Moving mercury and The Lorentz Force

Supposedly according to "ancient Indian texts", "Vimanas" operated by having mercury in an iron container which produced lifting force when heated. This is not supported by experiment ( as far as I know) or it would surely have been rediscovered long ago.  Apply enough heat to mercury in a sealed container and it will explode, making a very big  poisonous mess. Either those "ancient texts" are not telling anything like the whole story or they are just plain lies.

What this video DOES show is what is known scientifically as the Lorentz Force: the mercury in the ring is penetrated by a magnetic field going through it vertically while the electric field goes through it horizontally, these two creating the third force which moves the mercury at right angles to the other two - around the ring.  This will not create any "lift force" but it does show that the Lorentz force is real and does work on a conductive fluid.

Can the Lorentz Force be used to generate thrust? Note that it only operates on a conductive fluid - so you won't be moving air or water with it any time soon unless you change the medium's properties first. Then consider the power used: only two volts but a LOT of current - better have some serious power supplies on hand to do it. Finally, there is no "antigravity" effect or force involved - sorry folks, no secret flying saucer power here - just real science.

In theory, one might ionise air around your "saucer" to make it more conductive but even so the electrical resistance of the air will dramatically increase the amount of power needed to cause movement and the magnetic field is going to need to be huge too: so you will need a tremendous amount of electric power to cause this effect and after all of this, there is no "antigravity" or artificial gravity involved: that generator and the rest of your equipment is still going to weight a lot and won't make a saucer that can do much apart from maybe (if you have enough power/weight ratio) get you off the ground.  No supersonic performance, no instant cornering at 2000 Kph.  Nope.

Score one for science and zero for fiction.

Thanks to Electrical Experiments Roobert33 for the video.

The Land Beyond Part 1

If there is one thing the net is good for, it is weird, strange and “alternative” ideas about life, history and science. I don’t claim to be an expert of any kind and I welcome anyone who reads this (yeah, right, as if anyone reads this!) - if you can offer different views or better information to email me and I will happily look at it and amend my reports if it makes sense to me. 

Estimations of Credibility

These are my own estimations of the credibility of various people in the "Alternative" media - even the liars are at least entertaining. Wether any of them are genuine or not is at times impossible to determine because of the clouds of fake information and outright bulls***t about.

~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~

Zechariah Sitchin: FAKE.

I tried to sit through one video of him talking about his ideas and almost fell asleep - but that does not affect the accuracy or otherwise of what he says.

Nobody has found any translations of the Sumerian tablets that support all of his claims. Anyone prepared to take me up on this and show me where some Sumerian tapped into his clay tablet something that supports Sitchin’s claims? For him to make all these claims but never support them is just plain quackery. Did he ever write his "corrected" guide to Sumerian that proves his story? No. 

To be honest there are elements of the story in actual approved translations of Sumerian: but that does not mean the rest of his story is automatically true.

Putting it simply, according to him we are the slave race created by the "Annanuki" to mine gold for them to somehow protect their planet "Nibiru" which occupies an extreme orbit that takes it out past Pluto at one end of it's orbit and in near Earth in the other. 

The idea of a wandering planet having humanoids living on it is dubious: if “Nibiru” really had an orbit such as he claimed, the surface would be as cold as Pluto for most of it’s orbit, and the problems only get worse from there: no amount of gold in a planet’s atmosphere would keep it safe in an extreme elliptical orbit as described in his work. Gold might be useful for electrical equipment or even for shielding from radiation in a solid layer ( as sometimes used in modern spacecraft), but even then there are too many gaping holes in Sitchin’s stories for me to accept them as true. 

~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~

Part 2 will follow soon.

The Event

From Jonathan Pie who has a number of hilarious and pointed videos on Youtube.
This man should get an award: an honest journalist. Seriously.

