Alien Reproduction Vehicle

Discussion in 'Alternative Technologies & Energetics' started by Gambeir, Jan 14, 2018.

  1. humanoidlord

    humanoidlord ce3 researcher

    Messages:
    4,327
    • Awesome Awesome x 1
  2. nivek

    nivek As Above So Below

    Messages:
    20,046
    I do not mean to take this thread off topic, so if I may be brief, it does not sound like you are implying the use of 'UFO' in the same way as I do...I take it quite literal, U unidentified F flying O object...If an object in a photograph is unidentifiable then apart from any obvious CG creation or tampering, how would you know if it is a 'fake' UFO or a 'real' UFO, keeping in mind the literal meaning of UFO?...
     
  3. Thomas R. Morrison

    Thomas R. Morrison Administrator

    Messages:
    1,179
    That's an amazing Nick Redfern blog post - I had no idea that sightings of these things went back that far (but very few of us are ufologists, like Nick is, so he needn't get so snarky about our ignorance of these largely unknown cases ;)

    I remember a fascinating post by a Canadian guy at The Paracast forums - one night driving down the highway he saw a weird bright ball of what looked like electrified plasma just above the treetops...which then turned into a smooth black triangular craft with rounded edges and an array of lights on the bottom. Then it slowly moved away out of sight, iirc.

    That account has stuck with me; that's a very difficult report to explain - one of the only possible explanations that appeals to me is the idea that the plasma ball was actually some kind of wormhole and the craft emerged from it, rather than the plasma ball actually transforming into a sleek solid black triangular craft.

    But it's impossible to rule anything out, when we consider that other civilizations could be billions of years ahead of us technologically.

    This is why I've taken a shine to the term Anomalous Aerial Vehicle (AAV) - that focuses our attention on the class of reports that are particularly fascinating (to me, at least): technological aerial devices that seem to be dramatically more advanced than any known human technology operating in our skies.
     
    • Agree Agree x 1
  4. Mathias Båge

    Mathias Båge Adept

    Messages:
    70
    Directional control
    If the BTV surrounding the craft is symmetrical, i.e. the two hemispheres are of the same size, I postulate
    that the craft will be (somewhat) stationary:

    [​IMG]

    If the upper hemisphere is smaller than the lower, the craft will move upwards:
    [​IMG]

    If the lower hemisphere is smaller than the upper, the craft will move downwards:
    [​IMG]
    Maybe we could have two coils on the axial static electro magnet (on sump wall in the currently used depictions) and control the power fed to each: less power to the upper coil will reduce the size/energy of upper hemisphere, and vice versa.

    To fly sideways (right in this case), we'll need to distort one (or both) hemisphere(s) by creating a local radial contraction:
    [​IMG]
    Such a local contraction could be created by those german hydraulically controlled magnet plates, by fiddling with the frequency/phase/power fed to the four quadrature coils of the MAGVID, or by the gravitator (not present in currently used depictions).
     

    Attached Files:

    • Awesome Awesome x 2
    • Like Like x 1
  5. humanoidlord

    humanoidlord ce3 researcher

    Messages:
    4,327
    i know this is the wrong use of the term, but it has become so used in the incorrect sense, that it would be strange to use it literally
     
  6. humanoidlord

    humanoidlord ce3 researcher

    Messages:
    4,327
    nick redfern writes some quality articles in misteriousuniverse.com a must see at least to me
     
    • Agree Agree x 1
  7. humanoidlord

    humanoidlord ce3 researcher

    Messages:
    4,327
    i love these drawings, they make it way easier to understand your posts
     
  8. spacecase0

    spacecase0 earth human

    Messages:
    997
    anyone here good with math ?
    I am trying to figure out how large of a center magnetic field you would need.
    it would have to keep in orbit an electron in orbit at nearly light speed.
    so how heavy is an electron at light speed ?
    the math says it is infinity...
    so it would seem that you would need an infinitely strong magnetic field to contain it.
    so the accelerator coils are just going to keep pushing, and if you turn them off, the electrons should keep the orbit.
    to get rid of the energy you would either have to drop the central magnetic field, or reverse the spin on the accelerator coils.
    now if you have all this orbiting electrons, I bet it makes its own magnetic field at some point, so even dropping the power to your central coil might not stop it, but your magnetic field has to be strong enough to get it started in the first place.
    I am going to design for 13.56MHz, that is where the plasma cutters, induction heating, and all kinds of industrial hardware run, so you are going to have a limited impact on radio reception around you.
    decided on a a set of 2 turn one wavelength loop antennas, they will be set inside each other at 90 degrees. they should be a tad less than 11.545 foot diameter for the coils. (will use 145 foot of wire total)
    the speed of light field should be about 23 foot diameter, this should keep all the hardware inside the field so that it is all safe.
    the central coil can't really be more than about 11 foot tall unless it is multiple parts, and looking at it, it seems as if it should be a relatively short coil so that the magnetic field spreads out to the sides faster
    now I have some large magnets,
    but getting a detectable field at 11.5 foot away from the side of one is beyond any of mine, much less holing in an infinite mass in orbit.
    so, it would seem that the limit of that central coil is going to set how strong of a field you can make.
    a self excited homopolar generator can theoretically make an infinite magnetic field with a finite current (as it would in a sun or black hole), so it would seem the ideal to make this central magnetic field.
    but at some point my wire will melt, so I need to have some idea of what I am going for.
    the MAGVID PDF says 40 megajoules is a very marginal amount of energy to have in the field.
    so now with all the background posted,
    my question here is how much of a magnetic field would you need to keep in way more than 40 megajoules of electrons in orbit at about 23 foot diameter ?
    if anyone here is good at math you can likely figure it out way before I can.
    I can likely figure it out, it is just that I really don't like math.

