Language: 
To browser these website, it's necessary to store cookies on your computer.
The cookies contain no personal information, they are required for program control.
  the storage of cookies while browsing this website, on Login and Register.

GDPR and DSGVO law

Storing Cookies (See : http://ec.europa.eu/ipg/basics/legal/cookies/index_en.htm ) help us to bring you our services at overunity.com . If you use this website and our services you declare yourself okay with using cookies .More Infos here:
https://overunity.com/5553/privacy-policy/
If you do not agree with storing cookies, please LEAVE this website now. From the 25th of May 2018, every existing user has to accept the GDPR agreement at first login. If a user is unwilling to accept the GDPR, he should email us and request to erase his account. Many thanks for your understanding.
Amazon Warehouse Deals ! Now even more Deep Discounts ! Check out these great prices on slightly used or just opened once only items.I always buy my gadgets via these great Warehouse deals ! Highly recommended ! Many thanks for supporting OverUnity.com this way.

User Menu

A-Ads

Powerbox

Smartbox

3D Solar

3D Solar Panels

DC2DC converter

Micro JouleThief

FireMatch

FireMatch

CCKnife

CCKnife

CCTool

CCTool

Magpi Magazine

Magpi Magazine Free Rasberry Pi Magazine

Battery Recondition

Battery Recondition

Arduino

Ultracaps

YT Subscribe

Gravity Machines

Tesla-Ebook

Magnet Secrets

Lindemann Video

Navigation

Products

Products

WaterMotor kit

Statistics

  • *Total Members: 83535
  • *Latest: Fritzman

  • *Total Posts: 514388
  • *Total Topics: 15304
  • *Online Today: 44
  • *Most Online: 103
(December 19, 2006, 11:27:19 PM)
  • *Users: 1
  • *Guests: 12
  • *Total: 13

Author Topic: 'Impossible' rocket drive works and could get to Moon in four hours  (Read 52577 times)

Offline Pirate88179

  • elite_member
  • Hero Member
  • ******
  • Posts: 8369
Re: 'Impossible' rocket drive works and could get to Moon in four hours
« Reply #180 on: August 11, 2015, 04:15:24 AM »
Right or wrong, I'm not looking to receive anything.  There has been a lot of famous scientists in the past who were called crack pots in their time, and they were proven to be correct many years later.  The reverse has occurred also.

Gravock

My vote is with the reverse on this one.

Bill

Free Energy | searching for free energy and discussing free energy


Offline gravityblock

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 3260
    • Get Dish Now! Free Dish Network System from VMC Satellite
Re: 'Impossible' rocket drive works and could get to Moon in four hours
« Reply #181 on: August 11, 2015, 04:28:26 AM »
My vote is with the reverse on this one.

Bill

That vote makes absolutely no sense whatsoever.  So, you think I'm right at this particular time, but will be proven wrong and a crack pot down the road.  Or, you think MarkE is right at this particular time, but will be proven wrong and a crack pot down the road.  Either way, your own thoughts and reasoning skills are conflicted against each other.    This is almost as good as, "you have to speed up to slow down, and slow down to speed up".

Gravock

Offline MarkE

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 6830
Re: 'Impossible' rocket drive works and could get to Moon in four hours
« Reply #182 on: August 11, 2015, 04:53:19 AM »
My vote is with the reverse on this one.

Bill
GravityBlock is not a famous scientist.  He does seem revel in promoting a relatively famous crackpot: MM.

Free Energy | searching for free energy and discussing free energy

Re: 'Impossible' rocket drive works and could get to Moon in four hours
« Reply #182 on: August 11, 2015, 04:53:19 AM »
Sponsored links:




Offline gravityblock

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 3260
    • Get Dish Now! Free Dish Network System from VMC Satellite
Re: 'Impossible' rocket drive works and could get to Moon in four hours
« Reply #183 on: August 11, 2015, 05:21:58 AM »
GravityBlock is not a famous scientist.  He does seem revel in promoting a relatively famous crackpot: MM.

It's not a requirement to be a famous scientist in order to be considered right or wrong, and later proven to be otherwise.  I'm not promoting MM here.  If you think I am, then kindly show me the references of MM that relates to the same ideas I'm promoting on this topic.  In case you haven't noticed, I've been promoting the ideas as presented by RD (you missed the boat again).  You have done nothing but misrepresent what I have posted.  And, you do this with others who don't agree with you.

Gravock

Offline MarkE

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 6830
Re: 'Impossible' rocket drive works and could get to Moon in four hours
« Reply #184 on: August 11, 2015, 05:35:26 AM »
LOL, it is up to you to properly represent your ideas.  If you are unhappy with the way that you think that I or anyone else represents them then it is up to you to set the record straight as to what your ideas are.  You do yourself no favors with your stated contempt for established physics.  So far you have done nothing to establish that your ideas better represent reality than established physics.  If your hope is to convince folks that your ideas are anything other than so much crackpottery, I think you are doing a particularly poor job.

