Quote from nav on July 22nd, 2018, 01:34 PM

Let's find something you can pass!
A man has two dogs and one dog dies, how many dogs does he have left. :hillbilly: :hillbilly:

Two. One dead, one alive.

Now you can start your "if he says one thing I'll say the opposite" by spewing out some fairy-tale about how once a dog dies, it's no longer a dog, it's a Mack truck. :cool:

Quote from Cycle on July 22nd, 2018, 01:38 PM

Two. One dead, one alive.

Now you can start your "if he says one thing I'll say the opposite" by spewing out some fairy-tale about how once a dog dies, it's no longer a dog, it's a Mack truck. :cool:

No you failed, you spewed out a 5hit load of bumkum when the answer was something completely different and the answer is known throughout the physics world, if you don't believe me then look it up. Different realities Cycle, events unique to each individual spacecraft that cannot be cross referenced in any way shape or form.
You even stated that my observations on Earth in which I can't see the future were flawed.
Do you know what league that puts you in Cycle, it puts you in the 'dork in a tweed jacket with leather elbow patches' league.

Quote

Now you can start your "if he says one thing I'll say the opposite" by spewing out some fairy-tale about how once a dog dies, it's no longer a dog, it's a Mack truck. :coo

Actually that made me giggle. :rofl: :rofl:

Quote from nav on July 22nd, 2018, 01:50 PM

No you failed, you spewed out a 5hit load of bumkum when the answer was something completely different and the answer is known throughout the physics world, if you don't believe me then look it up.

Awww, Nav can't admit he's been proven wrong about everything. He even ran away from performing the mathematics which would prove him wrong, because despite the fact that he knows he's wrong, he can't admit it... to do so means he's also forced to admit that his take on reality definitionally marks him as delusional. :D

Quote from nav on July 22nd, 2018, 01:50 PM

Different realities Cycle, events unique to each individual spacecraft that cannot be cross referenced in any way shape or form.

Still sticking with your fairy tale that if a time frame evolves at a different rate than other time frames, it loses its connection to other time frames and thus winks out of existence in the perspective of those other time frames, Nav?

I've provided several examples which prove you wrong upon even cursory examination... a person walking, our satellites, the moon, the sun.

But you're not delusional, right?

Quote from nav on July 22nd, 2018, 01:50 PM

You even stated that my observations on Earth in which I can't see the future were flawed.

Now you're resorting to lies again, Nav.

I very clearly stated:

Quote

All time frames in the present can 'see' each other, but those time frames may have evolved at different rates. Or didn't you know that time is relative in a non-inertial frame, Nav? That's sort of the whole point of Einstein's General Relativity.

And since your "understanding of past, present and future here on Earth" is flawed, the scientific method dictates that therefore you must take into account the data, and thus change your belief to come into line with the facts.

To do otherwise is to admit you're operating out of ignorance and you prefer it that way.

That's why I've told you repeatedly:
"Educate yourself, Nav."

Quote from nav on July 22nd, 2018, 01:50 PM

Do you know what league that puts you in Cycle, it puts you in the 'dork in a tweed jacket with leather elbow patches' league. Actually that made me giggle. :rofl: :rofl:

Awww, you have no substantive corroboration of your delusional take on your fairy-tale sentient universe, in which differently evolving time frames simply wink out of existence for other time frames (so a person walking slows his time frame in relation to a geographically stationary time frame and he simply disappears; the moon being further outside the Earth's gravity well than we are and thus having a different rate of evolution of its time frame simply winks out of existence for us; etc.), so you're forced to resort to insults again.

Are you "winning", Nav? :cool:

Quote from Lynx on July 22nd, 2018, 04:29 AM

I was hoping to find those willing to share their thinking outside the box on this subject here regardless of how spectacular it may seem, just to spark new ideas using vivid imagination and hopefully also disregard all man made laws of physics and mathematics in the process as thinking outside the box is the only way to discover new interesting anomalies after all.

Yeap.  I've said for a long time, "If you find yourself needing to think outside the box, you need to get yourself a bigger box."  Myself, I prefer the smallest box where everything still works.  When it comes to finding a way to harness energy from seemingly nowhere or traveling faster than some limiting constant C, I have to throw out a lot of the rules and start over.  The box you pick sets your boundaries.  It determines what you can and cannot do.  Sometimes you have to stare at the imaginary roots of an equation and think to yourself, how can those be useful to me?  Do they have some meaning beyond a formula?  Sometimes math isn't the best way to document or attempt to represent a concept.  Sometimes instinct, inspiration, creativity enter the picture to form a picture.  If it seems crazy, do you just toss it away?  Or do you inspect it?  Try to find what it might mean?

Maybe Cycle is correct.  Maybe we should all use the scientific method and follow the data wherever it leads.  Then again, maybe the data is telling us a truth we don't want to hear, see or know.  Maybe truth itself is what we attempt to conquer.  It's pretty hard to know much of anything.  We can think it, believe it, but knowing it crosses a line that makes it part of us.  And once that's in there, can it ever be displaced?

