How to get rid of a Chemtrail from what I have done

reply to post by FreedomCommander


If YOU have a video camera you could show us a vast drop in temperature so are you up to the task!

I won't hold my breath.

Oh were exactly on your drawing is there any proof

reply to post by wmd_2008


thing is, now is not a good time due to winter season.

But if you wanted, I could build a cloudbuster to go along with the chembuster.

But I'm not going to risk my life for some troll that doubts everything is seen.

Originally posted by FreedomCommander
reply to post by wmd_2008

 

thing is, now is not a good time due to winter season.

But if you wanted, I could build a cloudbuster to go along with the chembuster.

But I'm not going to risk my life for some troll that doubts everything is seen.

Absolute zero is a good deal colder than your winter temperature, typical make an excuse when you can't prove what you claim!!!

As for risking your life what exactly do you mean!

Originally posted by FreedomCommander
If there is no electrons or very little amount (and I mean little to none), won't the neutrons become protons? And without any glue holding that atom together (Know the real reason but I know you'll just hammer on me for saying such things, so I'll just say the mainstream education's view and not the unorthodox's ways.) they fly apart.

Electrons don't hold the nucleus together, they orbit it. The nucleus is held together by the strong nuclear force, and the bonding there prevents the neutron's decay to protons, to my knowledge. Certainly Beta decay (I think thats the one) is rare except for radioactive isotopes.

But upon further study about the atom, and it's relation to us, if there are less electrons, we begin to freeze.

Electron numbers don't have anything to do with temperature. That would be vibration of atoms/molecules etc.

And it would take a lot of energy to take even one electron from a lot of atoms in the atmosphere. Also, to do so to anything requires breaking the covalent bonds first, then ionizing the constituent atoms (unless you just want to create H3O+, for instance). The energy for Hydrogen alone is 1312.0 kJ·mol−1, Oxygen 1313.9 kJ·mol−1. I can't see how your device can possibly channel that much energy. Not to mention, you need to get rid of those electrons somehow for those to stay as ions.

Ever heard of Absolute Zero? It can be done with this kind of equipment, and that is why the mainstream scientist can't reach it.

Considering the Laws of Thermodynamics state nothing can actually reach Absolute zero itself, I doubt this.

But what happens at absolute zero? The mainstream's view is that because the element has been slowed down so much, it can shatter.

An object perhaps, but an element, as in, an atom itself? No, it really can't. See previous descriptions of energies required to rip electrons from nuclei.

Edit: With regards to "Mainstream Ideas" being wrong, if you can come up with a way to get around the Laws of Thermodynamics, that would be amazing, as nothing in the entire observable universe disobeys those Laws, to my knowledge. In fact, I think they even hold true for a Singularity, so if you know of some way around them, please tell us it.

reply to post by apex


Well, if you say it's a nuclear force that is holding it together, some other people that are out of the whole "Status Quo" group would say differently. Without electrons, the neutrons will become protons and would separate from each other.

In the atom it's at a constant state of change and a constant state of vibration.

In the information that I was shown, it told me that you need electrons that vibrate in the infrared range to make heat. To put it in a simpler picture, imagine it like a bomb. A tiny bomb that once in a solid object, it's fuse will start. Once finished, it disintegrated or explodes, releasing smaller electrons that go to bigger electrons and repeat the process. This creates heat, that is why when we put our hands over a flame, we feel heat.

From what I have found, I simply take away all kinds of those electrons and there will only be an absence of heat.

The law of redistribution of energy, (can't be found anywhere I have looked, only in books that take a different view on life) states that when radiant electromagnetic energy interacts with matter, the resulting radiation as a whole is of a lower frequency than the original light. you can thank The Raman effect, named after C. V. Raman, for confirming the law.

It also states that energy, regardless of form, can only flow downhill or from a higher potential to a lower one. The famous second law of thermodynamics is a special case of this law.

It also accounts for temperatures at lower elevations being generally greater than at the higher altitudes. As the radiant energy from the sun passes through the atmosphere, increasing portions of the light are transformed into lower frequencies such as infrared, which activates the thermal motion of atoms and molecules, and produces heat. This process continues downward, even after the energy from the sun reaches the surface.

So can you run by me on how do electrons have no influence in the area of heat, using the Laws of thermodynamics?

When I mean element, I should of said a element as a whole, like a KG of iron or some kind of metal.

