Jump to content

John Phoenix

Senior Members
  • Posts

  • Joined

  • Last visited

Everything posted by John Phoenix

  1. I'm looking for some good tracking software to track the live decent of UARS a 1200 lbs satellite as it crashes to Earth later today. (for Windows 7) I need something that has the ability to track UARS in real time with second by second updated info and not just a 'prediction' track based on where it's orbit should be, as a simulation would. There is also another German made satellite that's going to crash soon I want to track. I'm looking for something easy to use, accurate.
  2. I didn't know clusters of galaxies were observed moving away from each other. You are right that this observation changes the conclusions. Hey, perhaps there is yet another massive black hole at the center of the universe. I was just going on what the show said ( and didn't say). I give myself an "A" for thinking out of the box with the given info. Ha ha. Love your avatar. i myself cannot wait for the Christmas special and next season.
  3. Well How about a hypothesis. If those who say the universe is expanding beleive so because the matter seems to be moving away from us, but they do not take into account the destructive forces of black holes that swallow up most matter then their theories could be wrong. I was watching the History channel show that said there is a massive black hole at the center of most galaxies. If this is true, we must Think. What are those black Holes doing? They are swallowing up matter. Galaxies spin in a circular motion.. like the motion of the black hole at it's center. I submit to you that every galaxy is being eaten/swallowed up from within itself.. from its black hole in the center. One day every planet star etc. inside its own galaxy, will be eaten by its black hole. Our own galaxy is right Now shrinking and being swallowed up by the black hole at it's center. Now, as we observe the universe from our standpoint it may indeed look like it's expanding, but it's not this is an illusion.. What we are really seeing are the planets and stars rushing away from us, because the are rushing away to meet their doom at the black hole at it's galaxies center. From our standpoint in space looking outward, the two conclusions may look very much the same. However if you do not take into account this black hole at a galaxies center eating the galaxy up from within, the conclusions of the observations of planets rushing away from us cannot be accurate. Ask yourself these questions. What's faster The speed at which matter seems to be rushing away from us OR the speed at which black holes swallow up matter? So call me a crackpot. To me this is not any sillier than the theory of Dark Matter so believed because the observable effect of light bending in space. Many things can bend light here on Earth and in space. To assume dark matter exists because of this effect is way sillier than my theory.
  4. Well I must say I am shocked none of your guys are up on this subject.. being that it's all about chemistry. I already have a good explanation of why sulfasion occurs from an ebike website. I did find a product that claims to stop the process by adding a small solar charger - found here called the Solargizer http://www.survivalunlimited.com/batteries/solargizer36vLugAC.htm I wanted some hard core scientists to tell me how sound this idea is. If good, i need to re-create this device with used parts if possible to fit my budget.
  5. 20 people saw this and no one has a clue? Please help.
  6. I am buying an electronic bike kit online. This is a kit with a battery operated motor for my mountain bike that lets me travel 25 miles an hour with a range up to 20 miles. It uses a battery pack of 3, 12 volt batteries (bike needs 36V) at 12AH. I wanted this to go to my fishing hole and fish, then a few hours later return home. I even called the company to be sure the kit could do the job with all my fishing gear before I ordered. The guy I spoke to did not tell me about battery sulfasion. A fellow on an e-bike forum told me I would not be able to use the bike in this manner because if I let the bike sit any length of time before putting it on the charger it would become damaged due to sulfasion. I was crestfallen. However someone suggested that as long there is a flow of current the sulfasion will not occur. It should not matter if the current is outgoing or incoming they said. Is this true? If this is true, they suggested I may be able to solve the problem by hooking up a small solar panel to the battery to give it just enough of a charge to prevent sulfasion. What do you guys think of this? Would it work? If so - How do I figure the correct size of such a solar charger that would work? If this will not work.. are there any other options? I cannot afford the more expensive better batteries such as LiPO4 batteries. They are very expensive and I am barely affording this e-bike kit as it is, so i am looking for a very cheap solution to my problem.