Quote from Lynx on July 22nd, 2018, 04:29 AM

I'm pretty sure I don't get 50 more years on this small planet, but I can do my very best to stretch the box frames a little.

Same here Lynx.  My time left in my current form is pretty limited.  Before it runs out though, I'd like to have the closest thing to proof there are possibilities in the world I didn't know about or even imagine could exist.  I probably set my goals too high, but at the time I set them, I really did think I could achieve at least one of them.  Not so certain anymore.

Quote from Lynx on July 22nd, 2018, 04:29 AM

I have a copy of Einstein's theory of relativity and I can understand that you would be better served getting a grip of it all if you also understood the math, but just by reading his examples about the train, lighting strikes, etc, that in itself gets ideas spinning in my head.
He really knew how to think outside the box.
I wonder what theories he would have had to share with us today.

I still recall some of the comments Nikola made in regards to Albert.  It's really a shame some of these great minds couldn't have come together and assembled great truths we all could benefit from.  Now we have choices, pick one or the other, but yet we can go to a buffet and have a little of what we like from all over the place.  My truth tastes good to me; your truth tastes good to you.  Different strokes for different folks.  What a world.

Quote from Cycle on July 22nd, 2018, 02:11 PM

Awww, Nav can't admit he's been proven wrong about everything. He even ran away from performing the mathematics which would prove him wrong, because despite the fact that he knows he's wrong, he can't admit it... to do so means he's also forced to admit that his take on reality definitionally marks him as delusional. :D

Still sticking with your fairy tale that if a time frame evolves at a different rate than other time frames, it loses its connection to other time frames and thus winks out of existence in the perspective of those other time frames, Nav?

I've provided several examples which prove you wrong upon even cursory examination... a person walking, our satellites, the moon, the sun.

But you're not delusional, right?

Now you're resorting to lies again, Nav.

I very clearly stated:
Awww, you have no subtantive corroboration of your delusional take on your fairy-tale sentient universe, in which differently evolving time frames simply wink out of existence for other time frames (so a person walking slows his time frame in relation to a stationary time frame and he simply disappears; the moon being further outside the Earth's gravity well than we are and thus having a different rate of evolution of its time frame simply winks out of existence for us; etc.), so you're forced to resort to insults again.

Are you "winning", Nav? :cool:

The paradox in question Cycle is an interesting paradox. If Napoleon is sat upon his horse at the battle of Waterloo, can he see Elvis driving down the strip in Vegas in his convertible? The answer of course is no because each event is separated by space time. Well the Paradox is exactly the same, each spacecraft is in a completely different and unique event in space time and whether it be 10 years, 20 years or what ever, they will never see each other just like Elvis and Napoleon. If the Universe were any different from that then chaos would ensue in the separation of space time events and this is what Einstein stated. The paradox shows that each persons experience of the Universe is unique but can be a parallel experience along with others. It also shows that if you place factors in the argument such as the slowing down of biological and atomic clocks then those parallel experiences with different biological and atomic clocks then you will not experience the same reality as each other just like Elvis and Napoleon.
No winners Cycle, only relativity 101 failures.

Quote from nav on July 22nd, 2018, 02:27 PM

The paradox in question Cycle is an interesting paradox. If Napoleon is sat upon his horse at the battle of Waterloo, can he see Elvis driving down the strip in Vegas in his convertible? The answer of course is no because each event is separated by space time. Well the Paradox is exactly the same, each spacecraft is in a completely different and unique event in space time and whether it be 10 years, 20 years or what ever, they will never see each other just like Elvis and Napoleon. If the Universe were any different from that then chaos would ensue in the separation of space time events and this is what Einstein stated. The paradox shows that each persons experience of the Universe is unique but can be a parallel experience along with others. It also shows that if you place factors in the argument such as the slowing down of biological and atomic clocks then those parallel experiences with different biological and atomic clocks then you will not experience the same reality as each other just like Elvis and Napoleon.
No winners Cycle, only relativity 101 failures.

Your confusion stems from the fact that you refuse to examine your beliefs, therefore you refuse to admit your beliefs are delusional, therefore you never learn, Nav.



In your delusional belief system, there is no present-time hypersurface of simultaneity, and all time frames remain independent and unconnected.

Just admit you're wrong, Nav. I'll stop bashing you about the head and shoulders with facts, and you can limp away with the small shred of dignity and credibility you've got left.

Alright, now that the peanut gallery has quieted down a bit, let's discuss a real-world applicable technique for traveling at high fractions of c.

No, it's not practical with our current technology.

No, it's not easy to do.

Yes, it requires a metric buttload of energy.

We all know the Higgs field is a scalar tachyonic field, and therefore the Higgs boson is a tachyonic spin-0 particle.

