Lynx, I found this "story" Axil's thread about chirality post 131 about the creation of black holes and white holes in the lab quite interesting.  Especially that last couple of minutes where time is discussed. 

Here is a different twist:

If artificial black holes are being created in the lab now, what is there to say that a temporary one could not be created in front of the spaceship, thus sucking it towards the event horizon of the temporary black hole?  But before you get sucked in and destroyed, another black hole is created in front of that one, with the first one "shut off".  as the spaceship is sucked from one to the next in a string of black holes, it should gain quite the velocity. Isn't this just another way of saying a warp drive - of Star Trek fame?

Granted, there is a long long long long way to go to get to that level of tech., but what the mind can conceive and believe, it can achieve.

Cool idea Ken.   :thumbsup:

Similar to what the Russians do with their torpedo technology--they create a cavitation bubble in front of the device which sucks the torpedo forward, so it never has to traverse through water and can go many times faster.

Quote from Matt Watts on July 26th, 2018, 01:31 AM

That's two now Cycle.  You've run off onepower and now Nav.  Proud of yourself?

You forgot Rass, whom Nav agreed with regarding expanding earth, hopping dinosaurs, that the sun is a giant ball of uranium, etc. before Nav went off into his "collapsing the wave function into the particle function" silliness.

Quote from Matt Watts on July 26th, 2018, 01:31 AM

I have an idea, you have two working hands?  I suspect you do the way you type so much.

Sit down and design a circuit, built it, test it and share with us your results.  That's what this forum is for.  I'll even set you up a workbench Cycle--your very own place to show us all what you're really able to accomplish.  To be blunt, quit screwing around and get serious.  Time is wasting.

Below is a little example in case you're not sure where to start.  If you're curious, you won't find that circuit anywhere on the Internet.  It took in excess of 60 hours or so to figure out and now it's on this forum for others to save loads of time going through what I went through.  That's OpenSource and it works for real.  It's not a simulation.

Already done... or haven't you been reading my posts? In fact, I've proposed 4 devices which do not violate any tenets of quantum mechanics and thus should work.

As for onepower and nav, they left of their own accord (onepower got banned, I believe, but his behavior that got him banned is his own choice), after getting all butthurt, calling me names and disrupting the forums... all because they insisted on not "getting serious", choosing instead to promulgate fairy tales that would lead us all down dead ends.

Quote from Cycle on July 26th, 2018, 10:41 AM

Already done... or haven't you been reading my posts? In fact, I've proposed 4 devices which do not violate any tenets of quantum mechanics and thus should work.

I've seen the talk.  Now walk the walk.  Acquire the test equipment, materials and fabricate a real physical device.  Demonstrate what it does and does not do according to the concepts "believed" to work.  In other words, show me.  I'm rather interested in seeing the quantum world jive with this reality you talk about so much--that same reality I live in where you get shocked, burned, pinched, scraped and at the end of the day, the device sits there flatline.

Quote from Matt Watts on July 26th, 2018, 11:04 AM

I've seen the talk.  Now walk the walk.  Acquire the test equipment, materials and fabricate a real physical device.  Demonstrate what it does and does not do according to the concepts "believed" to work.  In other words, show me.  I'm rather interested in seeing the quantum world jive with this reality you talk about so much--that same reality I live in where you get shocked, burned, pinched, scraped and at the end of the day, the device sits there flatline.

Or... or... and this is just an idea I'm throwing out there... you could build one of my proposed devices yourself. That prevents you later claiming that I'm 'fudging the numbers' or 'hiding wires', etc. I don't have the time nor the inclination to re-fight the same fight every other FE device builder fights by publicizing his built devices.

I provide the idea. It's up to others to build it. If I just gave everyone the exact method to build it, every moron out there would be building them. And we all know what happens when you mix morons and technology.

Ah, that dog just doesn't want to hunt.  Back to the pen.

Quote from kenssurplus on July 26th, 2018, 06:12 AM

Lynx, I found this "story" Axil's thread about chirality post 131 about the creation of black holes and white holes in the lab quite interesting.  Especially that last couple of minutes where time is discussed. 

