BTW Peter Woit's book "Not Even Wrong" is a must read about the wrong turn in physics today. Unconfirmed scuttlebutt is that Congress will essentially cut all federal funding of "string theory" as a result of the books by Woit and Smolin. George Chapline Jr (Ed Teller's long-time assistant with clout inside USG) told me he arranged for Woit's book to get published, but for some reason he is not happy with it. Lubos Motl (a Czech national) pressured to resign from Harvard's physics department because of his vicious shotgun public polemical attacks on Woit, Smolin, Penrose and even Susskind! With friends like Lubos Motl, Ed Witten does not need enemies. ;-)
Note that Feynman, t'Hooft, Glashow all on record that string theory is not physics. All are Nobel laureates in physics. Several prominent string theorists have jumped ship. String theorist students unemployable even in industry. See Ch 12 of Woit's book.
On Feb 17, 2007, at 11:11 PM, ANTIGRAY@cs.com wrote:
In a message dated 2/17/2007 11:50:18 PM Eastern Standard Time, sarfatti@pacbell.net writes:
No there is NO CHANCE WHATSOEVER! Lazar is a plant. George Knapp is a great guy but he is a reporter not a PhD physicist. I have already basically solved the problem of UFO warp drive. No need for this mindless nonsense without any coherent idea to it at all. It's a complete waste of time. What you have below is irrelevant to the Lazar issue - Red Herrings.
The star gate at the Skinwalker Ranch is MAINSTREAM PHYSICS do not muddy clear water with Lazar's not even wrong word salad!
Hi Jack,
I am not trying to muddy Skinwalker Ranch information with Bob Lazar pseudoscience. Optoelectronic camouflage has nothing to do Lazar. That is something known to exist. I was saying George Knapp reports what HE sees, be it Lazar doing a supposed experiment with Element 115, or seeing an alien jumping down out of a hole that appears near the ground. I was stating as an aside that I personally think the hole in the air was not a Stargate, but was a cloaked ship opening its hatch.
Showing alien sky at other end of tunnel? Not likely.
http://tinyurl.com/26z77x
From an operational and tactical point of view I don't think the aliens would risk using a valuable piece of equipment like a Stargate in an area that was under such close surveillance with video cams all over the ranch, because if there was a malfunction, the Stargate could fall into our hands. To show the alternative possible method of entry off a cloaked ship, I was showing real world information and photos of that electronic camo system because the aliens use it on their ships and personnel too. I am not a water muddier.
Art
Subj: Re: Element 115 Lazar nonsense fools Knapp?
Date: 2/18/2007 1:32:17 AM Eastern Standard Time
From: ANTIGRAY
To: sarfatti@pacbell.net
Right-click picture(s) to display picture options
Hi Jack,
Hopefully George Knapp will respond and tell us the exact details of what he saw Bob Lazar doing in the experiment with the Element 115. With any luck George got a sample of the metal.
Art
Subj: Re: Element 115 Lazar nonsense fools Knapp?
Date: 2/17/2007 11:57:38 PM Eastern Standard Time
From: sarfatti@pacbell.net
To: ANTIGRAY@cs.com
Bending of light - that's what lenses do. Any inhomogeneous medium with variable index of refraction will bend a laser beam.
How was it bent exactly?
Under what conditions.
It's easy to fool people!
On Feb 17, 2007, at 8:36 PM, ANTIGRAY@cs.com wrote:
Subj: Re: Element 115 Lazar nonsense fools Knapp?