Free Energy | searching for free energy and discussing free energy

Re: 'Impossible' rocket drive works and could get to Moon in four hours
« Reply #184 on: August 11, 2015, 05:35:26 AM »
Sponsored links:




Offline gravityblock

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 3260
    • Get Dish Now! Free Dish Network System from VMC Satellite
Re: 'Impossible' rocket drive works and could get to Moon in four hours
« Reply #185 on: August 11, 2015, 05:49:35 AM »
LOL, it is up to you to properly represent your ideas.  If you are unhappy with the way that you think that I or anyone else represents them then it is up to you to set the record straight as to what your ideas are.

The publications, books, and experiments by RD has failed to properly represent the idea to you also.  I understand the ideas as presented by RD, so why can't you?  It's because RD is in disagreement with your own beliefs.  However, this doesn't mean you misrepresent those ideas in which you disagree with.  You and Dan the downer are so much alike.  You don't know your head from your ass.  How can anyone properly represent their ideas to someone else who don't have the capacity to perceive things correctly.  It's like trying to properly represent your ideas to the fly on the wall.

Gravock

Offline Pirate88179

  • elite_member
  • Hero Member
  • ******
  • Posts: 8369
Re: 'Impossible' rocket drive works and could get to Moon in four hours
« Reply #186 on: August 11, 2015, 06:02:03 AM »
That vote makes absolutely no sense whatsoever.  So, you think I'm right at this particular time, but will be proven wrong and a crack pot down the road.  Or, you think MarkE is right at this particular time, but will be proven wrong and a crack pot down the road.  Either way, your own thoughts and reasoning skills are conflicted against each other.    This is almost as good as, "you have to speed up to slow down, and slow down to speed up".

Gravock

I just finished reading yet another book where "you have to slow down to speed up" is explained in great detail.  The book is: "Failure Is Not An Option" by Gene Kranz.  He clearly explains the study of orbital mechanics and how they had to learn to perform the essential rendezvous maneuver in order to get to the moon.  Yes, they did have to slow down to speed up.  Hopefully, one day you will be able to grasp this concept. This is the 4th book I have read that explains this principle.  Obviously, you have not read anything on the subject, otherwise, your comments might make some sense.

Oh, to explain, I think MarkE is correct (as well as known science) and you are not correct.  I did not think that I would have to explain that but...there it is.

Bill

PS  That concept could better be explained as having to slow down to CATCH up but, that is not the way all of those books have worded it...it would be more correct in my opinion.

Free Energy | searching for free energy and discussing free energy

Re: 'Impossible' rocket drive works and could get to Moon in four hours
« Reply #186 on: August 11, 2015, 06:02:03 AM »
Sponsored links:




Offline MarkE

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 6830
Re: 'Impossible' rocket drive works and could get to Moon in four hours
« Reply #187 on: August 11, 2015, 06:24:15 AM »
The publications, books, and experiments by RD has failed to properly represent the idea to you also.  I understand the ideas as presented by RD, so why can't you?  It's because RD is in disagreement with your own beliefs.  However, this doesn't mean you misrepresent those ideas in which you disagree with.  You and Dan the downer are so much alike.  You don't know your head from your ass.  How can anyone properly represent their ideas to someone else who don't have the capacity to perceive things correctly.  It's like trying to properly represent your ideas to the fly on the wall.

Gravock
You have reduced yourself to ad hominem attacks.  Nice.

Offline gravityblock

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 3260
    • Get Dish Now! Free Dish Network System from VMC Satellite
Re: 'Impossible' rocket drive works and could get to Moon in four hours
« Reply #188 on: August 11, 2015, 06:29:55 AM »
I just finished reading yet another book where "you have to slow down to speed up" is explained in great detail.  The book is: "Failure Is Not An Option" by Gene Kranz.  He clearly explains the study of orbital mechanics and how they had to learn to perform the essential rendezvous maneuver in order to get to the moon.  Yes, they did have to slow down to speed up.  Hopefully, one day you will be able to grasp this concept. This is the 4th book I have read that explains this principle.  Obviously, you have not read anything on the subject, otherwise, your comments might make some sense.

"Failure is not an option" was in fact coined by Bill Broyles, one of the screenwriters of Apollo 13.  I can't believe your reading books about going to the moon, when they clearly faked it.  Each to their own.  We've already had this discussion, so no need in repeating it.

Gravock

Free Energy | searching for free energy and discussing free energy

Re: 'Impossible' rocket drive works and could get to Moon in four hours
« Reply #188 on: August 11, 2015, 06:29:55 AM »
3D Solar Panels

Offline gravityblock

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 3260
    • Get Dish Now! Free Dish Network System from VMC Satellite
Re: 'Impossible' rocket drive works and could get to Moon in four hours
« Reply #189 on: August 11, 2015, 06:37:38 AM »
You have reduced yourself to ad hominem attacks.  Nice.

If that's the way you want to perceive it, then so be it.  It is what it is!

Gravock

Offline gravityblock

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 3260
    • Get Dish Now! Free Dish Network System from VMC Satellite
Re: 'Impossible' rocket drive works and could get to Moon in four hours
« Reply #190 on: August 11, 2015, 06:51:19 AM »
If that's the way you want to perceive it, then so be it.  It is what it is!

