Thomas;
My biggest issue is this idea you personally seem to have, and it is an attitude that we can't get there from here. That everything is "oh so complex," that it's going to be centuries, and so forth. Well it is complex, so is a hydrogen bomb, and so is a television, but that's never stopped humans. What bothers me is this idea that it cannot be done, not for centuries, or maybe ever because ya know we just don't have this, that, or maybe we just aren't smart enough.
Huh? I never said that we can't figure it out - you must be thinking of somebody else. I wouldn't be striving to figure out if I thought that it couldn't be figured out. My only point is that we haven't figured out how to get there from here
yet. At least not in the public sector.
In fact I'm convinced that we'll figure it out sooner or later. Because AAVs are proof that it can be figured out. And if
they can do it, then so can we.
It may be true what you say, but who in the 1800's was talking about the etheric as an absolute state of rest?
That was the main testable prediction of
the ether theory. So when that prediction was disproved, and Einstein presented the special theory of relativity, the ether theory was defeated and physics moved forward.
This is not a way to ingratiate modern ideas to people who are alternative thinking and who have a lot of regard for those past figures whose ideas appear so closely to match such conceptual ideas as quantum physics. If you make statements like that in alternative forums you might as well call yourself a pinata.
Haha - that's fine with me. There are some interesting similarities, in that quantum field theory involves universal fields, but the similarities end there.
If' it's geometric there must be points which define the geometry, and which then suggests that space has a structure, or lattice work about it. Can you clarify this more because it's unclear to me personally, and if space has a structure which we know of, then do also know what the pattern is?
In the theories of relativity, the structure of spacetime is the same for all non-accelerating observers, regardless of their velocity, and the structure of spacetime between two observers in relative motion is well-defined by the Lorentz transform. That's all there is to it, basically.
Geometry is a spacial function and seeing time as frozen frames of time is the typical picture presented of time frame dragging, and where space is like a record of frozen images of time: Past, present, and future typically shown as photo's linked around a spinning globe.
That doesn't make sense - there's no motion in a "frozen frame of time," so that model can't describe reality. The time component has to be non-zero or there's no physics at all.
This is very useful Thomas. You've probably seen this but I'll post the link for others.
https://phys.org/news/2015-09-magnetic-wormhole-regions-space.html
Creating a Magnetic Wormhole. Original Source Nature.
https://www.nature.com/articles/srep12488.pdf
Yeah I remember that. It's just an analogy though. So it's cool, but there's no new physics there.
There's always a work around to any problem.
I agree. But it usually takes either a serendipitous observation, or a stroke of genius, to figure it out.
Excellent information from a researcher's perspective. It's probably out there disguised as something else. I'd just about bet on it.
Maybe. Personally I think it's more likely that we'll have to do some very clever materials engineering to get there. For example, there aren't any high-temperature superconductors just lying around in nature someplace: those materials have to be manufactured very carefully to create that effect. Right now we're learning how to engineer quantum mechanical properties in carefully manufactured matter, which simply don't exist in nature - that field is known as "topological insulators," which is closely related to the field of metamaterials. That's probably the best approach to achieve some kind of gravitational technology.
I see, pipes and UFO's huh, well that's a new one on me. Only recently began running in to accounts involving UFO's and dangling pipes, but interesting. Thanks for the post.
I didn't say that UFOs use pipes of moving high-density fluid; I said that's a good way to think about a gravitomagnetic device in theory, as described in Robert L. Forward's paper. Because it takes a high-magnitude mass-current to produce significant gravitomagnetic fields. But it's interesting to note that any electrical toroidal inductor with a changing electrical current also produces an infinitesimal gravitomagnetic field, since electrons have mass.
That raises an interesting question, btw. Because in superconductors, the
effective mass of the electrons is much greater than that of a single electron (since they're coupled very strongly to all of the other electrons in the superconductor). We don't know if this effective mass, or the rest mass, in motion defines the magnitude of the gravitomagnetic field that's created - we've never been able to produce a strong enough gravitomagnetic field to detect in the lab so we can find out which definition of mass matters. I'd love to know which it is. Again, if we had a unified field theory (and I think we will find it, sooner or later), then we'd know the answer to that question.
WOW, just WOW
thomas check this out:
rattling the bear's cage once again
look at the first experience and compare what the UFOnauts said with what you just said!
Great Job humanoidlord. Not only a great job connecting information, but I think it illustrates the creativity and inventiveness of the human mind. Just a great job connecting the puzzle. You clearly have grasped the implications intuitively.
Yeah, it sounds like he was talking about gravitomagnetism, which is interesting, because so few humans are aware of that effect - which is a real effect; no doubt about it.
But he also talked about an infinite velocity, and that makes no sense.
I sense this is a momentous insight for humanity. Suddenly a revelation has taken place. What remains is for the engineering and physics to be ironed out. I have visions at last of hover board and flying boots and of home energy systems.
No, sadly. Gravitomagnetism is cool, and it can produce a dipolar gravitational field, but those fields are conservative in nature. The negative gravitational pole in the center is exactly cancelled out by the positive gravitational pole at the equator of the toroid, by Gauss' law. So, while you could propel a projectile away from the negative pole at the center, the device itself isn't a propulsion device. No hoverboards or free energy systems, unfortunately.
There is an interesting question here though. Since the Earth is curved, rather than a flat plane at the surface, I think that if the gravitomagnetic field was enormous in size, then the gravity and the antigravity effects produced by a gravitomagnetic toroid wouldn't cancel out exactly after all. I may be wrong though. In any case it seems to be irrelevant, because the concept of a gravitomagnetic field thousands of miles wide seems pretty far-fetched, or at least, vastly beyond any foreseeable human technology.
I always said they had the technology and now we have what amounts to enough evidence to bring an indictment to a grand jury ~ if we actually had one that is.
The ARV was reported to be much cooler than the surrounding air. The abductees have reported spiral tubing in a central column. I speculated myself that the material in the tubes could be a super~fluid. It appears to me that this is truly a major insight to an enabling technology which was in operation in 1951 and evidently not by aliens. LOl~
rattling the bear's cage once again
I really hate to be the party pooper here, because I want to see this technology in the public sector more than anyone alive, which is why it's my primary obsession. But you're getting way ahead of yourself here. First we need to figure out how to produce a detectable static gravitational field in the lab. The gravitomagnetic effects are another order weaker than that, so we're still a long ways off from that kind of technology, barring some radical and totally unforeseeable breakthrough. And it's not 100% impossible that the defense industry has made that kind of breakthrough, but it does seem highly unlikely.
And for your default assumption to be correct (that all UFOs are secret human technology), the military would've had to have figured out and built that kind of technology by the 1940s. That strains the limits of conceivability to the breaking point. It's actually far more credible to assume that we've been visited by extraterrestrial civilizations for at least several decades, than it is to believe that humans conquered gravity control and warp field propulsion by the 1940s.