Date: 2/17/2007 11:36:22 PM Eastern Standard Time
From: ANTIGRAY
To: sarfatti@pacbell.net
Right-click picture(s) to display picture options
Hi Jack,
I am not one of the cargo cultists. I am with you 100%. I only report the stuff that is out there if there is a chance there may be a kernel of usable information contained therein which the laymen writing about it have heard and/or misinterpreted from what they saw. That's why I sent you the info on George Knapp saying he saw Lazar experimenting with element 115 in a cloud chamber and it was bending light. George Knapp is a "credible" news reporter. He said HE saw it. He also reported about the alien being at Skinwalker ranch jumping down onto the ground from a lit up hole that opened up in the air. As I remember, I think you said it was a worm hole opening up. I personally think it was a hatch opening on the side of a cloaked ship hovering near the ground. We copied the concept of optoelectronic camouflage from the aliens ourselves and it is already deployed on some military aircraft, tanks, and military uniforms. There was a show on the Discovery Channel about this type camo 2 years ago. The Japanese are even making cheap knockoffs of the camo as you can see:
Art
Here are some more pics in these 3 articles:
Is Cloaking Technology for U.S. Infantry Warfighters Finally Possible?
Posted on Sunday, March 12 @ 09:22:08 PST by davidc
by David Crane
defrev@gmail.com
In the movie Predator (1987), an alien hunter visits earth to bag armed human warriors (military Special Operations personnel) as trophies, and engages in this recreational endeavor very methodically and efficiently. By the time the movie ends, the alien predator has killed off two complete (elite) and highly-experienced U.S. Special Operations teams, save for one survivor (Major Alan "Dutch" Schaeffer, played by Arnold Schwarzenegger), with extreme prejudice. Now, while the alien is bigger, stronger, faster, and much more mobile in the dense jungle environment than its human prey, it's also got another major advantage--superior technology. The alien has many high-tech weapons in its arsenal, all formidable. However, one weapon in particular stands out--the power of invisibility.
The fictional (Yautja ) alien Predator uses adaptive camouflage technology (a.k.a. electro-optical camouflage, a.k.a. optical camouflage, a.k.a. active camouflage, a.k.a. chameleonic camouflage, a.k.a. cloaking technology) to great effect in order to pick off Schaeffer's team one by one at will, without them being able to mount an effective defense. Even when they finally spot the alien and henceforth know what to look for, all they can... really see is a slight visual anomaly against the stationary jungle background when the creature is standing (or perching) still, and a moving visual anomaly (or shimmer) when the alien is moving against that stationary background. Interestingly, towards the end of the film, Schaeffer covers his body with wet mud to make himself invisible to the Predator's thermal vision, after he discovers the mud's utility inadvertently. He then uses his own new-found invisibility to turn the tables on the Predator and kill it. So, in the film, invisibility ends up being the primary component to both combatants' respective tactical success. But the Predator's cloaking capability is fictional. I mean, it's just a movie, right?
Actually, visual stealth tech (a.k.a. daylight stealth, a.k.a. daytime stealth, a.k.a. optical stealth), or invisibility, has been one of the holy grails of U.S. military technology R&D programs for quite some time, now. Why? It's simple. The U.S. Department of Defense (DoD) understands that if you can see the enemy, but the enemy can't see you, it's much easier to kill him, and much harder for him to kill you--and aircraft and ships are expensive. But ya' know what? So are infantry warfighters (infantry soldiers and Marines), although not in the same way. Aside from the obvious and largely-imeasurable value of human life, infantry warfighters are expensive with regard to public opinion and public relations. When they get killed or injured by IEDs (Improvised Explosive Devices), RPGs (Rocket-Propelled Grenades), mortars, small arms fire, etc., it impedes U.S. war efforts, because the American people are now much softer and thus more sensitive to U.S. casualties than they used to be (like during WWI and WWII, for instance). Every additional death that's reported causes PR damage. And, right now, our infantry is suffering approx. 95% of all military casualties, because they're the most vulnerable to enemy attacks. One military expert that we spoke with awhile back described human beings as "just pink squooshy things" when they're on a battlefield. They're just very easy to damage and take out. However, if you can hide those "pink squooshy things" with adaptive camouflage/cloaking technology as they move through the battlespace, they're no longer as easy to target and kill, and both their lethality and survivability are simultaneously greatly enhanced.
