|
Main Forum Page
|
The Gyroscope Forum |
29 November 2024 00:39
|
|
Welcome to the gyroscope forum. If you have a question about gyroscopes in general,
want to know how they work, or what they can be used for then you can leave your question here for others to answer.
You may also be able to help others by answering some of the questions on the site.
|
Question |
| Asked by: |
Glenn Hawkins |
| Subject: |
Destroier of worlds |
| Question: |
This may be the most important information ever published.
If inertial propulsion is achieved, which I believe it can be, it will be more destructive that a full-blown nuclear war on earth.
A meteorite fifty miles wide collided on earth at 35,000 MPH and all but invalidated then life on earth. If by comparison, 100 lb. probes like the one that just past Pluto is sent to explore other star systems, and within weeks accelerates to 86% of the speed of light, then eventually one WILL go out of control. Then it will be guided by gravity into an unknown planet. At that speed the collusion will not merely destroy the atmosphere; it will turn that planet of another solar system into an exploded cloud of dust. A probe at that speed cannot go through the planet like a hunk of cheese. If you dive a thousand feet into water the collusion is the same as if the water were concrete.
When a probe is out of control, if not guided if not into a planet, then into a star by the stars gravity, I theorize it may accelerate even faster. Whether it would cause a super nova I do not know, but it would cause serious problems if there were life in that planetary system.
Recently I wrote on here that the theory I developed is too valuable and too dangerous to release.
Robert Oppenheimer was the scientific director of the Manhattan Project, the USA's World War II program to develop the first nuclear weapons.
Oppenheimer said: "We knew the world would not be the same. A few people laughed, a few people cried. Most people were silent. I remembered the line from the Hindu scripture, the Bhagavad-Gita. Vishnu is trying to persuade the Prince that he should do his duty, and, to impress him, takes on his multi-armed form and says, 'Now I am become Death, the destroyer of worlds.' I suppose we all thought that, one way or another."
If one of us develops inertial propulsion, probes will be sent out to our closest neighbors in our edge of the Milky Way. When a probe mechanically falters, or fails in internal computer commands, a distance mass will grab it and guide it into a collision.
We should take this warning with the greatest seriousness. I think like Newton, I will never release certain knowledge I have won. Should any of us continue?
Glenn,
|
| Date: |
19 July 2015
|
| report abuse
|
|
Answers (Ordered by Date)
|
| Answer: |
Glenn Hawkins - 19/07/2015 05:36:48
| | |
Well. . . I guess false alarm. The probes will burn up in even a thin atmosphere.
|
| Report Abuse |
| Answer: |
Momentus - 21/07/2015 10:46:30
| | | Not a false alarm.
A common theme in space opera.
Peter F, Hamilton in his Sci Fi books calls these kinetic weapons. The perfect WMD, no radiation or toxins, just total devastation, delivered from orbital platforms.
Momentus
|
| Report Abuse |
| Answer: |
Glenn Hawkins - 23/07/2015 14:48:30
| | | Thank you Momentus.
I know you are correct and you remind us of good points. Those weapons however would have to be slowed to lower than 10,000 miles an hour and designed to withstand the heat and atmospheric resistance. They would be weapons built with intent, but the probe I wrote would be an accidental encounter traveling at such speeds that it would be impossible not to explode even in an atmosphere even many thousands of times thinner than our own.
The prob would explode into a large puff of gas.
Regards, Glenn
|
| Report Abuse |
| Answer: |
Sandy - 23/07/2015 21:28:35
| | | Evening all,
It is very unfortunate that the possible terrible destructive ability of an inertial drive device has come into discussion.
The human race has had a history of utilising anything which can kill, the philosophy being that the more efficient the killing the better, and spend millions to deliberately design devices to do just such a job.
Many years ago Eric Laithwaite said to me:
“Sadly, Sandy we cannot be held responsible for the misuse of such a device by others”
He was contemplating the misuse of an inertial drive device being utilised to nudge an asteroid or some other large rocklike structure into a trajectory, calculated in a way which would allow the “missile” to land upon someone you particularly do not like, and there are plenty of rocks out there to aim.
Moving from the sublime to the ridiculous, if an inertial drive device can be accelerated for one year, at an acceleration of 1G, the terminal velocity works out at something like the speed of light.
If that device at even a fraction of that velocity, unfortunately came upon some unsuspecting planet at that velocity I doubt very much if the device would have the time or ability to heat up to the point of its own destruction prior to hitting the planet.
