UFO Disclosure underway. Warning !

Bumperdog

Newbie
Hey, You are probaly right about the body of mass but I don't think future humans will need this bloody sack of bones and meat to hold us back. Are we sure that everything doesn't co exist in the same space like radio signal, at the touch of a button you are on a different station. I think time and distance are human perceptions that will have no real meaning when we learn how to do it.
 

RotoPlane

Gold Supporter
No, sorry, but that is not true. It has been proven in many experiments, that that part of the relativity theory is correct. If a body of mass approaches higher speed. it increases mass. Kai.
And the sound barrier theory had men who said basically the same things. Think logically about it...:suspicious:...mass growing to infinite size.....just because of its speed? One must use some common sense when dealing with this type of physics problem.....even though, at this time, the math may work. I’m sure there are other good reasons why their experiments “proved” this theory. These kind of theories usally fall by the wayside in time.
 
Hey....I just got back from Homer Bells fly-in to find what looks like some alien landing on my lot. I saw it from the road and thought...what the heck?

I investigated further...and I could make out some scorced patterns in the grass....then two parallel impressions centered on this scorched grass...:noidea:


I started thinking maybe this was a ufo landing......then I hit my head and said.....Thats where I landed the R22 Thursday and the exhaust burnt my grass..!!!:lol:

Stan
 

Attachments

Wow, Ed, you really need to do some reading on physics. I especially like the comment on using some common sense with these types of physics problems.

The laws that govern the universe are real. Surely, not all of them are understood, but the ones that are can't be dismissed because some people in the past thought the world was flat - and they turned out to be wrong. If the math does work out this time, it will next time too.

If you are correct, I can't wait for those theories, like Einstein's Theory of General Relativity, that use that magic force called "gravity" to fall by the wayside. It sure will be tough to fly our gyros then!
 

All_In

Gold Supporter
Hey....I just got back from Homer Bells fly-in to find what looks like some alien landing on my lot. I saw it from the road and thought...what the heck?

I investigated further...and I could make out some scorced patterns in the grass....then two parallel impressions centered on this scorched grass...:noidea:


I started thinking maybe this was a ufo landing......then I hit my head and said.....Thats where I landed the R22 Thursday and the exhaust burnt my grass..!!!:lol:

Stan
Now that's funny!!! You crack me up.
 

Gyro_Kai

Senior Member
And the sound barrier theory had men who said basically the same things. Think logically about it...:suspicious:...mass growing to infinite size.....just because of its speed? One must use some common sense when dealing with this type of physics problem.....even though, at this time, the math may work. I’m sure there are other good reasons why their experiments “proved” this theory. These kind of theories usally fall by the wayside in time.
ehm, no, man must not use common sense when he leaves his horizon and goes into an area where the human mind is not made for. Man must use experiment.

The huge particle accelarators have proved the theorie. In fact they have to change the magnetic forces for every round of acceleration because the particles get heavier every time.

A super precice clock has been put on board a plane and went around the earth in a jet plane several times. Then it was slightly behind its sister clock.

I cannot explain this more, my mind was made to manage an average cave in an average stoneage neighbourhood.

Einstein and Heisenberg developed theories, which today still stand, but they didn't explain all of the world today. Modern physics is filling in the gaps, not challenging them any more. A marvellous book on how all the sciences evolved (how can you tell how heavy the earth is and what's in its core?) is Bill Bryson's book about everything (or similar). I'm currently reading it and it is very entertaining and enlightening.


Kai.
 

kc0iv

Senior Member
And the sound barrier theory had men who said basically the same things. Think logically about it...:suspicious:...mass growing to infinite size.....just because of its speed? One must use some common sense when dealing with this type of physics problem.....even though, at this time, the math may work. I’m sure there are other good reasons why their experiments “proved” this theory. These kind of theories usally fall by the wayside in time.
I find that the sound barrier theory was created by the press (once again they got it wrong) from a comment made by British aerodynamicist William F. Hilton in 1935. In fact, scientists had been aware for a very long time that it was possible to break the speed of sound artificially.