But, why stop there? If we can make main battle tanks (M1 Abrams MBT), armored personnel carriers/infantry fighting vehicles (APC/IFV--like the Stryker and M113), and aircraft invisible, too, that's even better. Replacing human warfighters with robotic warfighters (armed/weaponized robots) is another part of the equation. Weaponized UGVs (Unmanned Ground Vehicles) and weaponized UAVs (Unmanned Aerial Vehicles), a.k.a. UCAVs (Unmanned Combat Air Vehicles) can help the U.S. military cut down on infantry casualties even further. And, why not cloak those, too?
Well, maybe now we can. It's possible that a company out of Fullerton, California called Advanced American Enterprise (AAE) has achieved the holy grail--tactical invisibility. That's what they're claiming, anyway. It's called the Stealth Technology System (STS) , and AAE claims that the technology really works and is ready for prime time. According to the company, STS is more effective, less expensive, and lighter-weight than any known active camouflage/cloaking tech that's previously been under development in the past. AAE states that STS can be applied to ground vehicles, boats, infantry warfighters, and UGVs/ground robots. Any object to which STS is applied will, according to AAE, become virtually invisible, even from as little as 20-25 feet away. Wow. The STS adaptive camouflage technology is apparently still undergoing T&E for application to manned and unmanned aircraft.
The actual inventor of the Stealth Technology System is Dr. Rashid Zeineh, who already reportedly has a number of previous inventions under his belt, including the first laser scanner ever (1968) and its software that "also reads DNA identity," and anti-hijacking tech, a.k.a. a "Counter-Terrorism Device for Airplanes." BTW, Zeineh's laser scanner also reportedly reads bar codes.
It's our understanding at present that, very soon, the Stealth Technology System (STS) is going to be tested on a small weaponized unmanned ground vehicle (UGV) and unmanned combat air vehicle (UCAV). This information is unconfirmed/unverified. If/when these tests are conducted, DefenseReview would very much like to see them (in person, or at least on video) and their results (witness reports, data, etc.).
We'd really like to see the technology tested on the NRI AutoCopter Gunship (weaponized unmanned mini-helicopter). If the STS tech works as advertised during these tests and it can really hold up to battlefield conditions (reliability, durability, etc.), look out, 'cause it's gonna' be game over. Imagine swarms of highly-lethal (and possibly even networked) weaponized UGVs and UCAVS zipping around the battlespace looking for you. Now imagine that you can't see them, even when they're very close or approaching you at high-speed in broad daylight. Very difficult to defend yourself against. You'd probably be killed without ever seeing what killed you. Of course, ideally, anti-thermal/IR (infrared) camouflage paint (for vehicles) or cream/makeup (for warfighters) and anti-thermal/IR apparel (for warfighters) should also be considered. This combo should give vehicle or warfighter combined visual stealth and thermal/infrared stealth. Oh, and silencers/sound suppressors should also be considered, in order to mask sound (sonic camouflage, if you will). If sound suppressors are employed, it will be harder for the enemy to hear the weapons being fired at them and/or figure out where the rounds are coming from.
Getting back to visual stealth tech, if it turns out that STS can successfully cloak mobile infantry warfighters within acceptable comfort/wearability, weight, durability, and powering requirements, then U.S. soldiers and Marines will be one step closer to Predator capability. So, does STS actually work as advertised? And, if it does work, can it be effectively applied to our infantry warfighters so they can effectively operate with it in the field? Defense Review hopes it does, because our troops could really use it. However, we (DefRev) don't really know, yet. We haven't seen STS tested, nor have we seen any video footage of it in operation. But, if it does, well...Cloak On, Game Over.
Author's note: If STS really works and is viable for U.S. infantry use, we'd better all hope the technology doesn't fall into the wrong hands (getting captured/obtained from disabled or destroyed/killed U.S. robots, vehicles or warfighters). We definitely wouldn't want to have to contend with cloaked IEDs or insurgents/terrorists, now would we. That would be very bad.
If you'd like to learn more about the Stealth Technology System (STS) you can contact Advanced American Enterprise (AAE) by phone at 714-287-0490, by fax at 714-870-6385, or by email at aab@ix.netcom.com.