I mean so far, with one cloudbuster at your disposal, you can stop a gun from firing. That way it can only be several thousands of dollars that can be spent of the whole defense project and nothing that runs on fire will work, such as a missile or a nuke.

Originally posted by FreedomCommander
reply to post by apex

 

Well, if you say it's a nuclear force that is holding it together, some other people that are out of the whole "Status Quo" group would say differently. Without electrons, the neutrons will become protons and would separate from each other.

First, it's the Strong Nuclear force that holds the nucleus together. The Electromagnetic force keeps the electrons in orbit around the nucleus. It is the binding together in a nucleus that keeps neutrons from decaying to protons. In fact, beta decay emits an electron from the nucleus, not into it.
Second, if these 'other people' have a different explanation for the way the universe works, it would have to be consistent with everything the Standard model etc have predicted, correctly, up to now.

In the atom it's at a constant state of change and a constant state of vibration.

In the information that I was shown, it told me that you need electrons that vibrate in the infrared range to make heat. This creates heat, that is why when we put our hands over a flame, we feel heat.

The atom constantly vibrates, but is usually in a constant state. If it were changing it would usually be radioactive, or highly reactive. That said, in either of those cases once it gets to a stable energy (which would be quite fast), it would stay the same.

As for the candle, if you put your hand over it, that would be convected heat from the hot air and exhaust products of the flame, not much in the way of radiated heat, which spreads in all directions from the flame, and is what you feel from a campfire 2 metres away, for instance.

From what I have found, I simply take away all kinds of those electrons and there will only be an absence of heat.

Once again, please explain where these electrons are going.

The law of redistribution of energy, (can't be found anywhere I have looked, only in books that take a different view on life) states that when radiant electromagnetic energy interacts with matter, the resulting radiation as a whole is of a lower frequency than the original light. you can thank The Raman effect, named after C. V. Raman, for confirming the law.

en.wikipedia.org...

Says there that has a frequency of occurrence of 1 in 10 million, which is hardly a lot. On the whole, reflected radiation is the same frequency as it started, it's just that white light (or the Sun's light) has the entire spectrum in it.

It also states that energy, regardless of form, can only flow downhill or from a higher potential to a lower one. The famous second law of thermodynamics is a special case of this law.

No the Second Law of Thermodynamics is the one that states that will occur, not the other way round. Calling it a special case of another law begs the question of how exactly you can make it not apply.

It also accounts for temperatures at lower elevations being generally greater than at the higher altitudes. As the radiant energy from the sun passes through the atmosphere, increasing portions of the light are transformed into lower frequencies such as infrared, which activates the thermal motion of atoms and molecules, and produces heat. This process continues downward, even after the energy from the sun reaches the surface.

Then please explain how the Thermosphere is so hot.

I mean so far, with one cloudbuster at your disposal, you can stop a gun from firing. That way it can only be several thousands of dollars that can be spent of the whole defense project and nothing that runs on fire will work, such as a missile or a nuke.

edit on 10-11-2012 by FreedomCommander because: (no reason given)

Please prove this and also explain it. Also, does it stop your car?

Originally posted by FreedomCommander
reply to post by apex

 

I mean so far, with one cloudbuster at your disposal, you can stop a gun from firing. That way it can only be several thousands of dollars that can be spent of the whole defense project and nothing that runs on fire will work, such as a missile or a nuke.

edit on 10-11-2012 by FreedomCommander because: (no reason given)

Let me re phrase as my last post didn't seem to go down to well Would you care to prove any of you exaggerated claims above!!

After all the moto of this place is supposed to be to DENY IGNORANCE and its surprising who seems to forget that!

reply to post by apex


Ok, let's start from the beginning.

Then please explain how the Thermosphere is so hot.

I have no idea how it was measured. If it was so hot, then either it's because the object is skipping across the atmosphere or what.

Please prove this and also explain it. Also, does it stop your car?

The cloudbuster? Sad to say, I only have a low powered one, not enough to put out even a blow torch. Match, no problem, lighter, no problem. But blow torch, no effect.

No the Second Law of Thermodynamics is the one that states that will occur, not the other way round. Calling it a special case of another law begs the question of how exactly you can make it not apply.

well here is the law.