I've written about the Higgs prior:

Quote from Cycle on May 12th, 2017, 10:58 PM

In the earliest moments of the universe, the weak force (at the time combined with the EM force into the electroweak force) was a long-range force. Then, as the universe expanded and energy density fell, the electroweak force symmetry-broke into the weak fundamental force and the electromagnetic fundamental force, giving rise to the Higgs field and thus fermionic mass. Before electroweak symmetry breaking, there were 4 species of Higgs bosons in existence (the only things which had mass), but when electroweak symmetry breaking took place, three of them underwent quantum mixing (via the Higgs mechanism) with the isospin force and hypercharge force which existed at the time, making the W^-, W⁺ and Z⁰ bosons massive, and leaving only the H⁰ Higgs boson today (the H⁰ Higgs boson couldn't interact with the EM fundamental force, which means we were left with one Higgs boson and massless photons). The Higgs boson is virtual today because the universe's energy density is too low for it to be concretized. It pops into existence for a brief moment, but its energy density is so high that it immediately decays via destructive interference, smearing its energy back into the QVZPE field, leaving behind a molasses-like Higgs field instead which we sense as the other particles having mass.

While normal fundamental particles require energy to be added to them in order for their momentum to increase, tachyonic particles slow down as energy is added to them (this is why the Higgs field acts as it does).

While normal fundamental particles have a speed limit of c, a tachyonic particle has a speed minimum of c. The Higgs field, being a scalar field, doesn't really propagate anywhere, since it's ubiquitous throughout the universe, but any perturbations within the field must travel at a minimum speed of c... we know it travels at exactly c. We've never experienced it traveling faster.

This is part of the reason why when a Higgs boson is forced to undergo tachyonic condensation (which occurs at energy levels at or above 125.09 GeV/c²), it immediately smears out its energy back into the Higgs field.

Now, if your hypersurface of simultaneity is in a space-like frame of sufficient magnitude (ie: you're moving through space fast enough), a tachyon in that same frame can actually appear to be traveling backward through time.

We can exploit these phenomena to achieve high fraction of c space travel. If we could generate enough power such that we could continually power a collider of sufficient energy so that we could generate a continual flux of Higgs bosons, and immediately chuck those Higgs bosons into a well-shielded Casimir cavity (which has an artificially lower quantum vacuum expectation value), we'd see the Higgs lasting longer because it takes longer to decohere (ie: the lower vacuum expectation value within the well-shielded Casimir cavity has a lower quantum entanglement cross-section, and thus slower decoherence of the Higgs particle and thus it takes longer for the Higgs particle to smear its energy back into the Higgs field).

At the same time, it would attempt to travel backward through time (for a sufficient velocity of the spacecraft to begin with... for slower velocities, it'd remain on the present-time hypersurface of simultaneity (ie: it'd remain in the present time), and for even slower velocities it'd travel into future hypersurfaces of simultaneity just as normal matter does) because it would remain outside the future light cone (you'll note the light cone is sloped at a 45 degree angle because light travels through space at 1 c (light-like curve)... anything slower is inside the light cone (time-like curve), anything faster is outside the light cone (space-like curve)).

You'll remember in a prior post I wrote:

Quote from Cycle on February 27th, 2017, 09:11 PM

In a paper by Oziewicz (referenced in the second link above), he states: "Minkowski, and then Ivezi'c, observed correctly that if a Lorentz transformation is an isomorphism of a vector space, then the entire algebra of tensor fields must be Lorentz-covariant. An active Lorentz transformation must act on all tensor fields, including an observer's time-like vector field."

So we must make the Higgs particles not only persist in an artificially lower quantum vacuum expectation value environment, we must make them undergo a Lorentz transformation. We could do this most easily via a vectoral Lorentz transformation... merely making the Higgs particles (ejected from the collider in a straight line) go in another direction within the well-shielded Casimir cavity... and by the time that's all complete, the Higgs would have smeared out back into the Higgs field.

Of course, getting the Higgs particle to go in another direction is going to be the hard part. It couples fairly well with the muon, and since the Higgs particle can decay into muons, we've got a ready-made supply and means of deflecting the Higgs. Now all we have to do is control the muons. Fortunately, the muon being a heavier species of electron makes that fairly straightforward via a magnetic bottle.

This Lorentz transformation means the Higgs tachyonic particles attempting to travel backward through time will also slow time for anything else in the same frame as those tachyonic particles... in this case, the entire spacecraft.

Thus, while you'll never exceed c with a regular matter spacecraft (and you'll never be able to build a spacecraft from tachyonic matter... and even if you could, it'd never travel slower than c, and would smear itself out into energy in very short order), you can slow time in the frame of the spacecraft.

Thus, from the frame of an external observer, the craft travels, say 100 km/s, whereas from the frame of the spacecraft itself, it'd travel the same 100 km in some fraction of that second.

In effect, by slowing down the evolution of time for the spacecraft, you're effectively increasing the speed of that craft in the frame of the craft's crew.

Interesting concept Cycle.  What I'm not able to comprehend is whether slowing down the evolution of time also modifies entropy.  If it does, we're in business.  If it does not, the ship and crew would disintegrate before ever reaching a destination.  If you'd care to take a moment and explain entropy in the context of your theory, I'd be interested in hearing it.

And BTW, your description of the Higgs Field sounds very similar to W.B. Smith's concept of the Tempic Field, also scalar.