Click here to read AAE's FAQ on the Stealth Technology System.
Photo Captions (for photos above, from top to bottom):
1) Photo still from Predator (1987)
2) AAE company photo of small square STS panel activated in front of individual.
3) AAE company photo of large rectangular STS panel covering majority of individual
4) Individual completely cloaked by STS panel.
Company claims optical camouflage could have protected Israeli warfighters.
Posted on Friday, November 17 @ 18:27:44 PST by davidc
by David Crane
david at defensereview.com
Optical Cloaking Technology for Urban Warfare and Counterinsurgency Operations
According to Dr. R. A. Zeineh (a.k.a. "Dr. Z"), his company's (Advanced American Enterprise) IR-Stealth 4.B combination thermal/IR (infrared)/night vision (NV) stealth system could have protected Israeli infantry warfighters from Hezbollah guerrilla fighters in Lebanon. One of the recent new documents we've received from AAE discusses how the Hizbollah guerrillas used night vision (NV) equipment to kill two Israeli commandos (out of a 4-man team) near Baalback, Lebanon. In other words, the Israelis didn't "own the night," and it got some of them killed. Dr. Z claims that AAE's technology could have changed the outcome of that unfortunate scenario. AAE claims to be able to provide a "head-to-toe pocket-size IR-Stealth enforced cloth coverall less than .3 Kg protects the night fighter and his armor from detection and from IR targeting." Put another way, AAE IR-Stealth 4.B tech weighing approx. 250 grams can be integrated with a military coverall or BDU to "cloak" an infantry warfighter so that he effectively becomes invisible to enemy thermal/IR (infrared) and NV (night vision) viewers and targeting devices. AAE claims that the IR-Stealth 4.B-equipped BDU/coverall will not hinder/interfere with the warfighter's ability to fight. The warfighter will still be able to breathe, see, hear, run, drive, shoot, speak/shout, climb, or carry an injured teammate--or perform any other battle-relevant behavior, for that matter. According to AAE, current military BDUs/uniforms can be...
easily upgraded to become thermal/IR/NV stealthy . Any all main battle tanks (MBTs), APCs and IFVs (Infantry Personnel Carriers and Infantry Fighting Vehicles), HMMWVs (Humvees), and helicopters can also be upgraded with the AAE IR-Stealth tech to protect them from heat-seaking missiles. AAE has a separate optical camouflage (a.k.a. electro-optical camouflage, a.ka. adaptive camouflage a.k.a. active camouflage a.k.a. chameleonic camouflage a.k.a. visible-light-spectrum cloaking technology) called Visibility Stealth 1.B that can be applied to both ground vehicles, including MBTs, APCs/IFVs, HMMWVs, UGVs (Unmanned Ground Vehicles) a.k.a. ground robots, and infantry warfighter uniforms that can reduce their visibility by 85-100%, again without impeding functionality (ability to fight) in any way. It's Defense Review's understanding at present that IR-Stealth 4.B and Visibility Stealth 1.B can be combined/integrated to work together to cloak vehicles and warfighters in all three light spectrums (visible, thermal/infrared, and night vision a.k.a. near-infrared), but we haven't confirmed this yet. In any case either type of cloaking/adaptive camouflage technology, by itself, could prove valuable in preventing casualties from future Hezbollah-type ambush attacks that utilize the tactic of firing Anti-Tank Guided Missiles (ATGMs) at vehicles and dismounted infantry. In the confrontation in Lebanon, Hezbollah guerrillas reportedly fired ATGMs not only at vehicles, but also at dismounted infantry . They also reportedly fired multiple ATGMs simultaneously at a single target in certain instances. If the AAE Stealth tech can protect U.S. and ally warfighters from small arms and light weapons (including ATGM) ambushes and IED (Improvised Explosive Device) attacks, it's definitely worth employing it. Time and testing will tell. It looks like DefenseReview will be attending a live demonstration of the AAE IR-Stealth 4.B tech soon. If/when we do, we will of course report back to our readers.
