Pearl Harbor Demonstration

[kevin.b]

In another thread , Linda was talking about rocks, big rocks and little rocks.
I went off walking my dogs, thinking of the loss Langley is suffering ( the dog is out of suffering, free)
And I was thinking if I could just shout through the earth ( Aussie's are upside down)
and send a hug, this led me to think of sound travelling through rocks, the air, water , and this link gave a graph of deep water off Hawai, and hear you all are talking of such.
Now if flying saucers don't produce a mach sound wave, it must be because they are moving the medium?
Anyway, sound travels faster through rocks than air, which means it's something to do with elesticity, and they reckon sound won't travel in vacuum, so vacuum must be non elastic.
Something doesn't make sense?
Must think.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Speed_of_sound
Kevin

[arc]

Kevin, Langley

I agree with your thought process, multiple levels of cover, I once read something that went sort of like this;
If its not five layers deep then its not good enough, and all those layers are still fiction.

Kevin your concept of the device moving the environment around itself, as well as itself, seems to me to have validity. If a device can move air then it follows that it can also move liquid. Pearl harbour has some deep water around it, very deep. Remember a few years ago when the Russians tested their underwater bubble maker, according to the net there was a version that used a super high speed prop spinning fast enough to make bubbles "cavitation", then another one that used a forward facing rocket tube to blow exhaust gasses directly in front of the the tube, all for the express purpose of creating a curtain of bubbles that flow back over the body to create an air bubble around the tube and hence eliminate friction. Finally a rocket engine on the back and you have an underwater torpedo that travels at 200mph. One thinks this is the "public" version, all hiss and noise and exploding rocket fuel and "smoke and mirrors'..... thinking for a moment though on why they would even bother, perhaps another cover for something else that travels even faster but has no need for crude outdated rocket technology.

Linda; your comment, another world below....
This may have a lot more to it than meets the eye,
Just how deep could you go if you can "modify gravity", What could you build, out of sight, out of mind...

[skyfish]

Kevin,

Speaking of sound...I posted this earlier. Food for thought.



For the first time, scientists have experimentally demonstrated that sound pulses can travel at velocities faster than the speed of light, c. William Robertson’s team from Middle Tennessee State University also showed that the group velocity of sound waves can become infinite, and even negative.


http://www.physorg.com/news88249076.html

skyfish

[Langley]

I
Now if flying saucers don't produce a mach sound wave, it must be because they are moving the medium?
Anyway, sound travels faster through rocks than air, which means it's something to do with elesticity, and they reckon sound won't travel in vacuum, so vacuum must be non elastic.
Something doesn't make sense?
Must think.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Speed_of_sound
Kevin

Songlines. Hug back. Im learning how to make concrete. I have until 3pm tomorrow to fix up Lesson No1. Thats when Diana gets home. When she left there was a garden.

It was just supposed to be a gutter along the shed. It now looks like an ancient dig site.

Thats it. Nodal points. Thats why the gutter collapsed. Thats why sound travels faster in rocks. The medium becomes the message sort of in resonance at the right frequency.

Nodal points and resonance. Ever lived next door to someone who played loud music all you get is the bass for a not surprising reason reflection, self absorption, resonance. Resonance builds. It is related to nodal points.

Self propagating waves.

If you could induce a wave ahead of the craft that nulls the bow wave, well, that would be a thing.

The analogy of two Hifi speakers, one wired in reverse, so it sucks when the other blows. No bass but place em right and you have a crude stereo spatial expander.

[Langley]

Hmm. I read skyfish and arc after Kevin.

Cesium ion seeding ahead of the craft would flow toward the craft creating a lower density area ahead of the craft's bow wave.

High pressure wave meets low pressure wave of same magnitude net equals zero.

Less bow friction.

Like speakers wired out of phase, no bass. Null wave.

Creating a slipstream sort of.

But then ion drive would do that to a degree by its nature.

Clear as mud sorry.

[arc]

Langley
I follow your thought train, similar to the concept of the "lifter" devices where the leading edge has a high voltage on it to ionise the air and break down the friction, lasers may achieve the same thing creating a charged tunnel ahead of the device combined with leading edge charging to achieve boundary layer effects. I think we will eventually see this being used with commercial airlines, especially with the fuel costs.

[skyfish]

Boundry layer?
How about an artificial event horizon that surrounds the craft?
That would be the ultimate boundry layer.
skyfish

[Mikado14]

Boundry layer?
How about an artificial event horizon that surrounds the craft?
That would be the ultimate boundry layer.
skyfish

Any thoughts on the construction of the hardware necessary or just a random statement?

Mikado

[skyfish]

Hi Mikado,
I posted these links previously. They show that an artificial event horizon
can be created.

http://www.st-andrews.ac.uk/~ulf/fibre.html

http://blog.wired.com/wiredscience/2008 ... -make.html

From Magic Bill's post earlier in this thread:

Mr. Piggot stated that suspended objects were surrounded by a radiant "black belt". The surrounding space was filled with the ephemeral electric blue lumination common with very powerful electrostatic machines

https://www.ttbrown.com/forum/viewtopic. ... 329#p20329

I believe that black belt is acting like an artificial event horizon, and Mr. Piggot's methodology can be utilized in the
type of field propulsion that has been discussed on this forum.

skyfish

[Mikado14]

Hi Mikado,
I posted these links previously. They show that an artificial event horizon
can be created.

http://www.st-andrews.ac.uk/~ulf/fibre.html

http://blog.wired.com/wiredscience/2008 ... -make.html

You made the comment about an event horizon around a craft. I know of what your links are talking about, however, I wanted to ask if you knew something about doing this to a "craft" .