  7. Well at least that's a little better folks. 1st point: Yeah your right.. Moores law only applies in the since that if computer processing power can double every 18 months then possibly so could other related technology. - it was a stretch but I think you got what I was trying to say. 2nd Point: I realize no one may actually know any applications and you guys are not exactly a captive audience - that's the point.. I was bombing out there! - Work with me here. The sensationalism did help to get a few more responses - GRIN Merged post follows: Consecutive posts merged Yeah but that only works with opposing forces between two metallic magnets does it not? I was trying to think of things where we could have uses for suspended objects that were not metallic. I realize this field would be a lot stronger to make this happen and due to size of equipment involved may not be too practical today. i wanted to see what you guys could come up with that we maybe could see possible in the future.
  8. Well, you have shown you can pick apart my statement rather nicely and throw in a bunch of interesting things. I now know of many different type of magnets or things with different magnetic properties and how they may or may not relate to my question. Thank you for sharing your wonderful knowledge. But that speaks nothing of the actual answer. Again - Does anyone know of any practical application for this technology and what advancements they have made to it since the floating frog experiment? Since it seems no one around here has very much of an imagination, I will help you jog yours. We have an object - not necessarily made of metal that we can suspend in a strong magnetic field. What can we do with it? First thing that comes to my mind is we have eliminated friction. (unless the magnetic field holds the object firmly in place where it cannot move or spin, but I have not heard if this is the case or not.) What object or objects can we put into this magnetic field that would benefit from the absence of friction? If we could design frictionless tools what sorts of tools could they be? Do you see where I am going with this thinking? I am sure the absence of friction is just one side benefit to suspending things in such a strong magnetic field. You guys claim to be scientists. I am rather shocked an dismayed that tons of you didn't jump at the chance to postulate possible things we could use this technology for. But I think I know what you will do. You will say, Why even think about it because it takes huge amounts of energy to levitate something in a strong magnetic field it will never be practical. - To those who think this may I remind you of Moores Law. What is impossible today may be possible a year from now. It is never too early to throw out some ideas and have them in place when the technology catches up with you. So I ask again: Does anyone know of any practical application for this technology and what advancements they have made to it since the floating frog experiment?
  9. That's a given, But - It has little to do with magnets. Magnetic fields can be produced with electrical current. The question was not what practical applications could there be with magnets, but the application of moving or levitating non metallic objects with magnetic fields. That is a Big difference.
  10. This begs me to ask.. Does this mean this same electric ark would not work in space since there is a vacuum? Wait.. don't we observe electric phenomena in space?.. could it be that the path the electricity follows is not solely because of the presence of air? Perhaps air is not the sole conductor?
  11. Well Swansnot, that is one reason I suppose. Not a very goon one mind you. The original poster didn't even say it. They didn't have to shut down the thread just because one person was not "scientific" enough. Those people do not want to discuss the very real fringe applications and new theories of science.. they just want to be right and maintain everything they already know must never be questioned.. . That's how I see them anyway. This is the same forum that banned me for just asking a question - without even answering it- and it was my first and last post. O.k. so.. I would still like to get to the bottom of this levitating non metallic objects in strong magnetic fields bit. Since this experiment, what has been done to progress the technology? What practical applications could there be in industry for such technology? Does anyone know?
  12. You label that thread psychoceramics. Are you saying science did not levitate that frog with a magnetic field? I have seen the videos, this was clearly done. How could it be psychoceramics when there is clearly some type of science involved? This makes no since to me. psychoceramics: The study of crackpots and crackpot phenomena. This includes things such as weird science and pseudoscience, bizarre religion, kooky solutions to the world problem and other things. Robert Pirsig's MOQ (Metaphysics of Quality).