Leon
(kc0iv)
 

RotoPlane

Gold Supporter
Well !!....I never....even a ehm...:help:...;). Now there are some obviously intelligent and learned men that disagree with me in this thread and I cannot prove what I've said with math...and they most likely can. I do agree that some bizarre and implausible things cannot be reasoned out by common sense, yet can be explained by math. But....increasing mass.....to infinity….due to an increase in speed?.....Please....

I'll tell you when the mass increase and time slowing down because of speed thingies will be believable to my brain.....when they send a ship into deep space, traveling straight-out from earth at 100,000 mph and upon reaching that speed and shutting down, a atomic time signal is sent back, compared to the same type on earth, and another signal sent back six months later. If the second signal is slower than the first one, (allowing for distance traveled) then my mind is wacko....sniff…and I will retire to me rocking chair….
 

All_In

Gold Supporter
Well !!....I never....even a ehm...:help:...;). Now there are some obviously intelligent and learned men that disagree with me in this thread and I cannot prove what I've said with math...and they most likely can. I do agree that some bizarre and implausible things cannot be reasoned out by common sense, yet can be explained by math. But....increasing mass.....to infinity….due to an increase in speed?.....Please....

I'll tell you when the mass increase and time slowing down because of speed thingies will be believable to my brain.....when they send a ship into deep space, traveling straight-out from earth at 100,000 mph and upon reaching that speed and shutting down, a atomic time signal is sent back, compared to the same type on earth, and another signal sent back six months later. If the second signal is slower than the first one, (allowing for distance traveled) then my mind is wacko....sniff…and I will retire to me rocking chair….
Yes it can make your head hurt! But:

Einstein interpreted the combination gamma * m0 to be the mass of an object in motion. This is why the equation is usually quoted simply as E = mc2. The equation relating mass to velocity is

m = m0 (M sub 0) / sq root of 1 –(v/c)2 (that's exponent 2 (=squared)

Mass, like gamma, grows with velocity. As the object approaches the speed of light, the mass approaches infinity!

A word of caution: many physicists simply call m0 (M sub 0) the mass, dropping the distinction between the rest mass and Einstein's velocity-dependent mass. So be careful to note which definition is being used!

This relationship can probably be found in most introductory college physics texts. A good book for more details, at a slightly more technical level, is Ray D'Inverno's book Introducing Einstein's Relativity.
 

RotoPlane

Gold Supporter
Yes it can make your head hurt! But:
The “but” is.....something is not right in E = mc2 when applied to real mass and its speed. That is why new math is invented when physicists need to prove a theory. In the end, one universal theory and math with work with all space-time-mass problems and it will probably be much simpler than quantum physics...snort... and string-theory. And I know this is my bull-headed opinion.....as right as can possibly be......:)
 

Gyro_Kai

Senior Member
Ed,

your theory and the currently most popular string theory have one thing in common: "no proof".

So you can happily continue with common sense, it will carry you much further in life than any of the other concepts. The string theory only works under the assumption that space has many (I think 10 or 24 at least) dimensions. So much for common sense.

Nuclear bombs work on E=mc2 but I guess that is a known fact.

Kai.
 

RotoPlane

Gold Supporter
Ed,

your theory and the currently most popular string theory have one thing in common: "no proof".

So you can happily continue with common sense, it will carry you much further in life than any of the other concepts. The string theory only works under the assumption that space has many (I think 10 or 24 at least) dimensions. So much for common sense.

Nuclear bombs work on E=mc2 but I guess that is a known fact.Kai.
Kai, you sound like a college professor, and if you are, I'd bet you are a very good one.....
 

Gyro_Kai

Senior Member
Kai, you sound like a college professor, and if you are, I'd bet you are a very good one.....
Far from it but thanks. :)

I'm more the practical guy and therefore engineer. My friend, a whiz kid who was solving differential equations in his Latin textbook in 8th grade when lesson was too boring, went into that trade of theoretical physics. Even he admitted that despite the math is all clear to him and he developed it further, his mind cannot really grasp the meaning. As it so happens, many theories towards the universal world formula have failed, but currently string theory still prevails.