I must at this point say that I was never a great believer in relativity, especially the bit which includes the relativistic tendency for mass increase near the speed of light.
Whether Einstein is right or wrong, it all becomes academic at 95% of the speed of light, but remember there are no prevailing laws referring to mass increase due to the acceleration, of self-propelled particles or self-propelled vessels as far as physics is concerned, but that is only because it has already been deemed impossible by the establishment.
It is a tough enough task, to make the things work, without using them as high speed cannonballs.
Regards
Sandy
|
| Report Abuse |
| Answer: |
Nitro - 24/07/2015 19:18:35
| | | Hello again, those who are still talking to me,
As I am bogged down with the nightmare of building an extension in the busy season and have stalled in remaking the “fast repeater” an excursion at a tangent into the other lunacy, of light, is a welcome change.
Sandy, I agree with you that Einstein, while a clever fellow, went into the realms of fantasy with the postulate that the mass of an object will become infinite at light speed. I think it was the neatness of the equation he’d figured out and the ill thought out Michelson Morley light speed experiments searching for an “aether” way back in 1887 that caused his error just as Newton’s too neat equations and his lack of knowledge of gyroscopes caused his errors.
There is a temptation amongst mathematicians (hello Dave) to extrapolate nice neat equations beyond the realms where they can work (see global warming predictions by the Met. office idiots when they cannot even get the weekend weather right etc.). Newton's equations are undoubtedly brilliant but they don’t work fully with the rotation of a rotating mass or indeed with subatomic particles (which is where Einstein came in to supersede Newton’s teaching) and Einstein’s extremes of his equations near the speed of light don’t make sense. Tachyons and other subatomics exceed light speed and black holes accelerate light towards them at a speed greater than light so that none escapes which would, on its own, seem to sod up the speed limit set by Einstein’s postulate.
Examine what Einstein’s equations give as a reason “Einstein’s speed limit” cannot be reached let alone exceeded and it doesn’t seem to make sense and, as Judge Judy says; “If it doesn’t make sense it isn’t true!”. This inability to get close to Einstein’s light speed limit is said to be because; as a device gets closer to the Einstein speed limit the equations indicate its mass increases towards the infinite and therefore a thrust beyond the infinite would be needed to achieve any further increase in speed. If, assuming for a moment that Einstein’s equations are correct about a change of mass occurring, and that that change of mass applies to a mass ACCELERATING ITSELF (e.g. rocket or gyro machine), as opposed to a mass BEING ACCELERATED by outside means (e.g. particle being accelerated in Cerne), the rocket fuel mass (assuming a rocket for this point, though a rocket’s use is unlikely) and its expulsion mass would also increase toward the infinite thereby eliminating the problem – though no doubt creating a few more! The same thing would occur if gyro propulsion were used; the mass and therefore gyrodynamic mass displacement would increase toward the infinite, proportional to its increase in mass caused by approaching light speed. Sadly while unopposed (strictly, “mostly unopposed”) mass displacement is possible, gyro acceleration is not possible as I now outline below.
I am still of the opinion after more recent tests, though I wish it weren’t so, that even my genius device will be, just like the you tube video of the curved path “MacPhail’s pendulum”, of little practical use beyond confirming the existence of anomalies in Newton’s laws.
The process required for gyro impulse propulsion is really quite simple, though the mechanics (as the “hands on” amongst you already know) have proved a proper sod.
To give an analogue of the process that may be easier to understand:- If you took a stone with you on a sledge and threw the stone away from the back of the sledge, the sledge would, of course, move in the opposite direction at a speed proportional to the relative weights of the stone to the sledge and you and to the amount of accelerating force you applied to the stone. Assuming no friction or other influences, the stone and sledge would travel apart at a constant speed, dependant on the above mentioned factors, forever. All so far so good and so Newtonian.
However, if the stone is attached to a string having no elasticity, attached to the sledge, the stone and sledge will travel apart to the extent of the string and stop.