  13. So.. what you are telling me is you do not believe that it was ever possible for science to levitate an object in a strong magnetic field? Even though the link to the research is down, you can see by the other post on this popular physics forum that the scientists did not refute this claim. http://www.physicsforums.com/showthread.php?t=3552 Here ya go: http://www.ru.nl/hfml/research/levitation/diamagnetic/ " Whether an object will or will not levitate in a magnetic field B is defined by the balance between the magnetic force F = M∇B and gravity mg = ρV g where ρ is the material density, V is the volume and g = 9.8m/s2. The magnetic moment M = (χ/ µ0)VB so that F = (χ/µ0)BV∇B = (χ/2µ0)V∇B2. Therefore, the vertical field gradient ∇B2 required for levitation has to be larger than 2µ0ρg/χ. Molecular susceptibilities χ are typically 10-5 for diamagnetics and 10-3 for paramagnetic materials and, since ρ is most often a few g/cm3, their magnetic levitation requires field gradients ~1000 and 10 T2/m, respectively. Taking l = 10cm as a typical size of high-field magnets and ∇B2 ~ B2/l as an estimate, we find that fields of the order of 1 and 10T are sufficient to cause levitation of para- and diamagnetics. This result should not come as a surprise because, as we know, magnetic fields of less than 0.1T can levitate a superconductor (χ= -1) and, from the formulas above, the magnetic force increases as B2. " The Simple Explanation: "As you might well know, all matter in the universe consists of small particles called atoms and each atom contains electrons that circle around a nucleus. This is how the world is made. If one places an atom (or a large piece of a matter containing billions and billions of atoms) in a magnetic field, electrons doing their circles inside do not like this very much. They alter their motion in such a way as to oppose this external influence. Incidentally, this is the most general principle of Nature: whenever one tries to change something settled and quiet, the reaction is always negative (you can easily check out that this principle also applies to the interaction between you and your parents). So, according to this principle, the disturbed electrons create their own magnetic field and as a result the atoms behave as little magnetic needles pointing in the direction opposite to the applied field*. As you probably saw many times when playing with magnets, magnets push each other away if you try to bring together their like poles, for example, two north or two south poles. Similarly, the north pole of the external field will try to push away the “north poles” of magnetized atoms. Our magnet creates a very large magnetic field (about 100 to 1000 times larger than school or household magnets). In this field, all the atoms inside the frog act as very small magnets creating a field of about 2 Gauss (although very small, such a field can still be detected by a compass). One may say that the frog is now built up of these tiny magnets all of which are repelled by the large magnet. The force, which is directed upwards, appears to be strong enough to compensate the force of gravity (directed downwards) that also acts on every single atom of the frog. So, the frog’s atoms do not feel any force at all and the frog floats as if it were in a spacecraft."
  14. About this thing they have done with the floating frog via strong magnetic fields.. what do we know about this that could be piratical for everyday use? I had a link to what I thought was the original study/experiment but that link is no longer a valid web page.
  15. I have no idea. My reading comprehension is pretty good and I don't see any resemblance in the two threads. I think the thing on my mind is that this is from CNN and not some source that would be as easily questionable. I mean.. It's not rense.com or coming from a known quack site. I figure if CNN published it there may be some truth to it. After all.. It's CNN! They are known for their journalistic integrity aren't they? Anyone know anyone at Boeing? I am sure CNN is good about checking sources before they do a story.. they just don't have a reputation to print lies or silly quack stuff. It should be easy enough to prove the story at least, even if you don't believe what the story talks about. In fairness, I know this story is a few year old.. but if true, just the fact that Boeing is or was seriously looking into this tells me they at least thought Anti-Gravity was possible.. and you know Boeing, they design high tech air craft for a living.. for the Government and Space programs even.
  16. I know we can float objects with strong magnetic fields. I think a lot of the time when people say "Anti-Gravity" it is this ability that they are actually talking about and it is not really true anti-gravity.. people just lack a fancy packaged way to explain the effect otherwise so Anti-Gravity comes to mind.