When two isolated systems in separate but nearby regions of space, each in thermodynamic equilibrium in itself (but not necessarily in equilibrium with each other at first) are at some time allowed to interact, breaking the isolation that separates the two systems, allowing them to exchange matter or energy, they will eventually reach a mutual thermodynamic equilibrium. The sum of the entropies of the initial, isolated systems is less than or equal to the entropy of the final combination of exchanging systems. In the process of reaching a new thermodynamic equilibrium, total entropy has increased, or at least has not decreased.

and for the law of redistribution of energy it is.

when radiant electromagnetic energy interacts with matter, the resulting radiation as a whole is of a lower frequency than the original light.

Infrared is a EM force. This is one of the reasons why it's a special case with the second law. All matter is made of light. Else we won't be able to see it.

Now as for the Raman it's purpose was to

the absorption and subsequent emission of a photon via an intermediate quantum state of a material.

Now I'm skeptical on the whole quantum physics thing, since it's only purpose is fantasy and train people in the art of doublethink, I think it's purpose is to show that all things reflect light.

What does this have to do with getting rid of a chemtrail? Simple, know how small things are, how they work from both sides of the education arena which includes the occult/hidden knowledge side, and work your way from there.

Now, for a little piece of what I have learned on the occult side.

The atom is composed of protons, collapsed hydrogen atoms and electrons of all sizes and densities.

There are the hard electrons which are small and very active. There are the soft electrons which are larger than hard electrons but smaller than a proton, they don't move as fast but they take in hard electrons.

The hard electrons are up close the nucleus of the atom all the time and the proton takes them in and spits them back out, giving the reality that the atom is alive. There is at least 1836 times the number of electrons is a single atom in order the balance out one proton. So in a observational standpoint, Iron has 26 electrons, 26 protons and 30 neutrons in the mainstreams simplified view.

Apply it to an unorthodox view it will turn out to be (~1836 x 26)= 47,736 electrons, 26 protons and 30 + or - 5 neutrons. That is more like it. Plus, the atom isn't alone, it's constantly exchanging particles in order to balance out. Imagine it like a sea, if all the sea is is a bunch of solid drops of water, would it be fun to swim in it? It wouldn't, just as a point of view case.

How a neutron is made is when it takes in too many hard electrons or electrons in general. When it has that many electrons trapped it becomes a neutral charge. It's spin remains the same but it won't attract any more electrons due to it neutral charge. However, it doesn't last long. The neutron only has a short lifespan. That is why it's in a constant state of change.

So far that I have experienced, everything around us is a EM force.

By the way where did you get your information/education?

Originally posted by FreedomCommander
Infrared is a EM force. This is one of the reasons why it's a special case with the second law. All matter is made of light. Else we won't be able to see it.

That is not how matter works. It is different to EM radiation (EM radiation being a form of energy, not Mass).

Now I'm skeptical on the whole quantum physics thing, since it's only purpose is fantasy and train people in the art of doublethink, I think it's purpose is to show that all things reflect light.

Air doesn't reflect light, to my knowledge. It refracts it however. Also quantum physics is there to explain how the universe works, with fairly major uses, since certain quantum effects govern how small computers can be built, for instance.

What does this have to do with getting rid of a chemtrail? Simple, know how small things are, how they work from both sides of the education arena which includes the occult/hidden knowledge side, and work your way from there.

Only trouble is, science isn't just a set of rules, it's a process. If scientific experimentation shows that under no circumstances does something occur (for instance, nothing travels faster than light, unfortunately), then it has to be accepted that that is impossible. This also includes checking for any alternative causes for the seen effects.

The atom is composed of protons, collapsed hydrogen atoms and electrons of all sizes and densities.

But it really isn't. We know they are composed of protons, neutrons and electrons. And this has been known since 1911, when Rutherford performed his scattering experiment. Atoms cannot be collapsed. The orbiting radius for the electrons (the shells) are fixed, and cannot be changed, the only change that can be made is elevating the electron to a higher potential or ionising.

There are the hard electrons which are small and very active. There are the soft electrons which are larger than hard electrons but smaller than a proton, they don't move as fast but they take in hard electrons.

Please provide a link to a source which says this, as it is absurd.

The hard electrons are up close the nucleus of the atom all the time and the proton takes them in and spits them back out, giving the reality that the atom is alive. There is at least 1836 times the number of electrons is a single atom in order the balance out one proton. So in a observational standpoint, Iron has 26 electrons, 26 protons and 30 neutrons in the mainstreams simplified view.

