Jump to content

swansont

Moderators
  • Content Count

    43919
  • Joined

  • Last visited

  • Days Won

    55

swansont last won the day on March 27

swansont had the most liked content!

Community Reputation

7114 Glorious Leader

About swansont

  • Rank
    Evil Liar (or so I'm told)
  • Birthday May 12

Contact Methods

  • Website URL
    http://home.netcom.com/~swansont

Profile Information

  • Location
    Washington DC region
  • Interests
    Geocaching, cartooning
  • College Major/Degree
    PhD Atomic Physics Oregon State University
  • Favorite Area of Science
    Physics
  • Occupation
    Physicist

Recent Profile Visitors

142231 profile views
  1. ! Moderator Note That’s not the topic of this thread
  2. swansont

    Bob Lazar

    Confirmed, not proven, and Einstein’s model meant one could quantify his prediction. None of which is given here. GR would not allow for such an effect as claimed with a much smaller mass such as a flying saucer. To the extent one could call this a prediction, it’s falsified.
  3. That’s going to make it difficult to comply with the rules of speculations. How would one test/falsify your idea?
  4. Do the calculation of how much energy it would take to do this.
  5. swansont

    Bob Lazar

    Then post the salient details here, per the rules. You’re asking us to debunk fiction? I think you’re misunderstanding how this works.
  6. You mean the SR thread that was on its sixth page and was started in Nov of last year? The one where a number of people, including myself, were begging the OP to stop with their delay tactics and get to the point? As Strange has already noted, that's precisely how threads are treated, and more so in speculations. Going off on a tangent to have a discussion of some other point is hijacking. Tangents that persist more than a post or two are usually split off, or trashed (and possibly a warning issued) if it's egregious. The way it's supposed to work is that the OP posts something, and you respond to the OP. You're not supposed to raise questions not directed at the OP, other than clarification of answers already given. In speculations this is especially important, because the OP is typically introducing a new take on some science, and nobody else has insight into their thinking. People butting in to start new discussions will sidetrack things pretty quickly. A lot of times we do this. People were begging the OP to answer their questions and get to the point for some time. Plus, the OP posted their "last post on this topic" twice. This would seem to be a Fletch/Mr. Babar definition of sudden. Dr. Joseph Dolan: You know, it's a shame about the thread. Fletch: Oh, it was. Yeah, it was really a shame. To be closed so suddenly like that. Dr. Joseph Dolan: Ahh, it was dying for months. Fletch: Sure, but... the end was really... very sudden. Dr. Joseph Dolan: It was in intensive care for eight weeks! Fletch: Yeah, but I mean the very end, when it was actually closed. That was extremely sudden!
  7. California borders an ocean. What is the cost of desalination? Transporting water isn't going to stop flooding. ___ California was mentioned, and their problems are partly their own doing. Agriculture requiring lots of water (e.g. almonds) in an arid region, and huge populations in the cities. Maybe it is political will that's lacking. But from where would California get its water piped in? The thing about dams is they're on rivers, which comprise the existing water transport system that we have. The problem is that anyone near the river tends to take water from it (and that gives rise to some long-standing water rights issues)
  8. The graph here shows that the US residential cost of water is around 70 cents a gallon in major cities. Less than $40 a barrel. https://www.circleofblue.org/waterpricing/?gclid=EAIaIQobChMIoYvu0L-96AIVCoTICh1aJAOzEAAYASAAEgIWgfD_BwE What's the profit margin on that? How much would a pipeline cost to run and maintain?
  9. The number of journals has been going up, but then so have the number if subfields because of new discoveries. There really aren't more journals in my area of specialty.
  10. Where’s the part where you explain how this is an electromagnetic phenomenon?
  11. What is the question that accompanies this drawing?
  12. swansont

    Bob Lazar

    You are free to defend this in a thread in speculations You mean like stuff you posted in the other thread? That I debunked?
  13. It's because it was a status update, and that's what the software displays for status updates. It's not an invite to join a subject; status updates aren't threads in the forums.
  14. The phenomenon has been measured/observed, so you can't get rid of it. What you can attempt is to say it's an interaction, and yet we've seen nothing in the way of detail regarding such a claim. All we've gotten is seventeen versions of the same introduction. In one frame there are zero relativistic effects. So that's moot.
×
×
  • 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.