Quote from Matt Watts on July 22nd, 2018, 10:08 PM

Interesting concept Cycle.  What I'm not able to comprehend is whether slowing down the evolution of time also modifies entropy.  If it does, we're in business.  If it does not, the ship and crew would disintegrate before ever reaching a destination.  If you'd care to take a moment and explain entropy in the context of your theory, I'd be interested in hearing it.

And BTW, your description of the Higgs Field sounds very similar to W.B. Smith's concept of the Tempic Field, also scalar.

The universe is inherently deterministic, as Bohm, Bell, Carver, Cramer, Einstein, Mead, Schrodinger and many others postulated, and as the exact results of quantum computing research corroborates. Thus there isn't an inferred direct relationship between time and entropy in any frame... the evolution of entropy is dependent nearly wholly upon the system's quantum entanglement cross-section with its surroundings. There is a correlation (hence the arrow of time), but that doesn't imply causation either from the perspective of time evolution causing entropy change, or entropy change causing time evolution.

Remember, 2LoT only holds locally and for systems close to equilibrium... universally and for systems far from equilibrium, we find spontaneous self-organization (reference Per Bak and Ilya Prigogine in my prior post), which implies a spontaneous decrease of entropy. If the universe slavishly followed 2LoT under all circumstances, it would have reached maximum entropy long ago.

Thus, if we haven't disintegrated in our unaltered present-time surface of simultaneity, there's little reason to believe a spacecraft with a slowed rate of time evolution would, either.

Quote from Cycle on July 22nd, 2018, 08:43 PM

Thus, while you'll never exceed c with a regular matter spacecraft (and you'll never be able to build a spacecraft from tachyonic matter... and even if you could, it'd never travel slower than c, and would smear itself out into energy in very short order), you can slow time in the frame of the spacecraft.

Thus, from the frame of an external observer, the craft travels, say 100 km/s, whereas from the frame of the spacecraft itself, it'd travel the same 100 km in some fraction of that second.

In effect, by slowing down the evolution of time for the spacecraft, you're effectively increasing the speed of that craft in the frame of the craft's crew.

Would this also be the case for a ship travelling in, say 250000 km/s, as seen from an external observer, that from within the ship itself, would it appear to be covering that same distance, 250000 km, in a mere fraction of a second?

Lynx, have you ever heard the Bob Lazar story. He claims he worked at Groom lake and S4 on reverse engineering Alien craft captured in the cold war era. Some claim he has passed several lie detector tests but i'm not sure if it's true or not. No one seems to be able to find his employment records for working at MIT and several other places apart one from fellow who found his name on a mailing list at MIT.
Lazar claims that the craft were using an element called 115 but that element here on Earth has no stable isotopes, Lazar claims that the Aliens had a stable version of it. Anyway, he claims the craft work by some kind of energy exchange system which converts nuclear energy into a massive electrical field and that field is coupled to what he calls gravity intensifiers, you then point these intensifiers at a certain area and it warps space time in some way allowing the craft to travel. Interesting concept but one of those 'sit on the fence' affairs due to the fact his education records seem to be dodgy.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Bob_Lazar

Quote

Your confusion stems from the fact that you refuse to examine your beliefs, therefore you refuse to admit your beliefs are delusional, therefore you never learn, Nav.



In your delusional belief system, there is no present-time hypersurface of simultaneity, and all time frames remain independent and unconnected.

Just admit you're wrong, Nav. I'll stop bashing you about the head and shoulders with facts, and you can limp away with the small shred of dignity and credibility you've got left.

It's your show, get on with it 101. Show the forum the extent of your super human intelligence. Maybe you can pick up some pats on the back along the way and some brownie points.

Quote from nav on July 23rd, 2018, 08:36 AM

Lynx, have you ever heard the Bob Lazar story. He claims he worked at Groom lake and S4 on reverse engineering Alien craft captured in the cold war era. Some claim he has passed several lie detector tests but i'm not sure if it's true or not. No one seems to be able to find his employment records for working at MIT and several other places apart one from fellow who found his name on a mailing list at MIT.
Lazar claims that the craft were using an element called 115 but that element here on Earth has no stable isotopes, Lazar claims that the Aliens had a stable version of it. Anyway, he claims the craft work by some kind of energy exchange system which converts nuclear energy into a massive electrical field and that field is coupled to what he calls gravity intensifiers, you then point these intensifiers at a certain area and it warps space time in some way allowing the craft to travel. Interesting concept but one of those 'sit on the fence' affairs due to the fact his education records seem to be dodgy.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Bob_Lazar

Oh yes, I've checked him out, but I've never quite understood the inner workings of the ship with element 115 and what it's supposed to do.
So it warps space time then using gravity.
I'll buy that, no problem.
Its probably something like that which would enable us to go places anyway a few thousand lightyears away and return to Earth without having aged silly in the process or to find out that life on Earth has undergone a few evolutionary cycles while we were away, leaving penguins running the whole shebang.
Thanks for the reminder :thumbsup:

For reference purposes.
http://www.gravitywarpdrive.com/Government_Scientist.htm

If only a new Einstein could appear who looked at all these theories, both those theories from within and those from outside the science & math box, compiled them all to one common framework which explained it all in a novel brilliant way which enabled us to just go ahead and build ourselves spaceships taking us to the stars and back in no time at all.