Whether or not this will ever have any influence on the rest of us, is totally unclear. Relativity and the unrealism of quantum theory however has influence on us every day. It plays a role in GPS calculation, modern microchips (tunnel-effect) Astronomy etc.


Kai.
 
been done !

been done !

Ed,

They have already done this, this is old news..... putting atomic clocks in high speed vehicles, first with the first ever high speed flights at high altitudes in aircraft and then again with spacecraft. It is proven over many times thats why they know it works the clocks return different times. Which at least on its surface reveals the theory to be correct.

But and I say with a big "but" many known theories and absolutes can and do reverse themselves given enough, power etc.

Take for example the following considerations.

Man will never fly,
Man will never go into space,
Man will never fly faster than the speed of sound...

etc. etc. etc

The only thing I cannot quite wrap my mind around is the law that says the same thing never happens the same way twice. Which if were true and you could go back in time, which time would you see ? Would you experience the timeline according to the random effects of what you had experienced or a totally different set of random events that would now have you back in time but with a totally different history.. ? That is the real bug a boo.

In theory at least if you could jump a few years or a few centuries then it would be as possible to go back as far as you wanted given you could build another time machine in the farthest back timeline you had jumped too.

J



Well !!....I never....even a ehm...:help:...;). Now there are some obviously intelligent and learned men that disagree with me in this thread and I cannot prove what I've said with math...and they most likely can. I do agree that some bizarre and implausible things cannot be reasoned out by common sense, yet can be explained by math. But....increasing mass.....to infinity….due to an increase in speed?.....Please....

I'll tell you when the mass increase and time slowing down because of speed thingies will be believable to my brain.....when they send a ship into deep space, traveling straight-out from earth at 100,000 mph and upon reaching that speed and shutting down, a atomic time signal is sent back, compared to the same type on earth, and another signal sent back six months later. If the second signal is slower than the first one, (allowing for distance traveled) then my mind is wacko....sniff…and I will retire to me rocking chair….
 

Gyro_Kai

Senior Member
Hello,

Man will never fly,
Man will never go into space,
Man will never fly faster than the speed of sound...
I think the big difference here is, that the above were reasoned, based on the "we know how, but it is too difficult" assumption. Like: too heavy, too little pressure, soo much pressure etc.

In the faster-than-light business we don't even have an approach as to "how". Current physics does not even allow a method, be it feasible or not. My star-trek mind suggests wormholes, shortcuts through spacetime. But, that is just as irreal as waiting for the next aliens and stop and ask them how they came here.

Kai.
 

kc0iv

Senior Member
Kai, You hit the nail on the head. Theoretical Physics anything can be proven theoretical.

As an example. Way back in high school I had a math teacher (he work for NASA back in the days they still used long hand math - no computers) that could prove 1=2 by math. It took him four blackboards of math to prove it but in the end he showed 1=2. Needless, to say common sense says otherwise. BTW - We would get him involved in some math problem and spend the whole class period not learning what we there to learn. A great way to distract him when we didn't have the the assignment.

It is like the string theory itself. It is based on black holes. They haven't proved black holes per se only that they appear to exist.

Leon
(kc0iv)
 

RotoPlane

Gold Supporter
Ed,

They have already done this, this is old news..... putting atomic clocks in high speed vehicles, first with the first ever high speed flights at high altitudes in aircraft and then again with spacecraft. It is proven over many times thats why they know it works the clocks return different times. Which at least on its surface reveals the theory to be correct.
The problem with any experiment that involves a circular path, is that other effects come in to play that can mask what is really happening, including earth’s magnetic flux lines and gravity. That’s why I said straight-out from earth into deep space. You know the Coriolis effect can do some bad things….;)
 
Last edited:

LuftCarl

Member
Black holes do exist. Einstein's Theory of General Relativity, as demonstrated by Stephen Hawkins mathematically, showed the possibility that they could exist. In 1975, a famous bet was made between Mr. Hawkins and Kip Thorne, who also is brilliant. Hawkins actually bet black holes do not exist despite being the one who worked the math that showed they could. Cygnus X-1 was proven to be a black hole and Hawkins lost. Many more have been identified since.
 
Top