Gravock

MarkE

I can't find the fly at fault.  However, you're intentionally being like Dan the downer and the fly on the wall.  There's a big difference!  I've been promoting RD in this topic, and you're saying I'm promoting MM.  That is a big misrepresentation by taking things out of context and twisting them whatever way you choose.  It's a pattern you don't break and it takes up a lot of bandwidth and time in trying to untwist and put it back into it's proper place.

Gravock

Free Energy | searching for free energy and discussing free energy

Re: 'Impossible' rocket drive works and could get to Moon in four hours
« Reply #190 on: August 11, 2015, 06:51:19 AM »
3D Solar Panels

Offline gravityblock

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 3260
    • Get Dish Now! Free Dish Network System from VMC Satellite
Re: 'Impossible' rocket drive works and could get to Moon in four hours
« Reply #191 on: August 11, 2015, 07:24:12 AM »
Oh, to explain, I think MarkE is correct (as well as known science) and you are not correct.  I did not think that I would have to explain that but...there it is.

I knew your vote would need to be explained to yourself.  You chose the reverse, and the reverse was that you think a person is right at this particular time, but will be proven wrong down the road.  The proving wrong was to be done sometime down the road.  Your explanation of your vote is only in regards to the "now", and totally disregards the future (down the road), and totally disregards the proving wrong aspect of it as well.  How convenient of you to leave out the future and the proving wrong aspects in your explanation of your vote.  Now you're following in MarkE's footsteps by conveniently leaving things out.

Gravock

Offline MarkE

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 6830
Re: 'Impossible' rocket drive works and could get to Moon in four hours
« Reply #192 on: August 11, 2015, 09:03:05 AM »
MarkE

I can't find the fly at fault.  However, you're intentionally being like Dan the downer and the fly on the wall.  There's a big difference!  I've been promoting RD in this topic, and you're saying I'm promoting MM.  That is a big misrepresentation by taking things out of context and twisting them whatever way you choose.  It's a pattern you don't break and it takes up a lot of bandwidth and time in trying to untwist and put it back into it's proper place.

Gravock
LOL

Offline allcanadian

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 1317
Re: 'Impossible' rocket drive works and could get to Moon in four hours
« Reply #193 on: August 11, 2015, 03:25:11 PM »
@Mark E
Quote
You have reduced yourself to ad hominem attacks.  Nice.


I would have to agree, criticizing the person rather than the concept has always been a losing proposition. I'm a little busy right now but in a bit I will post my solution to the float in tube problem and see where it takes us.




AC

Offline allcanadian

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 1317
Re: 'Impossible' rocket drive works and could get to Moon in four hours
« Reply #194 on: August 11, 2015, 05:38:30 PM »
Concerning the float in a tube problem.


As I said prior at the top of the fixed tube the float displaces a volume of water which must be replaced and there is no getting around this fact. If the water displaced was not replaced then the height of the water column would get smaller and smaller and the process would stop. It requires work to lift the water to be replaced which is equivalent to the work performed by the float when rising in the tube.


My solution seemed obvious in that the weight of the water column is the real issue and if at some point it had no apparent weight then the system properties have changed in our favor. So how do we do it?, I would coat the inside and outside of the tube with a water repellent so the water column acts more like a friction-less rigid body in the tube then cradle the tube so it may move up and down freely on friction-less magnetic springs. If the tube can oscillate up and down with the bottom of the tube always remaining in the water then at the top of the upward stroke the whole of the water column becomes weightless due to it's own inertia. It should be obvious this oscillator is a conservative system... nothing lost nothing gained.


Now if at the top of the tube stroke when the water column is weightless but moving upward we removed the float then the water column may advance upward to replace the volume of the float due to it's own inertia. The water which moved upward let's say 3" to replace the float must also fall the same 3" later on with the whole tube thus mass of the water and tube as a whole is conserved minus the float.


The process would be as follows:
1)  Float in stationary tube rises to the top of the tube performing work.
2)  Energy from an external source is added to set the whole tube/water column in oscillation upward/downward with the bottom of the tube always remaining in the water.
3)  At the top of the stroke when the water is weightless but still acting upwards due to it's own inertia we open a valve and remove the float.
4)  The water column advances up 3" in the tube to fill the float space and a valve is closed then the whole tube and water column falls the same 3" conserving mass and energy with respect to the tube and water column as a whole. ie..the system does not know the float is missing with respect to the mass nor height of the water except for the mass of the float which is small in comparison.
5)  The energy which initially set the tube in oscillation from an external source is then removed and stored and the tube and water column come to rest. The cycle repeats.






As we can see energy is conserved with respect to the whole oscillating tube/water column minus the float mass, it is also conserved with respect to the height of the water column in that the water rises 3" due to it's own inertia when the float is removed then falls the same 3" with the whole tube later on. The thing to keep in mind is that the mass/energy of the oscillating tube is the same regardless of where the float is in the tube. It does not care if the float is at the top or bottom or if it performed work or not. The oscillating tube is simply a more efficient means to remove the float, nothing more. Thus it would seem to me multiple conservative systems may be used to change the properties of the system which may change the rules... or not...we will see.






AC

 

OneLink