If only.

Quote from kenssurplus on July 20th, 2018, 02:54 PM

If we build a ball and step inside, obviously with a supply of air and necessities, the rate of time flow outside vs inside is equal unless something is done to change that.  If we use some of the processes explored here :

12 Experiments on Change of the Direction and the Rate of Time:   Dr. Vadim A. Chernobrov

I found a total of 23 issues of this magazine, very interesting reading.
Gonna take some time to go through them all, although the math seems to be quite challenging to try to get a grip on, granted.
Anyway, thanks for sharing :thumbsup:

The relativistic velocity addition formula shows that as you approach c, you must successively try to add more and more speed (or slow down time more and more) for the same gain in apparent speed in the frame of the movement. So you'd still not reach or exceed c. The above allows one to slow time down for the spacecraft crew, which makes it appear in their frame to take less time, but even in their frame they wouldn't exceed c.

w= (u + v) / (1+uv/c²)
The equation never exceeds c. It's the inverse of this:

Quote from nav on July 23rd, 2018, 08:36 AM

Lazar claims that the craft were using an element called 115 but that element here on Earth has no stable isotopes

Moscovium decays exclusively via alpha decay, with a half-life of ~0.8 seconds, and the daughter nucleons have an average energy of 5 MeV. So it's not stable in the slightest.

But it could be made to be stable... an alpha particle is essentially a helium nucleus. Put the moscovium into an extremely high-pressure helium atmosphere. But it'd have to be extremely high pressure.

1 eV/angstrom³ = 160.21766208 GPa
5 MeV/angstrom³ = 801,088,310.4 GPa = 116,188,036,262,364 psi

That's one hundred sixteen trillion, one hundred eighty-eight billion, thirty-six million, two hundred sixty-two thousand, three hundred sixty-four psi. The pressure at the center of our sun is estimated to be 3.84 trillion psi.

So in order to absolutely prevent moscovium from undergoing alpha decay under any circumstances (because the pressure of the helium itself is standing in for nuclear binding energy to prevent the expulsion of the alpha particle (helium nucleus)), you'd have to use an impossibly high pressure.

Pressure speeds up the fusion process, and slows down the fission process.

And that still doesn't provide any substantiation of Lazar's claims, none of which I believe.

Quote from nav on July 23rd, 2018, 08:36 AM

It's your show, get on with it 101. Show the forum the extent of your super human intelligence. Maybe you can pick up some pats on the back along the way and some brownie points.

Still psychologically projecting your thoughts about me while attempting to ascribe them to me as means of assuaging your ever-growing butthurt, Nav? Your tactics are so easily sussed because you're so predictable, Nav.

Quote from Cycle on July 22nd, 2018, 08:43 PM

Thus, while you'll never exceed c with a regular matter spacecraft (and you'll never be able to build a spacecraft from tachyonic matter... and even if you could, it'd never travel slower than c, and would smear itself out into energy in very short order), you can slow time in the frame of the spacecraft.

Thus, from the frame of an external observer, the craft travels, say 100 km/s, whereas from the frame of the spacecraft itself, it'd travel the same 100 km in some fraction of that second.

In effect, by slowing down the evolution of time for the spacecraft, you're effectively increasing the speed of that craft in the frame of the craft's crew.

Bump.

Would this also be the case for a ship travelling in, say 250000 km/s, as seen from an external observer, that from within the ship itself, would it appear to be covering that same distance, 250000 km, in a mere fraction of a second?

Quote from Lynx on July 23rd, 2018, 09:21 PM

Bump.

Would this also be the case for a ship travelling in, say 250000 km/s, as seen from an external observer, that from within the ship itself, would it appear to be covering that same distance, 250000 km, in a mere fraction of a second?

The speed of light cannot be breached in any frame. I refer you back to the relativistic velocity addition formula. So while from the frame of the ship's crew, they would appear to be traveling at some high fraction of c (because their time evolution is slowed down), from the frame of an external observer, they'd be traveling some fraction of that speed.

Quote from Cycle on July 23rd, 2018, 09:42 PM

The speed of light cannot be breached in any frame. I refer you back to the relativistic velocity addition formula. So while from the frame of the ship's crew, they would appear to be traveling at some high fraction of c (because their time evolution is slowed down), from the frame of an external observer, they'd be traveling some fraction of that speed.

Ok, thanks.

So changing spacetime continuum seems to be the best theoretical way to enable us to reach the stars while not breaking any laws of physics then.
This will now serve as the working hypothesis hereafter in this thread, unless someone comes up with some even more wild idea for space travelling the uninvented way.

Quote from Cycle on July 23rd, 2018, 09:08 PM

Moscovium decays exclusively via alpha decay, with a half-life of ~0.8 seconds, and the daughter nucleons have an average energy of 5 MeV. So it's not stable in the slightest.