  17. I know many scientist do not believe anti-gravity is possible. I just wanted to know what you folks thought of this. Do you think they are really talking about anti-gravity, or using strong magnetic fields to 'levitate' the craft? http://www.cnn.com/2003/TECH/09/05/wow.tech.black.world/index.html "(CNN) -- What ground-breaking new technology is kept so secret by the authorities that even to comment on its existence would be to reveal too much? Welcome to black world technology -- the discrepancy in the defense budgets no-one can explain, and the programs which politicians and officials have the right to deny even exist. Yet it is big business, not just for those involved in developing the technology, but for the spin-offs that eventually come in the "white world" -- defense jargon for the real world. "The computers that were secretly developed to go to the moon are now on your desktop," Nick Cook, aerospace consultant for Jane's Defence Weekly told CNN. "It all ends up in the commercial world in some ways, but black world technology is hard to penetrate in terms of figures and types of programs," he said. Boeing, the world's largest aircraft manufacturer says it is working on anti-gravity propulsion, which could revolutionize conventional aviation. If the science underpinning the program can be made into reality, it will be the biggest thing to hit the aviation industry since the Wright Brothers. "GRASP," or Gravity Research for Advanced Space Propulsion, was only recently reported in Jane's Defence Weekly, but the U.S. military may have had the technology for years. The National Institute for Discovery Science (NIDS), based in Nevada, say that mysterious U.S. military craft using this kind of technology have been skirting the skies since the 1980s. And NIDS is now calling for the military to unveil its secrets for commercial benefit. ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
  18. I found this on a web page and it makes no since to me. if I have a ball and I spin it on the floor, the entire ball is spinning at the same rate of speed. Top Middle an Bottom, still spins the same. How then can the earth spin at different speeds depending on where you are on the planet? "How fast does the earth spin? That depends on where on Earth you are standing. At the poles, the Earth hardly spins at all, but as you travel towards the equator, the rotational speed picks up. This makes sense -- as the circumference of a circle increases, a single point along it has to travel faster to complete a revolution in the same amount of time. The rotational speed of the Earth at the equator is about 1,038 miles per hour. The atmosphere at the equator is also slightly thicker due to rotation, and you weigh slightly less. At mid-latitudes, the speed of the Earth's rotation decreases to 700 to 900 miles per hour. " http://ask.yahoo.com/20020411.html ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~ Now I understand this here: " as the circumference of a circle increases, a single point along it has to travel faster to complete a revolution in the same amount of time." But to me this does not explain why this causes some parts of the earth to spin faster than others.. If I imagine this ball with lines coming straight out the ones in the middle will make their revolution longer than the ones at the top But to me this is Not the same as speed. the lines at the top and the lines in the middle are still moving through space at the same rate only traveling a shorter distance. It appears to me this is confusing the issue.
  19. Hmm o.k... Thanks folks.. I will take all those thing into consideration.
  20. You may have replied before I could finish my edit.. nope.. standing inside something won't work. I need to negate or repel this current with a force or by somehow introducing something to the current stream that will change the properties or behavior of the electrons or protons - which ever brings about the desired effect. Merged post follows: Consecutive posts merged Interesting.. How would one do that? Perhaps more importantly, Why would a sphere of plasma accomplish this goal and How would it work.. what is taking place from the plasma to negate the electric current?
  21. I am posting this here because honestly I don't know exactly where this falls. Lets say, I have an electric current traveling through the air. In what ways could I negate this current without turning it off at the source? Perhaps I just wanted to create a bubble if you will around me (assuming i am standing in the path of this current) where the current has to pass around me.. How could I do this? oh.. I should mention that I do not want to do this with a physical object.. but with a force of some kind.
  22. I cant say I blame you for being skeptic.. I still am myself.. which is why I'm looking into it. The Chinese however seem to think it can be done They must think with all their scientist that there is something to it.
  23. I am probably not explaining this very well. The negative current has something to do with Ed using his flywheel machine to create a type of anti gravity. I think it's best you watch the videos to understand it, or.. I just found this page where you can view both videos as sets of images if you don't to watch the video versions. I think what is overlooked is the way in which this negative current is used, not that it's unknown. http://www.code144.com/browse-vid.php Also instead of the 6 You Tube links I posted you can watch the first video from 2008 here:http://www.code144.com/original.php I did not know this earlier. I called it the secrets of magnetism because that's how it was posted on You Tube, but that's is not its real mane. the person who posted it on You Tube must have changed the name. It is The Secrets of The Universe 2008 edition, and the next is the Secrets of the Universe 2009 edition.
