> If you want to believe in little green men, be my guest.
..so you haven't looked at any of the evidence? Just wanted to say hello eh..
Well on the off-chance you ever get bored, or really want answers to these big
questions, maybe take a look in your own time.. I don't see anyone else making
I didn't put any on tick tok.
I didn't 'put' any anywhere.
Again, every day for the last few weeks i've come home from work and
checked YouTube for the last 24 hrs' UAP uploads.
I skip the dross, and categorise the rest. So, 'this one goes under this
header, this one belongs on that list, this
> Obviously no one has heard of them, because you just invented the name.
I first saw that term in reference to the box-shaped object that flew
uncomfortably close between two military jets travelling in the opposite
direction - this particular incident often given as an example of why the
> Every moving thing on the planet does the same thing. However the net effect
> is
> zero..
Reciprocity is obviously broken for effectively-reactionless
accelerations however. Let me try restate the conundrum more clearly:
• gravity's a mutual attraction between masses / inertias as observed
If you check the 'box-orbs' list, i now have at least two that clearly show
tethered pairs:
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ZubVcEHtBlw
https://www.tiktok.com/@draw_my_town/video/7104013293471304965?lang=en
Same flight config too.. as if the lower one were perhaps siphoning some
fluid from the
I've been trying to bite my tongue for fear of lowering the tone, but the
sheer weight of corroborating evidence for this phenomena must by now be
worthy of Vorts' attention.
Some weeks back, YT began showing me suggestions for UAP videos. I'd
watched the David Fravor interviews after the NYT
Turning the subject 45° on an axis for a moment, a large hovering diamond
was filmed by multiple witnesses in Columbia the other day, links added to
the list.
Could it be the same hovering diamond-shaped craft from Nick Pope's
infamous office poster of a similar sighting in Scotland?
-shaped IR silhouettes clustered around Europa's orbit (links in the
list); i could find no official explanation, thus far.. but hopefully
there's a perfectly prosaic one eh..
On Fri, Jul 8, 2022 at 7:08 AM Robin
wrote:
> In reply to Vibrator !'s message of Mon, 4 Jul 2022 11:12:33 +0100:
&
cannot introduce an effective CoM violation into an
otherwise-closed (isolated) system and not expect its net momentum to
change..
On Fri, Jul 8, 2022 at 7:28 AM Robin
wrote:
> In reply to Vibrator !'s message of Sat, 2 Jul 2022 01:41:55 +0100:
> Hi,
> >> Every moving thing on
The Anomalous Magnetization of Iron and Steel, B. Osgood Peirce 1912:
https://www.jstor.org/stable/20022770?seq=2
The effects seem to pertain to high dv/dt impulses however.. not to
mention antique metallurgical samples (the high-Sv kind).
Modern electrical steels OTOH are designed to be
> So progression from 18th century theory of Boscovich to modern physics
Fascinating, i was unaware of Boscovich's contributions, great
first-principle reasoning though..
There's still a good bit of unfinished business with certain 18th-century
breakthroughs that've languished, but don't get me
> I have been doing more reading about the history of stimulated
> emission. Einstein formally introduced a quantum version of the concept in
> 1917.
> Therefore you might think that it is only possible in a quantum
theoretical
> context. However, subsequent mathematical work has shown that a form
> here is an example
> Absorption and Stimulated Emission by a Thin Slab Obeying the Lorentz
> Oscillator Model
It's a quantitative formulation from classical first principles, sans
Schrodinger.. whereas the wave equation approximates the time
evolution of the wavefunction; you could describe a
in add: http://hyperphysics.phy-astr.gsu.edu/hbase/quantum/schr.html
IE. equivalent, not conflicting..
Terry Blanton wrote:
> Intervention is nigh:
> https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Mission_Earth_(novel_series)
>
> On Sat, Aug 27, 2022 at 7:53 PM Robin
> wrote:
>
>> In reply to Vibrator !'s message of Sat, 27 Aug 2022 20:49:36 +0100:
>> Hi,
>> [snip]
>
Lots of amazing discoveries to plough through so i'll try keep it brief,
however a certain minimum of word-space is required just to summarise
current findings:
• there are multiple different alien beings visiting constantly
• there are multiple different humanoids using saucer craft
ie.
Multiple independent captures in HD and 60 Hz, using fixed focal length
phone cams with fixed apertures, showing macroscopic quantum effects at
ranges down to a few centimetres, are all out of focus butterflies? And
this is just one type of mini-UAP - there's others indexed in the list that
don't
Just a heads up for anyone interested - i've succeeded in my long-held
objective of cultivating and harvesting a divergent inertial frame.
The energy density is whatever you want - just make up some high number and
you're good - and power density is basically that number times how many
cycles a
the first devices would be cool - i'm just an
obsessive hobbyist with no idea how to get this where it needs to be..
This warrants serious attention!
On Mon, Dec 4, 2023 at 9:28 AM Jürg Wyttenbach wrote:
> We all wait for the first device with COP >2!
>
>
> J.W:
>
> On 04.
we have a CoE break contingent upon an effective CoM break,
with the exploit confirmed at every stage in that process. The experiment
confirms the theory, literally mechanising the maths of OU. This isn't a
false-positive, it's the real deal..
On Mon, Dec 4, 2023 at 1:36 PM Vibrator ! wrote:
101 - 120 of 120 matches
Mail list logo