Here is a different twist:

If artificial black holes are being created in the lab now, what is there to say that a temporary one could not be created in front of the spaceship, thus sucking it towards the event horizon of the temporary black hole?  But before you get sucked in and destroyed, another black hole is created in front of that one, with the first one "shut off".  as the spaceship is sucked from one to the next in a string of black holes, it should gain quite the velocity. Isn't this just another way of saying a warp drive - of Star Trek fame?

Granted, there is a long long long long way to go to get to that level of tech., but what the mind can conceive and believe, it can achieve.

The black hole would have to be more massive than the spacecraft, and the timing would have to be exact (God forbid your timing circuitry glitches, sucking the nose of your craft beyond the event horizon and spaghetifying it)... but yeah, that's doable. Not now, of course, we don't have the technology right now... but it's doable.

It might be better to use the black holes as gravitational boosters, just as we use planets today to pick up velocity. Create a black hole, swing around it to pick up velocity, then time it so that just as the black hole evaporates (and expels a great lot of energy), your spacecraft is just ahead of the black hole in your direction of travel, so that expelled energy gives your craft a push.

In effect, and as an analogy, you're on a trampoline. You pull down on a section of the trampoline and circle around that depression to pick up speed... then you release the trampoline and the depression snaps back up. You go rocketing off in your preferred direction (provided you do it right, of course) without having to climb back out of that gravity well because the black hole has evaporated and thus so has the gravity well.

"But wait!", you say, "I did this with a penny on a trampoline, and the penny went flying vertically, not in my preferred direction!"

Sure. But space-time has a single present-time hypersurface of simultaneity. The only way the spacecraft could fly off in a 'vertical' direction is if the snap-back of the black hole's gravity well somehow pitched the craft forward in time to a future hypersurface of simultaneity... and that's not going to work.

What'll actually happen is exactly what we've seen from LIGO... a massive gravitational wave will be generated which will radiate outward from the point of snap-back. If the spacecraft is positioned correctly, it can ride that wave for as long as it can keep up (the gravitational wave is traveling at c, whereas the craft will never travel at c, so eventually the wave will surpass the craft), accelerating the whole while.

Rinse and repeat to achieve higher velocities. Each repeat means the craft remains on the slope of the gravitational wave for a longer period (there is less difference between c and the craft's speed, so it takes longer for the wave to outrun the craft). Eventually with enough of that, you're at a high fraction of c.

Well, this isn't the first, but hopefully it will be the last.

But who knows.

Forum rules are something that which very seldom needs overhauling, as throughout the years miscreants are identified, scrutinized and new forum rules comes out as a result thereof.

Up until now, with what happened to Nav, I really thought that existing forum rules were doing it's job just fine in keeping the forum healthy without attacks of detrimental nature.
But what Cycle here has been doing has also led forum staff to yet again invoke additional rules to the already existing ones.
This time the new, additional, rules, will serve to protect those presenting new novel ideas which can be deemed to be found outside the box which, for the time being, not necessarily then have all the mathematical and/or scientifically backed evidence to show for with regards to it's validity versus that which today is considered to be "facts" or "real" or "accurate" or "true" or some such main stream mathematical/scientific epithet of sort.

As such, established science and/or math will not be accepted as means to derail/debunk/ridicule/etc/ these ideas, theories and builds, regardless of whoever it is who wants to present these ideas which could be said to be "outside the box" to it's nature.

This, amongst other things, will allow these ideas, etc, to flourish with healthy input only, nothing detrimental will be accepted.

Forum staff alone will decide what constitutes to be detrimental to it's nature.

Forum staff will also decide what is supposed to be considered mere trolling solely for the sake of ridiculing the very gist of this new segment of forum policy, flat earth springs to mind here.

As such, detrimental behaviour will automatically lead to a timeout for the miscreant at hand, so think very carefully about what you plan to say in any such given opportunity to adress such a novel, outside the box, idea or build or the likes as forum staff has, at the end of the day, decided to allow said ideas/builds to remain in the forum and as such they will be protected accordingly.

Quote from Cycle on July 25th, 2018, 05:54 PM

This is a science-based forum, not a science fiction or science fantasy forum.