  24. Whoa.. I didn't know the barrier worked both ways in theory. Interesting about the tachyons. I'd love to look deeper into Maxwell, but I understand he didn't take into account the full set of data, he only used half. Many scientists believe he ignored equations for negative current. Everything taught in the mainstream is about electromagnetic energy that uses positive magnetic current that govern the laws of attraction. It is said through south poles there is also this negative current that ties into gravity which allows for a canceling or lessening effect of gravity. I would want to understand Maxwells theories and this other side of it to get a whole picture. For a better than I can do understanding of what this negative current is and why and how it is overlooked by science go here: http://www.leedskalnin.com/#anchor_837 This sounds really out there, some may say it is not scientific but if possible that's only because we are conditioned to believe so. Me, I am not saying I believe this one way or another.. I don't understand all the math involved but it is interesting. We know Tesla invented a device that levitates a piece of metal. It is shown here: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=OkoETVCM__c&feature=channel I do not know how it is claimed this works yet it does. ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~ I could really start a new thread with this and I may do that but after I posted my last message last night (this morning) I came across some work by a young man who brilliantly discovered a correlation between Coral Castle, how Ed Leedskulnin moved those slabs by himself and knowledge of Freemasons secrets as described in the architecture and paintings of 200 year old Freemason lodge halls. This work is full of math, most of it not too complicated so that I could follow the logic. From that standpoint scientists would appreciate this. Please watch this it gets deep. As you will see, there is so much corroborating evidence and not just speculation because this fellow proves everything with mathematical equations. (Someone recently told me on here, you want me to investigate something, give me math - well here it is) In essence, the math explains how Ed moved those blocks and it is the same secrets of stone working Freemasons have known for centuries and were well known to ancient man.. knowledge that has been lost over the years. It is believed that the Freemasons of today may have lost this knowledge themselves. If this is all true then we may have another important theory to work with that will change the face of science yet again in new and profound ways. I give you; Secrets of Magnetism http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=uR2p2gCM4wE&feature=PlayList&p=C0104BEB8A1491CC&index=0 It is in 6 parts. Please watch all 6 parts. They are all there to the right of the video. And also; The Secrets of the Universe http://www.code144.com/#video'>http://www.code144.com/#video In 2 parts. This is a more updated version of the Secrets of Magnetism. You really need to see both videos in their entirety to get the full picture here and follow all of the math. http://www.code144.com is this fellows main site. He has a forum full of people trying to build a working flywheel just like the one Ed used. There are many scientists and mathematicians on his forum trying to help. BTW, all of the books Ed Leedskulnin wrote on the subject of magnetic current and Coral Castle are freely downloadable from the Internet if you know where to look. I have gathered all of these books and plan to upload them all together to megaupload so others can acquire them all at once.
  25. Wow.. O.k. you guys are clearing this all up nicely. I especally like these: "Inductive logic can never give a definite answer. Though if you accept certain laws of physics as your premises you can make deductions from that, but you have to remember that the premises you are starting from would be unproven." "We cannot ask whether a scientific theory accurately describes our natural world, we can only ask if it works by accurately predicting results from experiments." "newtonian gravity completely failed to predict these things but not only did GR predict them, it predicted them accurately. it didn't get its status because it was an interesting idea, it got it because it worked consistently and precisely. even when new tests were thought up it passed." ~~~~~~~~~ As just a casual guy I have a hard time wrapping my mind around when scientist say things are so proven and written in stone, then something comes along to say yes, those experiments do prove out 100% of the time, yet if we ad this X into the mix the theory no longer seems to hold true, or another theory comes and does things the older theory failed to predict or establish. It's the way in which I view science I suppose that needs redefinition. I understand if tachyons do exist, they can travel faster than light. If true we would need a new theory to cover that one as Einstein says nothing can travel faster than light - or is there one already? I'm horrible at math but I am trying to learn a few things about science because I really want to understand electricity produced by magnetism in all its forms. I wouldn't call it a perpetual motion machine but I see Jon DePew has taken some magnets and once spinning.. they will spin on their own magnetic forces unless stopped. It is thought by many Ed Leedskulnin of Coral Castle used energy produced by his flywheel to cause a negative magnetic current in a steel cable and when wrapped around those huge stones it would produce an anti gravity effect to help him life the stones easily. Also it is said that once Ed cranked his flywheel it would keep spinning by itself. Now Tesla is a deep subject but he made a car go 90 miles an hour on a magnetic engine that had a long antenna of wire connected to it, and would pick up energy from the air, just like a huge tv or radio tower picks up energy today from the atmosphere. I want to really be able to understand these things. This is my personal holy grail of science.
  • Create New...

Important Information

We have placed cookies on your device to help make this website better. You can adjust your cookie settings, otherwise we'll assume you're okay to continue.