Apply it to an unorthodox view it will turn out to be (~1836 x 26)= 47,736 electrons, 26 protons and 30 + or - 5 neutrons. That is more like it. Plus, the atom isn't alone, it's constantly exchanging particles in order to balance out. Imagine it like a sea, if all the sea is is a bunch of solid drops of water, would it be fun to swim in it? It wouldn't, just as a point of view case.

But the electron has observably the same charge as the proton in terms of magnitude. The proposed Iron atom here has about 4 orders of magnitude more negative charge than positive, and like charges repel and therefore those electrons would immediately repel each other at extremely high speeds.

Electrons, incidentally, are well understood, and if you happen to have a CRT TV or Monitor anywhere, the CR stands for Cathode Rays, an old name for beams of electrons.

However, it doesn't last long. The neutron only has a short lifespan. That is why it's in a constant state of change.

Unless, as described previously, it is in a nucleus, then it doesn't change. If it were constantly changing it would need some sort of energy source, to convert them back from protons, and secondly, all atoms would be highly radioactive Beta emitters. They are not.

By the way where did you get your information/education?

In a school, and in books such as 'A Brief History of Time'. And some at University, though I did not do a theoretical Physics course.

As for you?

reply to post by apex

That is not how matter works. It is different to EM radiation (EM radiation being a form of energy, not Mass).

Then why would Tibetan Mystics say that "All matter is made of Light"? Obviously they know more than us and have a better control over thing than we do.

Air doesn't reflect light, to my knowledge. It refracts it however. Also quantum physics is there to explain how the universe works, with fairly major uses, since certain quantum effects govern how small computers can be built, for instance.

Air can reflect light, a mirage is one instance. Super cooled oxygen to a solid is able to reflect light.

Plus, this one is really bugging me, if quantum physics is so gosh darn great, then why are we not out in space exploring the planet with people and not some probe? Has it helped anyone?

Only trouble is, science isn't just a set of rules, it's a process. If scientific experimentation shows that under no circumstances does something occur (for instance, nothing travels faster than light, unfortunately), then it has to be accepted that that is impossible. This also includes checking for any alternative causes for the seen effects.

Uhh, yeah. That is where people usually close up. There are things faster than light. Here is the top 3 fastest list on what is the fastest, ranging from the fastest to the least.

1. Thought
2. Gravity
3. Light

If you have anything else to hit me with on what is faster, then I'm open.

But it really isn't. We know they are composed of protons, neutrons and electrons. And this has been known since 1911, when Rutherford performed his scattering experiment. Atoms cannot be collapsed. The orbiting radius for the electrons (the shells) are fixed, and cannot be changed, the only change that can be made is elevating the electron to a higher potential or ionizing.

sure about that? Because what makes a neutron? What make a proton? An electron? I know how they are made, do you?

Please provide a link to a source which says this, as it is absurd.

Ah, Got it from a book. Very resourceful one at that, talked about all the unexplained things in the world. The name is "The Awesome Lifeforce" By Joseph H. Cater.

But the electron has observably the same charge as the proton in terms of magnitude. The proposed Iron atom here has about 4 orders of magnitude more negative charge than positive, and like charges repel and therefore those electrons would immediately repel each other at extremely high speeds. Electrons, incidentally, are well understood, and if you happen to have a CRT TV or Monitor anywhere, the CR stands for Cathode Rays, an old name for beams of electrons.

Not unless you know the size of them. In comparison, it's that of a cannon ball to a BB. The cannon ball is the Proton and the BB is the electron. You can thank Harol Aspden for stating that.

Unless, as described previously, it is in a nucleus, then it doesn't change. If it were constantly changing it would need some sort of energy source, to convert them back from protons, and secondly, all atoms would be highly radioactive Beta emitters. They are not.

Nope, a proton is hollow, allowing it to breath. it is it's own energy source.

In a school, and in books such as 'A Brief History of Time'. And some at University, though I did not do a theoretical Physics course.

As for you?

Me? Reading a lot of books, doing comparisons to others works, and their experiments, reading their findings, testing out what they have done with a low budget.

So far I have made a tube that uses water at a ultrasound range to increase the voltage of a battery, made a cold electricity circuit, built a MHD drive and applied it to the cold electricity circuit to make it fly, did some research and found out that all planets have the same Earth like conditions and what their real structure is.

