Hybrid Fisson/Fusion Reaction Engine

starship1 · 2004-06-15 14:20:01

Okay let me see if I can get this straight... you cleped your way to a degree from the USAF Air University/CC and count working for the USAF as equal to class credits by your dubious equivilence formula.

What's a Clep? I did not seek a degree from the USAF Air University nor claim one, I graduated from The undergraduate school known as the prestigeous "little red school house" with a honor graduate diploma and 10 semester hours graduate course work credits and making 100% on the math/physics bypass test I was just required to pass to even get into the school. afterwards Attending graduate school, I completed it to the seventh skill level in a work study program in an Electronic warfare lab.

And your master thesis was assigned by Albert Einstein specificly about atomic rockets and it has no bibliography at all, since you took all the information "from memory." And the best tidbits of all:

nope, In the mid 1940's Einstein wrote a book on how to build his 1913 invention of an atomic bomb at the Manahatten project. that was censored by Enrico Fermi working as a low level intelligent agent for the Office Of Strategic Services that was to become later the CIA. Einstein wanted universites to study how it was built and how he invented it. After it was censored, he later signed dictations, telling how that I followed for the assigned master's thesis enabling others to know how it was built and worked.

[ "The comman law doctorates titles are awarded by any common man reading the works" and "I... award myself the commmon law title doctor" ...So, basicly your doctorates are made up and you just put "Dr." on your business card. That isn't exactly how it works... If I wern't in somthing of a good mood, I would be quite annoyed with your presumption given all the trouble i'm going through for my "Dr."

No my common law Doctorates are not made up representing education I do not have as you speculate. It is just a bonifide equivelant to formal doctorates based on acredited equivelant equations for evaluating equivelant education levels.

Mine was no trouple as all schools, tuitions, book, fees and ample living expenses were paid for by American tax dollars. I turned down a full scholarship to the officers school at the Air Force Academy for formal degrees offered as I did not like givng or taking orders or those that do. after I max scored the USAF entrance exams in General, Electronics, Mechanics, Administration subjects instead choosing the USAFAU making straight A's throughout the school.

Sorry about your trouble as you clearly do not know what a master's this or doctorial disseration is/

I gave you the relativity equations used for calculating faster than light.

You have not provided the readers with any evidence your GNC rocket has passed any required proof of principal test as mine has.

You have not provided the readers with any math or experimental proof a a universal light speed limit.

In fact you have not demostrated any math abilites at all, nor any education level beyond that of a snot nose in knee pants, know it all undergraduate who would not know what is true if it bit you on the bu**.

You have demonstrated that when you are unable to provide any math or physics to support your position of a universal light speed limit, you resort to attacking the character of those that disagree with you.

Grow up.

GCNRevenger · 2004-06-15 15:23:07

Looks like I struck a nerve... presumption of superiority, adding achievements (now you aced THREE air force tests all 100%) work extending directly from Einstein, "accredited equivilence," unable to keep his own story straight... Classic.

Frankly, I don't think you have even the qualifications you claim that you didn't say you awarded yourself, which I don't buy this whole "accredited equivilence calculation" stuff, you have no more right to the title of doctor of anything than ol' Rick had.

A dissertation around here in the real world, as the ones I have read for my job, often include pages of citations. Research dissertations without a requisit number are summerly rejected infact at this institution... if someone claimed to be a doctor or master of a subject without them, I could think he was either an idiot or a con artist.

Now you want to talk about my "lack of mathematical proof/skills" ey? Well hey, i've got somthing better... You've done the equations properly, but the problem is, you've been using the wrong ones! You have used Newton's math to make warp drive, and then turned around and used an entirely seperate equation to show that you can cheat the light speed barrier with time dialation a completly different way to justify it! Do I need to go back to your old posts and illustrate?

This torpedos your argument and credibility entirely.

Plus I have used the physical laws, like how a 2500K reactor can't make a 50,000K gas in any quantity in the fasion that you proclaim yours can. I have used simple logic of the laws of conservation of energy, the most common and universal of all tests for physics correctness, that when you have a greater mass and the same amount of energy that you get less performance than a lesser mass.

I have used chemistry, simple things like 50,000K > 3000K, the limits metals can withstand... hows that for math? And of course, simple common sense, that your engine - operating under the same principles of all NTR engines - supposedly has (and I quote, not exaggerating) 1,000,000 times the efficency of other concepts.

And what is your reply? Candles, paper cups, and snow cone wrappers?