    if you are thinking that we already know the number of turns of wire and size of the coil and the size of the homopolar generator from the ARV, so just copy that...
    then that puts it clear out of my price range, so I am looking at what I can get by with for testing.
     
    Last edited: Jun 6, 2018
  9. Gambeir

    Gambeir Celestial

    Messages:
    1,025
    Unless independently corroborated these reports constitute hearsay evidence which cannot be ruled out as spurious. This is unfortunate but the reports never should have been classified to begin with, and now the complete and total distrust of the system, along with it's so called security apparatus, have essentially invalidated almost anything they could produce; as there is no way to tell whether they are once more feeding lies or finally telling a forbidden truth.

    I'm sorry but if its from the FBI or CIA it's almost certain to be monkey food.
     
    Last edited: Jun 7, 2018
  10. Gambeir

    Gambeir Celestial

    Messages:
    1,025
    Damn fine thinking Mathias, puts me to shame. :)
    Like this very much.
     
  11. Thomas R. Morrison

    Thomas R. Morrison Administrator

    Messages:
    1,179
    Why not just use a betatron instead? All the equations you need can be found in this paper:
    http://web.mit.edu/course/22/22.09/ClassHandouts/Charged Particle Accel/CHAP11.PDF

    But if you need somebody to do custom calculations for unusual and specific scenarios, you'll need to hire an engineer, or figure it out for yourself. I don't know anyone who likes to run calculations for other people.

    It doesn't sound like you read that blog post. Redfern explicitly stated that the case in question was in the UK, and came from both the witness directly, and was subsequently confirmed by the old MoD's records that went public awhile back. I suppose that anything could be a hoax, but why on Earth would the MoD hoax an old ufo case? That just doesn't make sense to me. If there's a cover-up, then the last thing they'd want to do is foster public interest in ufos by hoaxing sighting cases, y'know?

    And it's strange that you seem to accept all kinds of wild unproven claims regarding ufo propulsion concepts, and yet cast such a deeply skeptical eye at a seemingly very credible ufo case. That seems like a pretty dramatic logical inconsistency.
     
    • Agree Agree x 1
  12. Gambeir

    Gambeir Celestial

    Messages:
    1,025

    Morrison, when you had half the associations with evil by way of employment with this system, the American version, and have had the intimate working experiences with in the system that I have had, then you too may become slightly more suspicious of virtually anything which comes out of it. I assure you nothing but nothing comes out of it unless it's passed through a highly organized, rigid dictatorial power structure, and which has had to pass up through several levels of civil ranks to finally arrive at an authorized authority, one whom is judged competent enough to pass a judgement as to what will, and will not be allowed. To be sure, these stories which the officially approved sources have now decided can become public are being handed out for specific purposes.

    "He who controls the past controls the future."

    You know that after 9/11 every single dictionary, in every single library that can be accessed within reason was replaced, and all for the evident explicit purpose of re~defining the meaning of ground zero? The system will spare no expense, and no effort is too great, nor detail too small, in it's quest for absolute power.

    So, I can see how you're viewing that, but all are suspect, some more suspect than others. Again, it is their own fault. Under no circumstance should any of these reports have been classified at any time. Not subject to public scrutiny until 30 years later? Give me a break. Compete nonsense and the absolute height of imbecility. For all I know they wrote them yesterday, have a cavalcade of stooges waiting to verify the story, and so this just proves to me that they are either incompetent idiots whom have about as much right to authority as a donkey does on race track, or they are every bit as evil as I'm suggesting, and which is a point of view brought about through experience.

    I guess for me the sticking point is the verification by MOD ~
    So you're right, the moment I saw the story resorting to officially approved, then I assigned it to the waste basket as not worth bothering with, and as likely some complex mind game which I don't need to bother wasting time over.
     