AAE IR-Stealth 4.B and Visibility Stealth 1.B Fact Sheets: Right-Click on the two links immediately below and then click on "Save Target As" (Microsoft Internet Explorer) or "Save Link As" (Mozilla Firefox) to download and view AAE documents on both optical/adaptive camo technologies: IR-Stealth 4.B Thermal/IR/NV Cloaking Tech Visibility Stealth 1.B Optical Camouflage/"Visual Cloaking" Tech Company Contact Info: If you'd like to learn more about the Stealth Technology System (STS), or Stealth III specifically, you can contact Advanced American Enterprise (AAE) by phone at 714-287-0490, by fax at 714-870-6385, or by email at aab@ix.netcom.com.
Previous articles that discuss the AAE Stealth Technology System (STS) cloaking/adaptive camouflage tech (in order from most recent to least recent): AAE Introduces IR-Stealth 5: Thermal/IR Stealth for Jet Aircraft Are Anti-Tank Guided Missiles the New Primary Threat in Urban Warfare/MOUT? Is 'Invisibility Cloak' for Combat Uniforms/BDUs Here Right Now? Tech Update: AAE Stealth III Cloaking Tech for Vehicles, Warfighters, and Helos
Stealth II Thermal/IR Cloaking Tech: Anti-Anti-Aircraft Tech for Helicopters
Cloaking Tech Continued: STS Optical AND Thermal/IR Camouflage for Warfighters
Is Cloaking Technology for U.S. Infantry Warfighters Finally Possible?
Additional articles on thermal/infrared (IR) camouflage technology: Intermat Anti-Thermal/IR Camo Tech for Infantry and Special Operations Forces Zensah Tactical Apparel for Special Operations Forces: Anti-Thermal/IR Camo?
They are covering infrared too.
Update: AAE IR/NV-Stealth and Visibility-Stealth Cloaking Technology
Posted on Friday, December 08 @ 15:33:09 PST by davidc
by David Crane
david at defensereview.com On November 27, 2006, DefenseReview published a piece about Advanced American Enterprise's (AAE) claims that their IR-Stealth 4.B thermal/IR/NV adaptive camouflage could have saved Israeli warfighters' lives during their fight with Hezbollah guerillas in Lebanon several months ago. That article also discussed AAE's Visibility Stealth 1.B optical camouflage , which the company claims would make the wearer virtually invisible in the visible light spectrum (a.k.a. daylight or normal light invisibility). Well, Defense Review just received AAE's latest fact sheet on their IR-Stealth for Personnel 4.C product (titled "IR-Stealth for Personnel 4.C Israel-Hezbollah"), along with photos. The document highlights the fact that the Israeli army was not able to "own the night" in it's battle against Hezbollah guerrillas because it did not have a technology like AAE IR-Stealth to prevent their vehicles (Merkava MBTs, for example) and warfighters from being targeted by Hezbollah guerrillas using "British-made" night vision equipment. AAE claims that...
an IR-Stealth for Personnel 4.C-equiped "head-to-toe" coverall (or military BDU) would reduce thermal/infrared (IR) and night vision detection by more than 85%, thereby shielding the wearer from being seen/targeted by enemy combatants using night vision equipment (a.k.a. night vision sensors a.k.a. night vision viewers) or thermal/IR (infrared) viewers/sensors. The IR-Stealth device for the coverall would weigh approx. 250 grams. The document points out that the coverall would have no negative effect on the warfighters functionality or capability to fight or operate. The IR-Stealth Night vision equipment reportedly enabled Hezbollah guerrillas to target and kill 2 Israeli commandos (out of 4) near Baalback, Lebanon. "IR Stealth for Personnel 4.C Israel-Hezbullah: Both Israel &Hezbullah have night vision equipment, but neither one "owns the night" against the other. The is because. unless having AAE head-to-toe pocket-size about 250 Gram IR stealth cloth-coverall to shield the fighters or commandoes from night viewers detection &from IR designators. AAE claims it has also successfully developed Daytime Visibility-Stealth for Personnel and Vehicles optical camouflage (a.k.a. electro-optical camouflage a.k.a. adaptive camouflage a.k.a. active camouflage a.k.a. chameleonic camouflage a.k.a. cloaking technology a.k.a. "invisibility cloak") that would make whatever object it covers virtually invisible in the visible light spectrum (daylight/normal light). Specifically, visibility reduction would be more than 85% for the cloaked object (moving or stationary). The personnel version (for coverall/BDU) of this device would weigh 250 grams, and would incorporate both an On/Off switch and self-destruct switch. The vehicle-version device (for Main Battle Tanks, Stryker Infantry Fighting Vehicle, M113, HMMWV/Humvee, etc.) would weigh approx. 150 KG.