Just who do you think you are trying to put words in forum staff mouths?
I can't recall having had you with us forum staff discussing forum rules and/or policy, so can it.

Quote from Cycle on July 25th, 2018, 05:54 PM

As I said before, the ideas you come up with are necessarily "based on science fiction or dimensions that may or may not exist" because you refuse to educate yourself as to how the universe actually works. So you waste everyone's time blathering on about science fantasy that you purport to be real. If anyone believed your tripe, they'd waste their lives pursuing a FE device that would never work.

Quote from Cycle on July 25th, 2018, 05:54 PM

Had you educated yourself about quantum mechanics the last time I schooled you on the topic, you likely wouldn't be so butthurt about having to be schooled on the topic a second time because your fairy-tale ideas cannot withstand scientific scrutiny, yet you promulgate them as though they were gospel truth.

You are quite some piece of work.
Had I been running the forum all by myself you'd be history by now and the forum would still have Nav around and I'd rather have one Nav here as opposed to having hundreds of your kind here all high and mighty belittling fellow forum members to your liking.
In fact, I'd very much like for you to leave the forum all on your own because trust me, with the new, soon to come, forum rules, I'm going to keep a very close eye out on you looking for grounds enough to boot you the hell out of here myself and quite frankly I'd rather be doing infinitely more important things with my spare time.

Quote from Lynx on July 26th, 2018, 12:49 PM

Well, this isn't the first, but hopefully it will be the last.

But who knows.

Forum rules are something that which very seldom needs overhauling, as throughout the years miscreants are identified, scrutinized and new forum rules comes out as a result thereof.

Up until now, with what happened to Nav, I really thought that existing forum rules were doing it's job just fine in keeping the forum healthy without attacks of detrimental nature.
But what Cycle here has been doing has also led forum staff to yet again invoke additional rules to the already existing ones.
This time the new, additional, rules, will serve to protect those presenting new novel ideas which can be deemed to be found outside the box which, for the time being, not necessarily then have all the mathematical and/or scientifically backed evidence to show for with regards to it's validity versus that which today is considered to be "facts" or "real" or "accurate" or "true" or some such main stream mathematical/scientific epithet of sort.

As such, established science and/or math will not be accepted as means to derail/debunk/ridicule/etc/ these ideas, theories and builds, regardless of whoever it is who wants to present these ideas which could be said to be "outside the box" to it's nature.

This, amongst other things, will allow these ideas, etc, to flourish with healthy input only, nothing detrimental will be accepted.

Forum staff alone will decide what constitutes to be detrimental to it's nature.

Forum staff will also decide what is supposed to be considered mere trolling solely for the sake of ridiculing the very gist of this new segment of forum policy, flat earth springs to mind here.

As such, detrimental behaviour will automatically lead to a timeout for the miscreant at hand, so think very carefully about what you plan to say in any such given opportunity to adress such a novel, outside the box, idea or build or the likes as forum staff has, at the end of the day, decided to allow said ideas/builds to remain in the forum and as such they will be protected accordingly.

Just who do you think you are trying to put words in forum staff mouths?
I can't recall having had you with us forum staff discussing forum rules and/or policy, so can it.

You are quite some piece of work.
Had I been running the forum all by myself you'd be history by now and the forum would still have Nav around and I'd rather have one Nav here as opposed to having hundreds of your kind here all high and mighty belittling fellow forum members to your liking.
In fact, I'd very much like for you to leave the forum all on your own because trust me, with the new, soon to come, forum rules, I'm going to keep a very close eye out on you looking for grounds enough to boot you the hell out of here myself and quite frankly I'd rather be doing infinitely more important things with my spare time.

Ok, then I'm done. You've just opened the door to every crackpot and loon with every crazy idea that has no connection whatsoever to reality (and never will).

I'm just going to saddle up my hopping dinosaur, whistle to my pixie-dust farting unicorn, and fly off to live on Venus with J-Rod the six-fingered, two-hearted, one-lunged alien.

And there's now no way that any of you can tell me that any of that is complete bunkum.

This is the way science-based forums die.

Quote from Cycle on July 26th, 2018, 01:03 PM

Ok, then I'm done. You've just opened the door to every crackpot and loon with every crazy idea that has no connection whatsoever to reality (and never will).