    Last edited: Jun 7, 2018
    • Like Like x 1
  13. spacecase0

    spacecase0 earth human

    Messages:
    997
    fantastic PDF,
    thank you,
    that saved me lots of work
     
    • Like Like x 1
    • Agree Agree x 1
    • Awesome Awesome x 1
  14. Gambeir

    Gambeir Celestial

    Messages:
    1,025
    I'm getting a certificate error message on the PDF
     
  15. nivek

    nivek As Above So Below

    Messages:
    20,046
    I downloaded it to my tablet and on my laptop without a problem...Try renewing your the certificate...
     
    • Agree Agree x 1
  16. Gambeir

    Gambeir Celestial

    Messages:
    1,025
    According to Microsoft:
    Certificate errors means the website you're visiting is having certificate problems. It doesn't indicate a problem with Internet Explorer.


    *This is basically all I'm seeing right now.

    certificate error
    A client certificate was invalid or not provided.

    Evidently MIT doesn't want to share their information with me.
     
    Last edited: Jun 7, 2018
  17. Gambeir

    Gambeir Celestial

    Messages:
    1,025
    Ha, never mind I went to the back door.

    .mit.edu+course/22/22.09/ClassHandouts/Charged Particle Accel/CHAP11.PDF at DuckDuckGo

    I used the second pdf link that comes up by using the above duck duck go search which is chapter 2 on particle dynamics, and then replaced each chapter heading with numerals for the entire class program of handout. This way I can't be gypped again.

    It's funky because again, the first pdf link under betatrons again comes back with certificate error but the others do not.

    So this link worked for me, then replace the CHAP02.pdf with CHAP11.pdf
    http://www.mit.edu/course/22/22.09/ClassHandouts/Charged Particle Accel/CHAP02.PDF
     
    • Like Like x 1
  18. Mathias Båge

    Mathias Båge Adept

    Messages:
    70
    Old drawings (three in one image) that I made in 2003:
    [​IMG]
    It was an attempt (and a poor one) to show how electrons are deflected in the MAGVID.
     

    Attached Files:

    • Awesome Awesome x 2
  19. Gambeir

    Gambeir Celestial

    Messages:
    1,025
    Actually I think it communicates the idea well Mathias. For me the issue isn't understanding the diagrams which are quite clear and descriptive, and their simplicity is probably a benefit.

    It just happens that I dug out the printed copy I made when you posted your link and so today I was going back over it with a fine comb. There are a number of issues which could use clarification for people like myself, otherwise it's fairly descent and communicates the ideas well. There may be some leaps in logic which need to be filled in but generally I think the whole thing is well done.

    What I'm trying to make sense of is how this all begins to take place by a physical means. In another words, beginning with one issue is; where are the these electrons coming from? In nature the air is composed of molecules. Free electrons are caused by radiation from space that liberate electrons by striking individual atoms in the ionic air molecules, and it does this at a steady rate. Now in the MMD Magvid, how are these free electrons being liberated? I'm having trouble understanding this process.

    The process of liberating electrons from the atoms of ionic air molecules is visible in the tornado model, but here you have a virtual bar magnet spinning which is said to be causing an effect upon "Electrons," and the question is where are these free electrons coming from, or how are they being generated, because while similar in theory to how a tornado works, what I'm not gathering is where is the free electron generator? That's what a tornado really is. It's a free electron generator. So where are these coming from in the Magvid?

    Do you understand? I'm sure it's just me but with a tornado it's these counter spiraling sheets of air bringing ionic particles in to collision which release the electrons via collisions with one another. Once the atmosphere creates a central tube of negatively charged ions which fall to the earth in a thread, then the resultant is an upwards positively charged ionic field that layers the surface. The positively charged ions will climb the downwards falling negatively charged ions as they build atop every repelled positive ion that is carried backwards on the falling ions, and then begin leap frogging over each other to contact the negatively charged ions, and so on until they reach the plateau where the negatively charged ionic field is held.

    So I can understand how a tornado creates liberated electrons via a Townsend Cascade, and brought on by the two counter rotating high speed vortex tubes which bring about a collision of atmospheric ions, but I'm having trouble seeing the mode of operation here in the MAGVID or MMD, but maybe this will clear up in due course.

    * This is a little nit picking but might be significant;
    The one thing which I've encountered is confusion caused by non~standard terminology which isn't precise in it's application by sources describing what constitutes the difference between an atom and a particle.

    The most logical sense of the issue is that particles are compounds of atoms, and that it's imprecise to refer to a single atom as a particle, though this seems to be a case where there's almost complete interchangeability leaving one to wonder what exactly is the difference between a particle and an atom? So that's a pain because this is simply not clearly defined and consequently not uniformly applied. As far as I can tell an atoms is one thing, and particles are the plurality of atoms, meaning more than one atom, but maybe MIT can make this clear: I doubt it though.

