Klatu

Swansont, As you know, all of the great pioneers in science are at first thought of by their peers as 'crackpots'. Columbus thought the world to be round not flat. Capernicus thought the earth was'nt the center of the universe. I could go on but I'm sure you know them all. Neither Columbus nor Capernicus (et al) had calculus to prove to their peers the justification of their thought process, instead they used reasoning, courage and demonstration with the tools they had available as their proof. For many... at the time it was still not enough. Their 'greatness' was not to be realized in their lifetime. Anyone who goes against current thinking is assured of being called a 'crackpot' or any of the usual names that seem appropriate to use by anyone who wants to be assured themselves that what they know is complete and correct. I agree that perpetual motion machines may never exist, but perpetual motion does. Propel an object in outer space and that object will sustain its velocity and direction (in theory) forever, until effected by some other force. Electrons 'orbit' their proton assembly without adding or using up the energy that cause them to do so. As humans, we use nature as our greatest teacher. All of the sciences are about learning the 'hidden secrets' that the universe holds, and in time reveals the secrets as laws. As a society, we need such people. They take on the risk for the sake of those who fear to, they have earned the honor to be called pioneers, by their sacrifice. How then should we label the rest? For myself I have learned to refrain from calling anyone a 'crackpot' because their opinion is different than mine. More to the point: Bearden's work has gained my apprieciation because he is working in an area of science that has no mathamatical representation outside of a closed loop circuit, yet there are many examples of over unity devices that have been title 35'd due to their threat to national security and current political policies. If you need proof of scalar wave technology application just look over your head almost any day of the week, you'll see those high altitude planes laying down long white plumes of chemicals(barium titanate) that saturate the sky and spread to a milky haze... contrails evaporate. You may also notice the pattern that occurrs in them as wave like until you observe the interference zone. It looks more like a grid pattern, you would instantly recognized... very few others would. Does it make sense to you that if there were higher orders of symmetry within our current understanding of electromagnetic principles that those properties would be used as weapons and weapon systems first and then if any spinoffs from that technology could be used for industrial purposes it would be for sale to the highest bidder? Where and when have we seen this pattern before? The defense rests. K

Group, I'm rather suprized that no one has mentioned Tesla waves aka scalar waves or even quantum tunneling. Does anyone remember the Nimtz demonstration? If your would like to check out these sites: http://www.catandogs.net/english/Scalar_Waves/scalar_waves.html I highly recommend Tom Beardens site: http://www.cheniere.org/toc.html Superluminal waves have been around since the 1900s thanks to N. Tesla and they have many interesting uses the current world is not ready for. K

Bigmoosie, The given newtonian formula determines the force of attraction that both masses experience proportional to the square of the distance between them. To determine the force of attraction using this formula in a subterrian exploration you will need to integrate the net forces acting on m2, if m1 in the planet mass. The simplest way to achieve the results you maybe looking for is to diminish the value of m1 for every meter you travel below the earth surface(you will need to know how much mass to remove using simple geometry). M2 would be your mass and would remain constant, m1 would become less and less as you approach the center of m1. It maybe interesting to note your acceleration and velocity during the trip. I like the Einstienian approach, it would go something like... imagine a giant hole drilled through the plant from end to end. You approach the hole's opening at one end in your space suit and jump in. You would fall at a predictable rate of 32 feet per second squared, since there is no atmosphere there will be no areodynamics to hinder your fall. As you desend past the crust (1000 miles or so)and approach the mantel your acceleration and velocity continue to increase rapidly. The mantel is the thickest part of the planet many thousands of miles so this might take a few hours so sit back and enjoy the ride. As you approach the center of the planet your accelerometer is declining but because of your accumulated momentum your velocity remains at it's maximum. Being unable to slow yourself you would pass right by the center point and begin your journey out the other side. At this point you would notice your velocity decreasing rapidly. Before you got one third the way past the center point your velocity would slowly decrease to zero and would you would start falling back toward the center again. This might happen a number of times until eventually you would find yourself at the center point with the net gravitational effects are the same in all directions leaving you weightless at the dead center of the planet. Of coarse this is an imaginary ride but it is based on the use of Newton's formula. If you program in basic or C it should'nt be more than 2 dozen lines of code. happy landings! K

Vrus, Perhaps after reviewing Tom's work we can disscuss some of the deeper aspects of this new technology? K

Vrus, Yes I have heard of many stories regarding a weapon that can intercept missles, but it still amounts to shooting a bullet with a bullet. The odds of success when it matters is very small. There is an interesting video clip taken by someone on the international space station that shows what appears to be a rail gun targeting something approaching the earth which makes a hasty 180 degree turn as if under intelligent control. Since the public airing of that clip and the many emails that followed, NASA's policy is to not show any clip without full sensorship to the public. A truely curious policy seeing as NASA is funded by our taxes. Not surprizing... we have'nt gotten truth or fact from our government in 5 decades. You may wish review Tom Beardens website, it has some very interesting information about a well developed Russian technology th US seems to know very little or nothing about. http://www.cheniere.org/toc.html K

Vrus, Yes I have heard of many stories regarding a weapon that can intercept missles, but it still amounts to shooting a bullet with a bullet. The odds of success when it matters is very small. There is an interesting video clip taken by someone on the international space station that shows what appears to be a rail gun targeting something approaching the earth which makes a hasty 180 degree turn as if under intelligent control. Since the public airing of that clip and the many emails that followed, NASA's policy is to not show any clip without full sensorship to the public. A truely curious policy seeing as NASA is funded by our taxes. Not surprizing... we have'nt gotten truth or fact from our government in 5 decades. You may wish review Tom Beardens website, it has some very interesting information about a well developed Russian technology th US seems to know very little or nothing about. http://www.cheniere.org/toc.html K

Group, The recoil effect is an interaction of masses and applied force. If the projectile has very little mass the recoil effect is small, as compared to a larger mass. There is also a 'trade off' with the force applied. If the projectile has very little mass but the force is very large the recoil effect will still be considerable. The faster a given mass accelerates the more force is required to continue the acceleration. It's as if the mass of the object increases with velocity. The recoil effect can be suppressed by using the counter emf of the charged coils to cause a push and pull effect on the projectile as oppossed to a singular or continuous push or pull effect. This would reduce the net effect on the mechanics to near zero. Such a device placed in space perhaps in a shaded area would negate the need for supercooling the coils(-400F), there by conserving weight and electrical power. It should also be possible to not use rails as guides so long as the projectile is introduced into the center of the coils in a microgravity environment. It' seems that outer space is the only practical place to use this device, now the question is... for what purpose? K