I'm just going to saddle up my hopping dinosaur, whistle to my pixie-dust farting unicorn, and fly off to live on Venus with J-Rod the six-fingered, two-hearted, one-lunged alien.

And there's now no way that any of you can tell me that any of that is complete bunkum.

This is the way science-based forums die.

Let the door hit you on your way out.

Quote from kenssurplus on July 26th, 2018, 06:12 AM

Lynx, I found this "story" Axil's thread about chirality post 131 about the creation of black holes and white holes in the lab quite interesting.  Especially that last couple of minutes where time is discussed. 

Here is a different twist:

If artificial black holes are being created in the lab now, what is there to say that a temporary one could not be created in front of the spaceship, thus sucking it towards the event horizon of the temporary black hole?  But before you get sucked in and destroyed, another black hole is created in front of that one, with the first one "shut off".  as the spaceship is sucked from one to the next in a string of black holes, it should gain quite the velocity. Isn't this just another way of saying a warp drive - of Star Trek fame?

Granted, there is a long long long long way to go to get to that level of tech., but what the mind can conceive and believe, it can achieve.

Thanks Ken, love it :thumbsup:
Sure, man made black holes would yield quite the gravity, something that which most definitly would be required to take into consideration while trekking for the stars.
Somewhere in there lies the key to, in lack of better wording, wormholes, which would take us to the stars.
Black holes gravity mixed with electromagnetics, moving rare earth magnets, lasers, a whole bunch of resonant acting closed loops, everything and anything I've forgot to mention.
Then add and remove as seen fit and voila = jumping through hyperspace using wormholes.
Boom and you're there.
I can't help but wondering if ET's are checking this out and rofling their antennas off.........or maybe even breaking sweats, that would really be sweet :-D

Issac Asimov said Today’s Science Fiction is Tomorrow’s Science Fact.

I think at one time Scientist’s said it would be impossible for humans to reach the Moon, but they did it.

 :myoda: 

http://www.checktheevidence.com/wordpress/2010/01/13/wilbert-smith-and-ufo-et-disclosure/

Cheers!


Be certain you listen to Mr. Smith's closing speech.  It's absolutely priceless.

Quote from Matt Watts on July 26th, 2018, 06:12 PM

Be certain you listen to Mr. Smith's closing speech.  It's absolutely priceless.

Starts at about 5 mins from the end.
He says it exactly the way it is.
By using known science and math as precepts to "verify" whether or not new discoveries should be deemed to be "true" we will never stand a chance to ever be able to reach the stars, atleast not by using that which is considered to be true/real/accurate/facts according to the contemporary science and math practices there are that which are being taught in schools worldwide today.

Thanks for sharing :thumbsup:

So, to further look into folding space then.
I'll just use the conventional spacetime idea of what room is all about.
Imagine a cube made out of rubber bands in X, Y and Z directions, at regular intervals, with knots at every intersection.
The working hypothesis is to use gravity, be it through black and/or white holes, electrogravitics, element 115, or whatever else that which has been mentioned in here up until now, in order to fold space, I.E by parking your spaceship in front of one side of the cube, throw out a gravity hook and grasp the opposite side, pull it towards the ship, shield the ship from it's native gravity generating hooking device, move the ship just a little bit forward into the cube, put in the handbrake and then shut off the gravity generator which will make room expand to it's former state again with the ship still in it's parking space, which in effect would mean that you would end up moving the ship from one end of the cube to the other, WITHOUT using any propulsion at all.
That way you'd be moving the ship from 'here' to 'there' without the need to burn matter of sort for the sake of gaining propulsion in order to get the ship moving through space.
That way it wouldn't also be "breaking" any man made laws of physics, it would on the other hand be an application of quite the novel way of using, however new, technology, the unconventional way.

OK, if we are going to have a little law and order then i'll return and continue with my work which I think is in a very important stage.

Quote from nav on July 27th, 2018, 01:16 PM

OK, if we are going to have a little law and order then i'll return and continue with my work which I think is in a very important stage.

:thumbsup2:

Welcome back :-D

Braaaaap!

