Attack the information at hand.

You know sort of like 'don't attack the messenger'.

If you don't have the proper skills to do so, just say so and stop trying to discredit his persona.




posted on May, 24 2012 @ 09:20 AM
link   
reply to post by kn0wh0w
 


Pacific Journal of Science and Technology is run by Akamai university which is a diploma mill

.



posted on May, 24 2012 @ 09:23 AM
link   

Originally posted by QQXXw
reply to post by kn0wh0w
 


Pacific Journal of Science and Technology is run by Akamai university which is a diploma mill

.


No, you have to do it like this:

Pacific Journal of Science and Tech is run by the Akamai university, which is basically a diploma mill:


The Pacific Journal of Science and Technology (PJST) is a peer-reviewed electronic journal of interdisciplinary scientific research, theories, and observations. PJST is a semi-annual publication of Akamai University, Hilo, Hawaii.

Source for claims

Take note, I do not say that they are a diploma mill. Due to lack of evidence for that claim, in this thread that is



posted on May, 24 2012 @ 09:24 AM
link   

Originally posted by QQXXw
reply to post by kn0wh0w
 


Pacific Journal of Science and Technology is run by Akamai university which is a diploma mill

.


And it is a diploma mill because you say so?

Or is it because they publish work from this 'crackpot' (your words)

Again, attack the information at hand.

That is what we, ATS as a collective, should try to discredit.

Yet you're insisting on discrediting this man, universities and god knows what else..

If you don't have the skills/knowlegde to debunk the information at hand, just say so. (i don't have the skills either but i don't go around namecalling just because i don't agree with this man. There is no shame in that)

But what you're doing now is lame.

So i would like to some proof for your 'diploma mill' claim, or is that your opinion only?



posted on May, 24 2012 @ 09:28 AM
link   
reply to post by adigregorio
 


Their own website claims they are not accredited
www.akamaiuniversity.us...

Thier own website claims the following: "Please Note: Akamai University is not accredited by an accrediting agency or association recognized by the US Department of Education"

Do you want to continue this pointless discussion?



posted on May, 24 2012 @ 09:33 AM
link   
Well this is interesting. Reading now.


Originally posted by QQXXw
He is definitely a crackpot




You do everyone in this thread a disservice. If you can't be rational in the face of claims that seem bogus, then i'm sure 4Chan will welcome you with open arms.



posted on May, 24 2012 @ 09:34 AM
link   
reply to post by QQXXw
 


Tis never pointless to back ones words with sources.

As you can see the other poster there was under the assumtion that it was just your word of the "diploma mill". Now, with that bit of awesome fact you included (star worthy fact!) The discussion is heading towards pointless


As for me, like I said I am just here for the time manipulation!



posted on May, 24 2012 @ 09:41 AM
link   
reply to post by adigregorio
 


I have seen plenty of papers like this. In every case it is always nonsense masked by heavy mathematics which is there to confuse some readers and keep them from finding out the pure nonsense that lurks beneath.



posted on May, 24 2012 @ 09:43 AM
link   
post removed for serious violation of ATS Terms & Conditions



posted on May, 24 2012 @ 09:46 AM
link   
In a second thread, there was a .pdf file posted that included formulas. Since I have a physics background, I spent about an hour decoding them so far and they are accurate. Here is a summary of the .pdf file so far.

QQXXw, you don't know what you are talking about. I have a good enough math and physics background to understand what is going on, and it makes sense so far. If I come across something that is wrong, I'll let you know.

Section 1: Introduction)
This is an overview. Basically, it explains what HAARP is used for, which is generating electromagnetic radiation at extremely low frequencies (ELF). To do this would normally require an extremely long antenna in order to set up the extremely long wavelength required to produce the ELF.

However, this can be bypassed by heating the ionosphere using high frequency radiation - this somehow produces ELF electromagnetic radiation. We can get into that more later.

Section 2: Gravitational Shielding)
This section explains the concept of gravitational shielding. In the last decade, a new formula was generated that explains the difference between inertial mass (f = m*a), which is used to calculate force, and gravitational mass, which is used to calculate gravitational force. The formula basically states that when the change in momentum is 0, there is no difference between the inertial mass (how much stuff the object has) and the gravitational mass (used to determine how much the object weighs). However, the higher the change in momentum gets, the less the object weighs.

This means that the faster an object accelerates, the less it weighs. Normally, the change in momentum would have to be extremely high to have any noticeable difference.

It turns out that that it is possible to create high acceleration by using electromagnetic radiation. Note that this does not mean the object has to move very far - since it would be possible to keep the object accelerating indefinitely by moving it back and forth at a high speed (its velocity would change from + to -, thus causing acceleration). So basically, the high-frequency electromagnetic radiation generated by HAARP super-heats particles, causing them to have high acceleration values.

The gravitational shielding comes into effect when (and yes this is possible the equations convinced me) the objects' weight (in this case I think they are referring to electrons in the ionosphere) become negative, and therefore, they counter-acts Earth's gravity.

The formula used for gravitational shielding is as follows:

Let Mg be gravitational mass
Let Mi be inertial mass
Let Mi0 be the original inertial mass
Let X be the ratio of them

X = Mg/Mi

Normally this would be 1, because the mass used to determine weight would be the same as the mass used to determine the amount of stuff the object has in it.

However, with high acceleration, this ratio can become less than 1 (meaning the object weighs less) or negative (meaning the object counter-acts Earth's gravity and provides gravitational shielding for everything below it).

Multiple gravitational shields can be placed on top of each other, for example, if there were two of them, the gravitational mass of everything below it would be X1*X2*(the original gravitational mass of the object) where X1 is the ratio in the first shield and X2 is the ratio in the second one.

edit on 24-5-2012 by darkbake because: (no reason given)



posted on May, 24 2012 @ 09:46 AM
link   
double post
edit on 24-5-2012 by darkbake because: (no reason given)



posted on May, 24 2012 @ 09:47 AM
link   
I usually don't condemn papers, but after reading this one, I have to say, the author's understanding of relativity is abit elementary.



posted on May, 24 2012 @ 09:49 AM
link   
reply to post by QQXXw
 


Oh, don't misunderstand my stance on dear Fran.

I have been on your side regarding that since before I posted. I could just see where the disconnect was, so I thought I would step in and offer some helpful handies.

Not to mention the whole "time manipulation" aspect, I mean c'mon who wouldn't want to have some funtimes.

PS: The math is included in these papers so folks can say things like: "Why don't you look at the maths, explain that stuff away!" Problem is they don't seem to realize that the math was never explained to them in the first place...

A = FG2

And that is a real equation!! Of course it looks better as E=MC2...

Letter, numbers and the equal sign don't always mean "correct!"



new topics

top topics



 
25
<< 1    3  4  5 >>

log in

join