    That all may seem like a lame point but I found this lack of specific universal understanding has sources saying particles and then another saying atoms when they are referring to the same thing, and then again when they are talking about ions and then they go on to say that a ion is an atom. Christ sake's can it be made more confusing or what? Just how hard is it to decide to call one thing by one name? This is like calling a rock by five different names all meaning a single rock!

    I've concluded that all physics publications should not be allowed to publish anything, otherwise we will soon all know nothing to do incompetence and stupidity in their evident free for all usage of descriptive words. Everything having anything remotely associated with physical sciences, and probably computers as well, should have to pass through some kind national review board to assure some standard of descriptive meaning.

    This confusion brought on by imprecision is somewhat critical. You start using these terms like ions, atoms, and particles as all meaning one thing and before you know it you have no idea what the hell they are trying to tell you, or if they actually are trying to communicate or just shoving a load out to make it seem like they know what they are talking about. As a result I almost have to write my own definition of meaning~!

    Ions are particles which carry an electrical polarity. In the atmosphere the air's ionic structure is primarily neutral, or self canceling, because these ionic particles are formed by unlike charged atoms attracting one another and joining together to form an single ion molecule and it is these ion molecules that are then referred to as particles, and because they have so joined their nature is to cancel out a predominate charge in any one single particle of ionic air molecules.


    These atoms have joined to each other on the supposed basis of which magnets operate on: A positive attracts a negative: A Cation is a positive charged particle and an Anion a negative charged particle. The basis behind the theory is an atom has gained or lost an electron.

    Charge polarity in an atmospheric ion is said to be caused when energies from space knock an electron out of a single atom and which is itself just one of several atoms that make up an atmospheric ionic particle, and that particle is made up of molecules made from atoms.

    Any free or liberated electrons will naturally seek to bind itself with any other atoms that are minus an electron. No knows why free electrons go looking for new homes evidently but that's the theory, and so the whole is that the atmosphere is generally neutral charged most of the time since these free electrons only desire to become slaves in atomic homes that lack enough slaves, or so they claim, and so despite there being a constant abundance of free electrons running round looking for new homes all the time, there is also an abundance of available new homes and we end up with an atmosphere that is basically neutral most of the time: It's all musical chairs out there.
     
    Last edited: Jun 7, 2018
  20. Thomas R. Morrison

    Thomas R. Morrison Administrator

    Messages:
    1,179
    I wish I could defend the integrity of the forces in control of our political/military structures, but your point is valid, and the word "evil" is indeed applicable to a lot of what's going on. And the proof that anyone needs isn't even hidden - the US has destroyed Iraq completely (under false pretenses), turned Libya into a slave-trading terrorist stronghold (also under false pretenses) and now they're trying to do the same to Syria...while arming and funding the Islamic State terrorists who they now call "moderate rebels" throughout the completely corrupt corporate news media.

    It looks to me like the MoD finally released their ufo reports (some of them anyway) to mollify the masses - because now when people clamor for info they can just point them to the released reports and say "keep yourself busy with that stuff."

    That's pretty chilling; I've never heard that before. These insidious mind manipulators who create the terminology that drives our nation - those people sicken me, and apparently they do their work with complete impunity and anonymity. I wish we could expose them, because they're as vile as the Nazi propagandists, and they've been controlling the narratives that shape history for many decades (perhaps longer). Right now they're pushing for a new Cold War with Russia, and they're succeeding - if this ignites a nuclear war it'll be their fault and yet nobody will even know their names.

    100% agreed. The visitation of our planet by extraterrestrial technology is a scientific issue, and suppressing that information violates the human rights of everyone on this planet.

    Well, this story came out through the witness; it was only later verified by the records. I tend to side with the credible witnesses - not the publicity-and-money-seeking types, but the average Joe/Jane, when they report these things. AAV witnesses need our support: they've got the entire media machine and a huge fraction of society, snickering at them and humiliating them at every turn, and I loathe that abusive group-think. So I give the common person the benefit of the doubt, until I have a clear and empirical reason to do otherwise.

    I don't know if you've ever seen anything exhibit dramatic inertia-defying maneuvers in the sky, but I saw such a thing when I was seven years old. It was the most amazing and wondrous thing I've ever seen, and yet I've had to remain silent about it my entire life (in public anyway) because of the massive PsyOp to discredit and ridicule people like myself who actually saw something absolutely awe-inspiring, and leaps and bounds beyond any known human aircraft. So I have a great deal of sympathy for the witnesses - they're risking enormous public scorn and suspicion in order to share information that they feel we have a right to know and a need to know. Bless their hearts - that's an act of heroism, in my book.
     
    • Like Like x 1
    • Awesome Awesome x 1

Share This Page