But it could be made to be stable... an alpha particle is essentially a helium nucleus. Put the moscovium into an extremely high-pressure helium atmosphere. But it'd have to be extremely high pressure.

1 eV/angstrom³ = 160.21766208 GPa
5 MeV/angstrom³ = 801,088,310.4 GPa = 116,188,036,262,364 psi

That's one hundred sixteen trillion, one hundred eighty-eight billion, thirty-six million, two hundred sixty-two thousand, three hundred sixty-four psi. The pressure at the center of our sun is estimated to be 3.84 trillion psi.

So in order to absolutely prevent moscovium from undergoing alpha decay under any circumstances (because the pressure of the helium itself is standing in for nuclear binding energy to prevent the expulsion of the alpha particle (helium nucleus)), you'd have to use an impossibly high pressure.

Pressure speeds up the fusion process, and slows down the fission process.

And that still doesn't provide any substantiation of Lazar's claims, none of which I believe.

Still psychologically projecting your thoughts about me while attempting to ascribe them to me as means of assuaging your ever-growing butthurt, Nav? Your tactics are so easily sussed because you're so predictable, Nav.

I read into Moscovium myself and formed the same conclusions (not the math) but availability. So either Lazar is lying or aliens have found a natural stable source somewhere in the Universe that has been created by an event or something. I'm sat on the fence with this one right from when I first read about it many years ago but many writers and broadcasters believe his story but for me personally to believe him i'd need more than just small talk. Actual evidence is a good start, pictures and documentation always help too for credibility.
It's like a lot of UFO stories out there, most of it is unsubstantiated although the Sirius disclosure interviews on Youtube are very interesting. Dr Steven Greer has interviewed literally dozens and dozens of ex-military personal who claim to have witnessed either alien beings or had access to captured UFO's. Are they all liars or is there something in it? Hard to know but i've actually checked out the credentials of a lot of the personal involved and some of them are high ranking such as major's colonel's and even general's and admirals. The most interesting interviews I found were the one's involving an alien by the name of the J-Rod which several high ranking military personnel claim to have met and held conversations with.
This is quite curious too, many arguments for it to be alien origin but also many arguments that it is a deformed human being. It's another one to sit on the fence and ponder.
http://siriusdisclosure.com/evidence/atacama-humanoid/
Sirius website:
http://www.disclosureproject.org/
Lynx, I don't know about you personally but i've had two experiences in my life that remain unexplained concerning high velocity objects. Over the years I've been interested in astronomy and had several nice scopes and astronomic binoculars, these days my eyes are not as good as they used to be so I just use binocs and periodically have a flick around the night sky. I'm in the northern hemisphere so my observations are pretty much the same as most people's on here.
One night I was out on a particularly bright autumn night with my Celestron 15x70's. These are pretty heavy so I lie on my back and rest the rubber cups in my eye sockets which gives me the most stable image without using the tripod. Anyway, I was flicking around a few galaxies which you can see with the 70's not too bad and a fast moving object of silver blue light past my lenses from south to north. Now, the 70's have a pretty wide field of view for astronomical use so I was quick enough to follow it. Thinking it was a meteor and getting ready for the burn up, I tracked it north but it stopped dead. By this time it was about 60 degrees from the northern horizon. I moved the 70's from my eyes to see if I could see it with the naked eye but could not which gives you a rough idea of the altitude (I can see aircraft lights at 40,000 feet with the 70's).
I tracked this object for a few minutes then something quite incredible happened, while it was stationary a red object of about the same magnitude came in the 70's field of view from the east but traveling slow, it appoached the silver blue object and stopped beside it, now I had two in view. Seconds later a third object came into view from the south, another silver blue object. By this time I was really exited and was thinking 'helicopters, gotta be'. What happened next changed my whole belief system on how fast objects can move, the first object I tracked took off at a speed due south that was so fast I couldn't keep the 70's in track and I just seen it vaguely across about 100 degrees into the southern horizon and went out of sight. It took me about a minute to find the other two because i'd messed up my position and got disorientated. They were still there and remained there for a few minutes and then the red one took off east at at breathtaking speed and stopped dead about 20 degrees above the eastern horizon. I'm on top of an hill so my views are pretty good from up here and the light pollution is minimal. The third silver blue object was still stationary but just as I panned back it took off due east and just as it approached the red object the red object took off again and disappeared behind the eastern horizon taking the third silver blue object with it.
I cannot estimate the altitude accurately, I can only use the FOV of the 70's to roughly estimate but I can give an idea of the velocity. I concluded that it took about 2-3 seconds to cover my 180 degrees view of the near field of 60 miles at the velocity they were going, but there was no vanishing point which made me think at the time that they were in at least low Earth orbit. If they were at 40,000 feet then their speed would be 72,000 miles per hour, if in low Earth orbit then significantly faster. Something confused me that night, how can something set off so fast and stop so fast without destroying the occupants inside (if there were occupants)? I wasn't the only person to see them, another man who lives 4 miles from me also saw them and he claims to have seen them before. I've never seen them since.
The other incident that happened to me actually physically affected me. Before I tell you about this I want to stipulate that I don't smoke weed, take drugs or alcohol apart from the odd beer at a wedding or birthday.
I was out with the 70's one night looking due west towards a local factory, due west is not usually good for me because there is light pollution from the factory and a road that passes it. Anyway It was winter and the conditions were pretty good and I think I was actually looking at Orion at the time when in the lower right portion of my view I saw a glimmer of light and so I dropped the 70'sand centered it. I remember thinking at the time there is nothing of this magnitude in the western horizon that should be as bright and i dropped the 70's and it was visible to the eye. I then realized it was getting brighter and thought 'low plane or chopper, gotta be'. By this time it's floodlight bright and wavering about as if someones got a spot lamp on a pick up truck but the damn thing is at least 50 feet off the floor. At this point, my honest feeling was a plane was about to hit my house and I was preparing for impact, I was actually shaking at the time. I was about to dive to the floor when this thing struck the top of my scalp, knocking me to the ground and then turned 90 degrees right to avoid my house then took another 90 degree left turn over my back yard and sped away. It was about the size of a football, actually spherical in appearance and bright blue silver color. As it took a left turn over my yard I got up and ran around to the yard and yelled 'you f*cking ba*tard' at it. This thing wasn't moving at silly speeds but it had intelligence. I reported the incident and researched for months what it could have been. I found one incident in Japan that matched my experience but this one crashed and was kept by the Japanese government. No way it was ball lightening, this thing was guided somehow and made a B line for me.
Ever since those two experiences in my life I've always been opened minded about how fast things can move and what is out there.