 :clap2:

Right i'll finish my idea in the confidence i'm not going to get verbally beat up.
A lot of the fields we know can be intensified, case in point RF fields, we can amplify them, electric fields, we can amplify them, magnetic fields can also be increased so perhaps there is a way of amplifying gravity that we don't know about yet!
If you can create a situation where you have an heavy element aimed through a gravity amplifier and exaggerate your mass then perhaps you could bend space time just like a huge mass does.

I won't beat you up Nav, you may be one of the last few friends I got.

I will however suggest making an attempt of wrapping your head around this:
http://www.rexresearch.com/smith/newsci~1.htm#ch4field

I would have posted the whole thing here, but doing so would probably be a really bad idea.

Quote from Matt Watts on July 27th, 2018, 04:29 PM

I will however suggest making an attempt of wrapping your head around this:
http://www.rexresearch.com/smith/newsci~1.htm#ch4field

That is quite interesting reading right there, gonna take some time to go through it all though.
Thanks for sharing :thumbsup:

Hehehehehe!    :rofl2:

I've posted references to W.B. Smith's New Science at least a dozen times on this forum.  And I'll probably keep doing it until a good size group begins to take his words seriously.

Mr. Smith is the real deal and if one really tries hard to think in terms of his writings, things just fit and make sense.  Things like, "half-in, half-out", "tempic field", "spin center", "reality", "awareness", "nothing at all", gradient, divergence, curl.  It all seems radically wild from what we have been taught, but I know now what I've been taught is mostly horsesh1t, so learning something new is actually quite useful.  I can look at this Steven Mark device I'm working on and see things completely different, now with real possibilities and a framework to experiment within.  This old dog wants to learn a new trick or two.  What say you?

Quote from Lynx on July 27th, 2018, 05:44 PM

That is quite interesting reading right there, gonna take some time to go through it all though.

I've read the whole thing no less than a dozen times, each time I go back to it and read it again, I find more stuff I missed.  And like Mr. Smith, I want to turn these words into real hardware.  I owe whoever it was that figured all this out at least that much.  Probably one of the worst sins in the world is to take a gift from someone and throw it away or destroy it.  I can't do that, provided it really is a gift and not a Trojan Horse, which I don't think this is.

Quote from Matt Watts on July 27th, 2018, 05:56 PM

Hehehehehe!    :rofl2:

I've posted references to W.B. Smith's New Science at least a dozen times on this forum.  And I'll probably keep doing it until a good size group begins to take his words seriously.

Mr. Smith is the real deal and if one really tries hard to think in terms of his writings, things just fit and make sense.  Things like, "half-in, half-out", "tempic field", "spin center", "reality", "awareness", "nothing at all", gradient, divergence, curl.  It all seems radically wild from what we have been taught, but I know now what I've been taught is mostly horsesh1t, so learning something new is actually quite useful.  I can look at this Steven Mark device I'm working on and see things completely different, now with real possibilities and a framework to experiment within.  This old dog wants to learn a new trick or two.  What say you?

I've read the whole thing no less than a dozen times, each time I go back to it and read it again, I find more stuff I missed.  And like Mr. Smith, I want to turn these words into real hardware.  I owe whoever it was that figured all this out at least that much.  Probably one of the worst sins in the world is to take a gift from someone and throw it away or destroy it.  I can't do that, provided it really is a gift and not a Trojan Horse, which I don't think this is.

Now I'm intrigued.
A new Einstein perhaps?
Now I'm definitely goning to read what he has to say.
So it's all his, Mr. Smith's, own writing then, his own thoughts, theories and ideas?

Quote from Lynx on July 27th, 2018, 11:08 PM

So it's all his, Mr. Smith's, own writing then, his own thoughts, theories and ideas?

His interpretation.  The insights came from the boys topside.  In other words, from intellectuals far more evolved.

At one time I had Cycle take a look at it and of course, he scoffed at all of it.  Now knowing more about Cycle, I'm taking it even more serious.

I'm also curious how Mr. Smith ended up with cancer and died before he could finish his work.  My gut tells me he was really on to something and that's not allowed in this world.

Hear hear.

Awesome :-D