AAE will perform live field demonstrations of both technologies (IR/NV Stealth and Visibility-Stealth) for interested vetted parties. A proposed Visibility Stealth live demo would consist of person in a bunker rising and shooting blanks at observers from 20+ feet away without being seen/detected by the observers or video equipment (camcorder, for instance). DefenseReview looks forward to attending a demonstration of the technology soon. We're also going to try to obtain some high-resolution video of this type of demo, and publish it. Until we see AAE's cloaking tech for ourselves, we of course must remain skeptical. AAE IR-Stealth for Personnel 4.C Fact Sheet: Right-Click on the two links immediately below and then click on "Save Target As" (Microsoft Internet Explorer) or "Save Link As" (Mozilla Firefox) to download and view AAE documents on both optical/adaptive camo technologies: IR-Stealth for Personnel 4.C Israel-Hezbollah
Company Contact Info: If you'd like to learn more about the Stealth Technology System (STS), or Stealth III specifically, you can contact Advanced American Enterprise (AAE) by phone at 714-287-0490, by fax at 714-870-6385, or by email at aab@ix.netcom.com.
=====================================================
In a message dated 2/17/2007 9:43:08 PM Eastern Standard Time, sarfatti@pacbell.net writes:
Subj: Re: Element 115 Lazar nonsense fools Knapp?
Date:2/17/2007 9:43:08 PM Eastern Standard Time
From:sarfatti@pacbell.net
Look if you want a sense of what real physics is without the math read Peter Woit's "Not Even Wrong."
Nuclear physics is well understood in the sense that there would be no peculiar gravity properties of element 115 even if you could get a stable isotope of it, which you can't.
On Feb 17, 2007, at 6:40 PM, Jack Sarfatti wrote:
On Feb 17, 2007, at 5:15 PM, ANTIGRAY@cs.com wrote:
Hi Jack,
Bob Lazar never said the element 115 the USG had was made by us. He claimed that the USG had 500 pounds of the element they removed from captured or crashed alien craft.
Total hogwash. Completely silly. Irrational cargo cult mumbo jumbo brainwashing for True Believer cultists. This is the worst sort of pseudo-scientific trash around. It's exactly what Ray Hudson was warning about.
Some disinformationalists added to his story by saying aliens gave it to us to queer the whole story:
Bob Lazar stated that the “Sport Model” Flying Disc amplified the “Strong Nuclear Force” of Element 115 (UnUnPentium or UUP) to generate the gravity field for “Space-Time Compression.” Bob also stated that the U.S. Government had 500 pounds of Element 115 in their possession.
This is ridiculous idiocy. Not even wrong. It's word salad. This is NOT physics. It's this sort of nonsense that give the Skeptics ammunition to debunk the whole field!
More supposed information including how the metal was machined for use at: http://www.gravitywarpdrive.com/Element_115.htm
It may all be "BS"
It is.
but there is a lot of "S" already
It's N = NOISE!
floating around now that 70 years ago would have been considered "BS" like time travel.
DO NOT COMPARE THE TWO IN SAME SENTENCE.
I am not advocating as true
It's not even wrong. It's professor Irwin Corey snake oil. It's worthless.
anything that Lazar said, I'm just noting that he didn't say we made the 115. That would be very obvious BS. We are lucky we can refine uranium.