From Magic Bill's post earlier in this thread:

Mr. Piggot stated that suspended objects were surrounded by a radiant "black belt". The surrounding space was filled with the ephemeral electric blue lumination common with very powerful electrostatic machines

https://www.ttbrown.com/forum/viewtopic. ... 329#p20329

I believe that black belt is acting like an artificial event horizon, and Mr. Piggot's methodology can be utilized in the
type of field propulsion that has been discussed on this forum.

skyfish

Confused like a deer in the headlights here. Are you saying that the experiments carried out by Piggot created an event horizon or you are just hypothosizing and/or perhaps have a link for substantiation?

Mikado

[skyfish]

Hi Mikado,

Just my idea of a linking of the observed phenomenon with alteration of the aether to such
an extent that light is affected. I hesitate...I see a linkage...implications...not sure if I should share this
on the fourm. Not sure I should go any further. I understand your hesitation in telling all
and this may be a case where I sould not elaborate publically. I am not sure how to proceeed with this.

skyfish

[Mikado14]

Hi Mikado,

Just my idea of a linking of the observed phenomenon with alteration of the aether to such
an extent that light is affected. I hesitate...I see a linkage...implications...not sure if I should share this
on the fourm. Not sure I should go any further. I understand your hesitation in telling all
and this may be a case where I sould not elaborate publically. I am not sure how to proceeed with this.

skyfish

Mr. skyfish,

Thank You for your candor. How about this for an idea, if you are asking the question then it shouldn't be put out there. When in doubt, I almost always try to move on the side of caution.

Mikado

[Paul S.]

Hey Paul. I am just a little lost here because I thought that you kept up pretty well with the storyline but there is obviously a hole here. OH . right. The "missing years" section. The nine years when nothing was written in those notebooks. RIGHT. So when do we learn about all of that?

Right, Mark, the anecdotes that Linda is sharing above occurred during "The Missing Years."

I have a pile of notes set aside to address those years in the second draft, but I'm not entirely certain that I will. Most of what we have from that period is personal anecdotes like Linda has shared here. We don't REALLY know what was going on, or what was so critical that the notes from that period are squirreled away in some place -- as Morgan said -- "safe, really safe," where the rest of us will likely never find them.

So for now, at least, it seems it serves the story line better if those years are treated as missing, rather than glossing them over with personal anecdotes, because drawing a blank there actually draws more attention to the period.

For now, at least.

--PS

[Mark Culpepper]

I dunno Paul. Feels pretty artifical to me. I mean you have spent all of this time trying to get to the nitty gritty of this entire story and yet its OK to just let nine years slide by without a nod or real mention?

Just because it fits better?

I am sure that it might suit the flow of the storyline but .... it still feels artificial. And it also feels like to me that you are " discounting" these personal stories of Lindas as somehow unimportant because you don't have the science to back them up and I contend that the readers are going to feel really shortchanged because the personal stories are what they really value. Just my opinion here to throw in the hat.

What does everybody else think?

another quick thought .....maybe you could do both. Why can't you tell those stories about the family WITHOUT going into what was happening scientifically. Nine years is a flipping long time to just leave out. And if things were so high pressured that he couldn't even write about them in his journals ( the ones on the surface) then his family life must have been showing some strain. All worth knowing about. Let other people ( or you) put the pieces together about the science later but really ... tell the story now. ... lets see ... from the end of 1958 all the way to 1967. Shoot you have already covered some of it. But what about Charles? When did he come to live with the family ... and why? And Helen Towt? what about her. And Beau Kitselman coming to visit Linda said, in 1960. Actually now that I think about it you might be right. Maybe its another book entirely. Still going to feel short sheeted.

MarkC

[twigsnapper]

Strange,

For someone whose every mathematical word is just hung on with so much admiration and respect, why hasn't anyone realized what this man actually said here. Excerpt from " Hello Stupid"


"B. and I were separated for some years right after the war, but we kept in touch. When I was teaching calculus to a group of Navy men at Barbers Point (which is a part of Pearl Harbor), my students built and operated a 'gravitator' and we all became very enthusiastic. The FAWTUPAC Commander took an interest, B. was sent for, and finally no less a personage than CINCPAC Admiral Radford witnessed a demonstration. B. was well treated by his Navy acquaintances, who were of course immensely proud of him, but the demonstrations were still rather primitive, and no scientists appeared"

Anybody read between those lines? " My students "BUILT AND OPERATED A GRAVITATOR"

A little " red light" on a panel has been mentioned before. Would it have flashed to someones attention????? What then would have happened ???? What eventually happened then to that " demonstrated gravitator"?????

The only thing that survived that meeting was the " tethered saucer toy carnival ride"????? ( The same thing that Mark Bean has been demonstrating for years, right Victoria?) But the rest of it, (according to Morgans notes in Pauls direction) was that the Group " TOOK IT BACK FOR SAFEKEEPING"

Something to consider. This " safekeeping " thing. twigsnapper