GCNRevenger · 2004-06-15 16:00:39

To add... Claiming that you are "right" and know better and all the other members of the physics community are "wrong" and don't understand your "deep knowledge of relativity" is usually a good litmus test of being a crackpot too by the way.

Presuming to be just like "dead Einstein's graduate student" and completing some far-out master thesis "assigned and clearly instructed" question... wow you aren't very good at this are you?

And to top it off, completly ignoring or misunderstanding Euler when he clearly states that NO fission or fusion powerd rocket can achieve such performance, even if they are 100% efficent.

Starship1... Starship 1... anything like Rick's old Earth 1 Solar Cruiser?

Euler · 2004-06-16 01:10:06

The convergent/divergent nozzle was invented by 1900 for chemical rockets and since then its efficiency has increased only 5 or 10 percent over what it began with up to todays space shuttle main engine operating at >99% efficency.

SSMEs only have an energy efficiency of about 75%, and I am pretty sure that that is more than a 5-10% improvement over 1900 chemical rocket engines.

The exhaust velocity in the chamber is limited to below the speed sound (Mach1) at the convergent nozzle as the shock wave blocks the nozzle throat causing the chamber pressure to increase till the nozzle explodes.

No, the exhaust velocity is not limited by the speed of sound.

Heating a heavy liquid many times more massive than your hydrogen gas to many times the maximine temeperature your engine is rated for, mine gets close to one hundred percent efficient at converting mass to energy while your best is .0001 percent efficient. That is if you can make some future discovery keeping the gas plasma in it's engine casing long enough to do much work.
Your GGNC' (NTP) max efficiency is measured at
Project Orion (pulse drive)
=.00025 %
Nuclear electric Propulsion (NEP)(ion drive - Project Vasimar)
.001 % efficiency
Nuclear thermal Propulsion (NTP) (solid core - Project Nerva and gaseuos core such as GCNR)
= .0001 % efficiency
reference http://www.islandone.org/APC/Nuclear/ch … emnuke.gif
http://www.islandone.org/APC/]www.islandone.org/APC/

The main reason that NEP and NTP have energy densities much lower than the ideal for nuclear fission is not because they are inefficient. Instead it is because most of the fuel mass is used only for propellant, and is not used to generate power. Your engine also accelerates a plasma rather than accelerating the reaction products themselves, so this will also apply to you. If your engine works at all, it would still not be able to even approach the .04c exhaust velocity that fission is ideally capable of because you will probably end up accelerating a lot of plasma with a little Uranium.

At any time the rocket man can determine his velocity wrt his ship knowing the distance he has traveled and dividing that distance by his own watch to determine his velocity as v=D/T. He can even use a scale and his watch as V=AT.

This neglects length contraction. At no time does the rocket man believe that he is going faster than the speed of light; instead, he believes that the distance between his starting point and his destination has shrunk. The people on Earth will believe that the distance has stayed the same, but that time on the space ship has slowed down. They will both give the same (sub-c) value for the instantaneous velocity at any time.

For a one way trip to the closest star at a constant 1g wrt earth to
midpoint and decelerating at 1 g the remainder of the journey.
Trip length: 4.25 light years.
Acceleration: 1.0 g.
Time on earth: 5.8780560467144 years.
Time on ship: 3.544401860293398 years.
If Christ was resurrected after death and did ascended to the heavens
on a 1 g rocket ship to visit his father at a 1000 ly distant star he
could return today Obeying Einstein's laws some 27 years older and he
might be ticked off so behave as:
Trip length: 1000.0 light years.
Acceleration: 1.0 g.
Time on earth: 1002.2235407106124 years.
Time on ship: 13.453214568643295 years.
For a one way trip to the edge of the observable universe measuring a
constant 1g wrt earth to midpoint and decelerating at 1 g the
remainder of the journey.
Trip length: 1.7E10 light years.
Acceleration: 1.0 g.
Time on earth: 1.7004884192539843E10 years.
Time on ship: 45.71651222563561 years.
Velocity average with respect to (wrt) earth =
17E10 light years /1.7004884192539843 years =
.99971277707718905089055716347216 C

This much no one disputes.

Velocity average wrt ship = warp speed 371856888.7
Known as faster than light or warp speed due to warping time.

No, this is not FTL travel. The space ship is never traveling faster than light with respect to Earth. At no time will people on the space ship believe that they are traveling faster than light with respect to Earth. Time dilation does occur, and that is why the people on the spacecraft believe that less time has passed. Don't measure speed in terms of warp, people will think that you learned physics by watching Star Trek.