 

Quote from nav on July 24th, 2018, 10:00 AM

Lynx, I don't know about you personally but i've had two experiences in my life that remain unexplained concerning high velocity objects. Over the years I've been interested in astronomy and had several nice scopes and astronomic binoculars, these days my eyes are not as good as they used to be so I just use binocs and periodically have a flick around the night sky. I'm in the northern hemisphere so my observations are pretty much the same as most people's on here.
One night I was out on a particularly bright autumn night with my Celestron 15x70's. These are pretty heavy so I lie on my back and rest the rubber cups in my eye sockets which gives me the most stable image without using the tripod. Anyway, I was flicking around a few galaxies which you can see with the 70's not too bad and a fast moving object of silver blue light past my lenses from south to north. Now, the 70's have a pretty wide field of view for astronomical use so I was quick enough to follow it. Thinking it was a meteor and getting ready for the burn up, I tracked it north but it stopped dead. By this time it was about 60 degrees from the northern horizon. I moved the 70's from my eyes to see if I could see it with the naked eye but could not which gives you a rough idea of the altitude (I can see aircraft lights at 40,000 feet with the 70's).
I tracked this object for a few minutes then something quite incredible happened, while it was stationary a red object of about the same magnitude came in the 70's field of view from the east but traveling slow, it appoached the silver blue object and stopped beside it, now I had two in view. Seconds later a third object came into view from the south, another silver blue object. By this time I was really exited and was thinking 'helicopters, gotta be'. What happened next changed my whole belief system on how fast objects can move, the first object I tracked took off at a speed due south that was so fast I couldn't keep the 70's in track and I just seen it vaguely across about 100 degrees into the southern horizon and went out of sight. It took me about a minute to find the other two because i'd messed up my position and got disorientated. They were still there and remained there for a few minutes and then the red one took off east at at breathtaking speed and stopped dead about 20 degrees above the eastern horizon. I'm on top of an hill so my views are pretty good from up here and the light pollution is minimal. The third silver blue object was still stationary but just as I panned back it took off due east and just as it approached the red object the red object took off again and disappeared behind the eastern horizon taking the third silver blue object with it.
I cannot estimate the altitude accurately, I can only use the FOV of the 70's to roughly estimate but I can give an idea of the velocity. I concluded that it took about 2-3 seconds to cover my 180 degrees view of the near field of 60 miles at the velocity they were going, but there was no vanishing point which made me think at the time that they were in at least low Earth orbit. If they were at 40,000 feet then their speed would be 72,000 miles per hour, if in low Earth orbit then significantly faster. Something confused me that night, how can something set off so fast and stop so fast without destroying the occupants inside (if there were occupants)? I wasn't the only person to see them, another man who lives 4 miles from me also saw them and he claims to have seen them before. I've never seen them since.
The other incident that happened to me actually physically affected me. Before I tell you about this I want to stipulate that I don't smoke weed, take drugs or alcohol apart from the odd beer at a wedding or birthday.
I was out with the 70's one night looking due west towards a local factory, due west is not usually good for me because there is light pollution from the factory and a road that passes it. Anyway It was winter and the conditions were pretty good and I think I was actually looking at Orion at the time when in the lower right portion of my view I saw a glimmer of light and so I dropped the 70'sand centered it. I remember thinking at the time there is nothing of this magnitude in the western horizon that should be as bright and i dropped the 70's and it was visible to the eye. I then realized it was getting brighter and thought 'low plane or chopper, gotta be'. By this time it's floodlight bright and wavering about as if someones got a spot lamp on a pick up truck but the damn thing is at least 50 feet off the floor. At this point, my honest feeling was a plane was about to hit my house and I was preparing for impact, I was actually shaking at the time. I was about to dive to the floor when this thing struck the top of my scalp, knocking me to the ground and then turned 90 degrees right to avoid my house then took another 90 degree left turn over my back yard and sped away. It was about the size of a football, actually spherical in appearance and bright blue silver color. As it took a left turn over my yard I got up and ran around to the yard and yelled 'you f*cking ba*tard' at it. This thing wasn't moving at silly speeds but it had intelligence. I reported the incident and researched for months what it could have been. I found one incident in Japan that matched my experience but this one crashed and was kept by the Japanese government. No way it was ball lightening, this thing was guided somehow and made a B line for me.
Ever since those two experiences in my life I've always been opened minded about how fast things can move and what is out there.