Blooms

https://vimeo.com/117674269

These are solid objects, but they are photographed as they spin with careful attention to the frame rate relative to the rpm so that they appear to move . . .
Wonderful work by John Edmark

Moondust

I have seen people online asking "Why didn't they go back to the moon?" and proposing all sorts of way-out theories.  Well, none of those are necesary - the simplest answer is very practical and very deadly: Moondust.  Have a look at this :

No angry aliens, mysterious glass structures or secret bases required.  

Unless you go to some serious effort ( e.g. building an elevated landing pad and sealing your base very, very thoroughly) you are bound to end up with leaking spacesuits, failing equipment and dead astronauts - it is only a matter of time. 
No wonder people on Earth now look to Mars as a much better colonisation option: at least it has atmosphere and weather so there will be erosion and you won't have that sandpaper dust problem (although Mars has it's own problems).   

OUT THERE

I was taught that the galaxy was probably dead. Apart from dear little Earth, everywhere else was dead, no life, no air, no water. We humans are supposedly something special, there is nobody out there, we are “the chosen few”.

The first problem with that viewpoint is that life on Earth is everywhere. We now know that there are lifeforms that can be frozen for centuries that reanimate once conditions become suitable again (tardigrades) – there are lifeforms at the bottom of the deep seas, microbes floating in the upper atmosphere, and maybe living forms we have not even defined living further out from there . . . . . .

but we are told, sadly, there is no life off Earth.

Of course, this also depends on your definition of “life” too – is DNA itself a form of life? It can be frozen at zero degrees, frozen in a meteoroid and sent across the galaxy to finally land on some distant planet where it might be defrosted and reanimate to create new life  (see Prof. Fred Hoyle's Panspermia theory). . . . . but the universe is dead, right?

Our astronomers define intelligent life currently as that which uses radio signals to communicate, even though it is almost useless at interplanetary distances, but since we don’t (officially) know of any other method and can’t hear anything (officially), we are confidently told that there is nobody out there.

Personally I regard that as making as much sense as mythical American Indians looking toward the horizon saying to each other “there is nobody across the sea because we can’t see any smoke signals” - the assumption that radio waves are the only possible method of space communication is just plain stupid. I am sure that if space travel is doable (and I think it is) then they would have something much, much faster than radio waves for communication. This delusion that there is nothing else is pseudoscientific conceit - the real conceit here is that our science is somehow capable of explaining everything adequately, yet a few minutes of careful analysis will show it is deeply flawed: gravity waves, anyone? How about a "unified theory of physics"? Need I say more? 

To extrapolate from our local experience, we would expect that the galaxy would be teeming with life: every planetary body capable would have its own ecosystem, many with intelligent life, most based on some sort of DNA/RNA code because that’s the system we see around us.

Of course, this is all assumption. There may be other systems that don't use DNA but something else.

Would they all be nice, friendly and benevolent beings? Not likely. Not if they are anything like

the lifeforms here on Earth: the lifeforms here consist of predators and prey, parasites and hosts, symbiotes and lots of cooperatives. Of course, that assumes that they are quite similar to us, or at least life here - but they are alien and so they might not even be neatly described by us . . . . . we could need whole new collections of words just to describe alien life.

All of this only applies to this specific level of reality, please note: there may well be other levels of reality that are not “organised” the same way but I don’t know about them. 

~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~

The net has supplied a huge amount of "information" but the trouble is,  most of it is junk: in addition, there may be information that is true but we have been taught not to trust it, and how can we change our views without solid proof? 

I will chart in future posts my own observations and notes about various things I think worth looking at - but with careful reference to facts as I understand them, with quite a bit of skepticism thrown in where deserved.

 For the first episode, I will refer you to Tyler from Secureteam10 for a word about The Moon.

Yes, everything he says is correct as far as I know, and can be verified from other sources. 

Why make up stuff when reality is so out there already?

Vicious Cycle

Have a look at this:
It seems Google won't let me embed a Vimeo - or maybe I'm just not seeing where to do it.
It's worth a look though.