Awesome, awesome stuff here.

Oh and for a little side reading, you can go here for some free energy generators.

reply to post by FreedomCommander


What about the gun question you seem to be ignoring that claim

reply to post by wmd_2008


ok, even though your annoying, I'll suck up my pride and answer, but don't expect me to be complacent after what you've challenged.

What do you need to create fire in the atomic spectra? Electrons of a certain origin and density.

When these electrons disintegrate they release harder, yet smaller versions of electrons, similar that to a bomb going off.

These hard electrons are like buckshots in a shotgun, hitting all other atoms and triggering a chain-reaction.

This is the key to stopping a flame. Know that if you take away all the electrons required for a gun to fire or for a flame to start, they won't start.

The ultimate weapon in this case is the one that takes the flame away.

Originally posted by FreedomCommander
reply to post by wmd_2008

 

What do you need to create fire in the atomic spectra? Electrons of a certain origin and density.

When these electrons disintegrate they release harder, yet smaller versions of electrons, similar that to a bomb going off.

rofl!!

this is hilarious!

These hard electrons are like buckshots in a shotgun, hitting all other atoms and triggering a chain-reaction.

With just enough real information to give is a certain cachet....

This is the key to stopping a flame. Know that if you take away all the electrons required for a gun to fire or for a flame to start, they won't start.

"flame"........priceless!!

The ultimate weapon in this case is the one that takes the flame away.

Except it wouldn't be a weapon at all unless you hit someone over the head with it - and even then there are probably better sticks you could use

Click here for more information.

Originally posted by FreedomCommander
Air can reflect light, a mirage is one instance. Super cooled oxygen to a solid is able to reflect light.

Mirages are caused by refraction. And solid Oxygen does not count as air. Does Ice count as water, or vice versa? Just try doing an ice axe arrest on some rapids....

Uhh, yeah. That is where people usually close up. There are things faster than light. Here is the top 3 fastest list on what is the fastest, ranging from the fastest to the least.

1. Thought
2. Gravity
3. Light

Thought can't be measured in terms of speed. If you want to go the route of nerve speed, I'm fairly sure its subsonic, actually.

Gravity travels at lightspeed to my knowledge, and obviously light travels at lightspeed.

sure about that? Because what makes a neutron? What make a proton? An electron? I know how they are made, do you?

Care to enlighten the rest of us then, rather than stalling and asking me to explain more of normal science?

Ah, Got it from a book. Very resourceful one at that, talked about all the unexplained things in the world. The name is "The Awesome Lifeforce" By Joseph H. Cater.

Found on google books, author seemed to know very little about the Apollo program in his descriptions of high moon gravity, or supposed moon atmosphere.

Nope, a proton is hollow, allowing it to breath. it is it's own energy source.

First, subatomic particles don't need to breathe. Second, it doesn't have it's own energy source, as that would violate Conservation of Energy. Third, you said nothing against the issue of radioactivity.

So far I have made a tube that uses water at a ultrasound range to increase the voltage of a battery, made a cold electricity circuit, built a MHD drive and applied it to the cold electricity circuit to make it fly, did some research and found out that all planets have the same Earth like conditions and what their real structure is.

Please provide some proof for such outlandish claims.

Unless you have some actual proof next post, I'm not going to respond next time. If the alternative explanation for how the universe works predicts exactly the same results as classical/quantum/standard model physics, which it would have to do in order to expand on them, please bring evidence of this to the discussion.

reply to post by apex


Ok I'll only answer one, and just that, nothing more.

It's the creation of the particle.

but since you were too busy with not taking the time to read the book I laid before you, I might as well tell you a bit of it.

All matter is made of light, light is made of ether particles,

The stages are compression, velocity gain, and terminal velocity.

Compression begins when the ethers begin to crowd together

The velocity gain is when they are pushed into one direction

Once they hit their terminal velocity, they are held by a mutual magnetic attraction as a result of kinetic energy.

When these photons gather at one place they form electrons or protons, depending on their size and charge.

This is not inert matter, inert matter cannot form intelligence or life, denying this is basically denying life.

How a neutron is made is when a proton takes in too many electrons.

This is the only question I will answer. The other ones, I question on whether I should show it and have you hammer on me on how it's a fake or not and you hammer on me for being an idiot.