I wholeheartedly believe you Nav, I can only wish for being so lucky some day as to personally experience something like this myself.
If I ever got myself a telescope of my own I would probably try to equip it with some video streaming equipment of sort, be it directly to a laptop or whatever, just to be absolutely sure not to miss out on some such experience.

Changing spacetime continuum takes a few things then.
In no particular order I'd like to list a few (just throwing out ideas here):

* Rare Earth magnets
* High current coils
* High voltage electric fields
* Rotating electromagnets
* Plasma generators
* Infra red and ultra violet lasers
* Element 115

This for being able to build
* Gravity generators
* Searl effect / Hutchinson / etc / generators, detectors, resonance action looping and amplifying
* Electromagnetic shields

Fill in the blanks gentlemen, feel free to both add and remove items and ideas from the lists.
This for being able to compile such a theoretical modus operandi, using VIVID IMAGINATION to "explain" how spacetime can be altered/warped/compressed/etc, all for the sake of "bringing" us closer to the stars by changing the "empty" space from here to there, enabling us to travel in our spaceship at, say 100 mph, through aformentioned altered spacetime and thus reach said stars in virtually no time at all, all perfectly explainable to modern physics and in no way breaking any law of physics in the process either.

Quote from Lynx on July 24th, 2018, 10:17 AM

I wholeheartedly believe you Nav, I can only wish for being so lucky some day as to personally experience something like this myself.
If I ever got myself a telescope of my own I would probably try to equip it with some video streaming equipment of sort, be it directly to a laptop or whatever, just to be absolutely sure not to miss out on some such experience.

Attaching video equipment and camera to a telescope is not quite as easy as you think Lynx, not the physical attachment but getting image quality. When I had my Meade scope, I had a Nikon D80 attached via a kit you can buy but you just can't take one picture. You have to take multiple pictures and stack them on top of each other with software. When I mean multiple I mean 100's. Then of course the scope has to be set up absolutely perfectly with the North star so that when the scope is on autotrack the images will line up perfectly for stacking. That is easier said than done believe me. You only have do be a hair width out with the scopes position for the stacking to be trashed. Takes a lot of time and effort to do and is difficult. Of course newer camera's have much better CCD's these days so instead of 10 mega pixel like the D80 you can now get 30 mega pixel with better light gathering capability. Video is easier but you still need good equipment and I had success with Sony camera's that cost about 200 dollars fitted to the scope. Again scope position is critical such as level and the scopes tracking set up with Polaris (north star). My Meade scope had digital input and digital tracking and when I bought it I set up a concrete floor for it to sit on in the yard, all you had to do is tell the Meade where Polaris was and it could find any system in my FOV automatically just by selecting a system from the keypad. Meade was about 2000 dollars US at the time but a great compact scope with great image detail in Galaxies and nebulae.

Quote from Lynx on July 24th, 2018, 10:48 AM

Changing spacetime continuum takes a few things then.
In no particular order I'd like to list a few (just throwing out ideas here):

* Rare Earth magnets
* High current coils
* High voltage electric fields
* Rotating electromagnets
* Plasma generators
* Infra red and ultra violet lasers
* Element 115

This for being able to build
* Gravity generators
* Searl effect / Hutchinson / etc / generators, detectors, resonance action looping and amplifying
* Electromagnetic shields

Fill in the blanks gentlemen, feel free to both add and remove items and ideas from the lists.
This for being able to compile such a theoretical modus operandi, using VIVID IMAGINATION to "explain" how spacetime can be altered/warped/compressed/etc, all for the sake of "bringing" us closer to the stars by changing the "empty" space from here to there, enabling us to travel in our spaceship at, say 100 mph, through aformentioned altered spacetime and thus reach said stars in virtually no time at all, all perfectly explainable to modern physics and in no way breaking any law of physics in the process either.

One thing to ponder Lynx is the discovery of new dimensions and fields. We know about the four dimensions used by ourselves in our every day life, X,Y,Z and T. Our simple understanding is that to move through three dimensional space it takes time. What if there is a dimension where distances are diminished in such a way that you can pass through wormholes or fold space back onto itself? The question is, are we smart enough to do it?