Even if we had it - so what? So you have it for sake of argument. What' hocus pocus do you use then? It's completely mindless anti-science nonsense. No element has any direct relevance to warp drive - total irrational garbage. No physics there. It's pure unadulterated crap for scientific illiterates! Ask any real physicist.
There is no physical evidence for any stable isotope of 115. Even if
In a message dated 2/17/2007 3:17:59 PM Eastern Standard Time, sarfatti@pacbell.net writes:
Subj: Re: Element 115 Lazar nonsense Lazar fools Knapp?
Date:2/17/2007 3:17:59 PM Eastern Standard Time
From:sarfatti@pacbell.net
To:ANTIGRAY@cs.com
Received from Internet:
It's balderdash. No physicist believes it. No one made of pound of this mythical stuff.
On Feb 17, 2007, at 11:44 AM, ANTIGRAY@cs.com wrote:
Hi Jack,
It was an isotope of element 115 which apparently has a much longer half-life and supposedly exhibits the properties claimed.
Art
In a message dated 2/17/2007 12:21:33 PM Eastern Standard Time, sarfatti@pacbell.net writes:
Subj: Element 115 Lazar nonsense Lazar fools Knapp?
Date:2/17/2007 12:21:33 PM Eastern Standard Time
From:sarfatti@pacbell.net
To:Sarfatti_Physics_Seminars@yahoogroups.com
Received from Internet:
I heard an unconfirmed rumor that George Knapp thinks he saw Bob
Lazar bend a light wave with a "pound" of element 115. What George
allegedly saw was a cheap magician's trick. Element 115 decays
quickly and to say one has a "pound" that does not decay of it is
ridiculous. Also it's completely silly to think that any nucleus has
unusual gravity properties on the macro scale. It's irrational cargo
cult junk science. Bob Lazar and Robert M Collins are two disinformation agents from the same pod. Ask any PhD physicist from a real university, not Bearden with his fake degree, who has examined the claims and see
what they say. No need to take my word for it.
>Element 115 is unstable
>"The disc's reactor uses a fuel which does not occur naturally on
>Earth. This fuel is a super-heavy, stable, element with an atomic
>number of 115 and does not appear on our periodic chart." (1)
>Recently a team of American and Russian scientists discovered
>elements 113 and 115. Element 115 has a decay time of tens of
>milliseconds. (3) There is no way to stop an element from decaying.
>In the experiment, element 115 was recorded four times. The
>reactions and decay time were (5):
>287-115Uup --> 283-113Uut + 4-2He (46.6 milliseconds)
>288-115Uup --> 284-113Uut + 4-2He (80.3 milliseconds)
>288-115Uup --> 284-113Uut + 4-2He (18.6 milliseconds)
>288-115Uup --> 284-113Uut + 4-2He (280 milliseconds)
>
>It is true that there is a hypothetical island of stability, in
>which the very massive elements are stable. This is because of a
>hypothetical stable proton/neutron configuration in the core.
>However, this has not been observed in element 115.
>
>The hypothetical island of stability is thought to occur in
>isotopes with around 114 protons and 184 neutrons. Element 115 has
>around 114 protons, it has 115 protons. However, it only has 172
>and 173 neutrons in the recorded decays. Only very few elements
>have 12 or more isotopes and these elements are of a different
>group than element 115. It is therefore not likely element 115 can
>reach the island of stability.
http://www.atsnn.com/story/33267.html
Jack Sarfatti
sarfatti@pacbell.net
"If we knew what it was we were doing, it would not be called research, would it?"
- Albert Einstein
http://www.authorhouse.com/BookStore/ItemDetail.aspx?bookid=23999
http://lifeboat.com/ex/bios.jack.sarfatti
http://qedcorp.com/APS/Dec122006.ppt
http://video.google.com/videoplay?docid=-1310681739984181006&q=Sarfatti+Causation&hl=en
http://www.flickr.com/photos/lub/sets/72157594439814784
No comments:
Post a Comment