At 08:16 am 31/03/2006 +1000, you wrote: >In reply to [EMAIL PROTECTED]'s message of Thu, 30 Mar >2006 12:46:47 -0500: >Hi, >[snip] >>More like grey: >> >>http://tinyurl.com/oj2fo >[snip] >A quote from http://www.prweb.com/releases/2004/8/prweb147720.htm > >"The beam, which Podkletnov claims is produced by a high-voltage >discharge onto a 4-inch diameter superconductor, is said to have a >range in excess of 5 kilometers, and capable of penetrating >materials without a loss in energy. It is said to be powerful >enough to shatter brick, punch holes through concrete, and deforms >metal targets "like hitting it with a sledgehammer" > >This sort of thing really makes me wonder sometimes. How can a >beam that is "capable of penetrating materials without a loss in >energy" shatter target material? How does it decide whether to go >through or destroy? > >Regards, > >Robin van Spaandonk
I must confess that puzzled me too, Robin. Maybe Podkletnov was like my mother. During the London Blitz she would hear a story whilst out shopping that a bomb in my local borough of Wembley had killed 2 people - by the time she got home the number had risen to 20. Frank Grimer On the other hand I suppose the beam could have a very long focal length and only destroy at the focal point. It would certainly be a useful weapon for bumping off people you didn't like without any collateral damage. 8-)