A gyro machine (or at least mine) is like the above set up with string but with one important difference; the gyro mechanism effectively enables the stone to be retrieved for another throw without the stone’s return causing the sledge to react to the stone’s return and go back to its start position. Thus the gyro machine moves like an inch worm – making a movement of a set distance, stopping, resetting, then making another movement of a set distance etc., etc. This movement and stop, movement and stop can, of course, be smoothed by multiple gyros and a large smoothing mass but this will not produce a constant acceleration as the dead stop after each movement prevents the movement becoming the incremental movement which is constant acceleration. This, like the machine’s mechanics, is a proper sod and weep-worthy after having come so far. Luckily I have a good stock of Famous Grouse so I shall spend the weekend reverting to my “Isle of Mull” therapy by replacing the pain of a “successful failure” with the pain of a successful hangover!
The problem of gyro propulsion is now solved but the solution (or at least the one I have found) will not produce the constant acceleration that was hoped for – unless, of course, one of you knows something I have overlooked???!!!
Happy weekend Gyronauts
NM
|
| Report Abuse |
| Answer: |
Glenn Hawkins - 27/07/2015 13:13:26
| | | Top of the morning to you, Sandy,
It is not my fault if the countryside is full of bad fiddles players.
Dr. Frankenstein,
I am not trying to fuss. If fact that is the reason I have delayed in replying.
I respond for everyone’s consideration and with my own idea of duty. I differ in that, to avoid an open discussion of the potential of an ultimate doomsday device, which we seek to build, and merely to protect our indulgence and self-gratification would be deplorable. Five billion people deserve to be aware of the means by which their potential destruction may await them and their posterity.
God told of fire and brimstone and He allowed man the mind to understand. This is not a secret. The only secret is how the means might come about.
“Don’t look at me. I just work here. Get in the oven.”
I am not saying that to you, old RAF. It is just a point.
What to do? I don’t know. I am currently proceeding if only to know if I can do it.
Have a blessed day,
Glenny
|
| Report Abuse |
| Answer: |
Dave Parsons - 28/07/2015 04:28:35
| | | He's getting quite comfy under your kilt. Be sure to do an equipment count from time to time.
|
| Report Abuse |
| Answer: |
Glenn Hawkins - 28/07/2015 05:56:14
| | | You really are an idiot, boy. You have nothing to say and you cannot understand. Well I don't care. Enjoy yourself.
|
| Report Abuse |
| Answer: |
Glenn Hawkins - 29/07/2015 21:22:02
| | | Dave, I apologize to you and say that you seem plenty intelligent enough to me.
It started with your mentioning the big lying phoney, Massey or who ever he is. Everyone on this site has been honest for ten years and told no lies I truly believe and therefore I doubly see him as a despicable retching lair.
I tried to warn you away from wasting your life trying to correct big corporations and the legal system made up of corruptible men. I once owned a newspaper with five reporters including myself when I was young. I was protected by the nature and power of the press and by the Constitution. You are unprotected. I wanted to protect the little people taking a beating from the corrupt boys downtown and the corroborate power of wealth and connection. I attack them in the press and in the courts. I gave them a bad time for over a year.
Eventually I found that the people weren't interested in being protected. They either just paid the in-power corruption to leave-me-alone-please money, or they went bankrupt. They not only refused to organize, they refused to help me help them.
I found also the 'Company' as it is called here in Chattanooga wore me out. They just beat the hell out of me in every way. So many years have passed and still when I do a little real estate business in town all the inspectors are sent to attack me and run me off.
Now I do OK, buy they are not the kind to forgive and forget. I had been very hard on them and publicly. Those crooks are still in power and I now how weak the number of 'one' alone is.
I tried to help; to tell you you were wasting your life attacking and trying to defend against a POWER you don't even realize. I told you, "Don't crusade against Rome." You responded negatively and it escalated to absurdly.
Anyway, that is what happened. It seems the old saying is it is still true, "A good deed never goes unpunished."
Anyway, I take it all beck because it was mean. You'll be OK. Post as you like and I'll see you around.
One more post about light speed and I am finished and caught up here.
Glenn,
|
| Report Abuse |
| Answer: |
patrick hill - 15/09/2015 02:07:04
| | | How strange it is that after e mail and security check my ans still not let in
|
| Report Abuse |
| Answer: |
Momentus - 16/09/2015 14:19:17
| | | Patric it is strange beyond belief!! that I can read your post even tho it was not accepted.
Paranoia rules.
And it was your best post yet???
posted anon by Mometus
|
| Report Abuse |
| Answer: |
Glenn Hawkins - 16/09/2015 14:23:50
| | | Stranger still, I do not see it, Pat.
|
| Report Abuse |
| Add an Answer >> |
|