Goolge search for "Rick Dobson"...ISA...finding .......
No relative though brothers as we are both military vets and both former officers. I cannot find him claiming to be a doctor, though examining his bio at
http://www.international-space-agency.n … ...hy.html
I have no problem addressing him respectfully as "Doctor" as he obviously has the the required semester hours and thesis requirement completed by compiling other's prior research and he has meet the disseratation requirement demonstrating outstanding performance in the field by advancing the field with his independent work in the field of Aerospace Technology and he does have the military security clearance so keeps much secret though the clearance is inactive.

Maybe they are the same person after all? Though this disguise is better than his last one. Anyway, USAF people seem to have strange ideas about what counts as a doctorate degree. Rick's bio says that he has only done 10 weeks of academic work since he graduated from high school. Getting a real doctorate requires many years of effort at a much higher level. To give you an idea, I still have at least 5 more years of school before I earn a doctorate degree in math or physics. Just because you can pass the USAF entrance exam does not mean that you know more physics than the people who have spent all of those years studying in college.

Rxke · 2004-06-17 08:55:44

I discarded quantum mechanics in 1963 as mathematical gobbley gook, and not a theory one can actually do anything with thereby following Einstein's instructions to discard it.

BTW:

Goolge search for "Rick Dobson"...ISA...finding .......

Eh? ... Nowhere did I see GCNRevenger mention "Dobson..." You're psychic or what?

This message courtesy of your friends: <--- CIA....

GCNRevenger · 2004-06-17 09:14:53

Ha I wish it were that open & shut... I think Starship1, rather than make a separate post, went back and edited the post previous after I used Dobson's name.

The coincidence on all the other counts though is just too great, same style and everything.

Rxke · 2004-06-17 10:47:52

That could've been the case, if you typed 'Dobson' but you used "ol' Rick", instead...)

Google / Rick ISA / (that is w/o "Dobson") :170,000 hits....

Occam's razor, dear Watson.

I'm not saying S1= Dobson, only that he knows who you were talking about, but pretending not to...

Dumdumdumdum...

(Gotta go, Niels Bohr's descendants on the line, they want me to work on some of his unpublished papers, ever since I added "Doctor in Quantum Physics" to my name, I've become a very busy man...)

GCNRevenger · 2004-06-17 11:32:45

Oh I think that it is ol' Rick, waaay too many coincidences. I wonder, does Josh/Adrian/et al. carry logs of edited posts, and specificly, the timestamps of when they were edited?

-Both are military/ex-military
-Rick was an E/A-6 mechanic. Starship has EW equipment training (which does sound reasonable)
-Rick was big on "revolutionary drive systems," and now Starship comes with a big grandiose superengine warpdrive
-Rick likes pictures (obviously). Starship likes pictures & graphs
-Rick liked big posts with similar sized and placed paragraphs, very similar to Starship.
-Hey, the name, Earth-1 Solar Cruiser = Starship1
-Quickly apeals to "other board members" when pressed about his ideas to "continue discussion" just like Rick
-Sensitive about his trumped up title, Doctor Starship1 = CEO Rick
-Starship1 is quick to defend Rick. Too quick, given he is obviously a nut.
-Similar spelling errors
-Similar goals, to vette a wild idea to the board, seeking support for it
-If he was joking is in question, but Starship mentioned somthing about attending a secret USAF school. Rick and "CIA agents are coming to get meee" same type of thing.
-Signs his posts (well, somtimes) in a similar fasion as Rick, which is pretty unique.

have I missed anything?

Euler · 2004-06-17 18:09:18

There are similarities, but there are also some differences.

-Starship's name is Thomas Hulon Jackson.
-Starship is older than Rick.
-Starship is from Oklahoma rather than Nebraska.
-Starship says "sez" a lot.
-Starship has posted in other forums, some as early as 2000.
-Starship has still not yet called anyone a "CIA Nazi Thug."

GCNRevenger · 2004-06-17 19:51:19

Ehhh i'd say its a tossup either way now... schitzophrenia? It isn't that hard to make a name and a fake little background with a little bit of effort.

starship1 · 2004-06-17 21:22:03

Well hello old friend from Mars forum A.K.A. GNCavenger.
As you are anonymous, you can say anything and often do. Best I can tell you are at the undergraduate level as you have a sophomoric attitude who dose not believe my dozen plus diplomas hanging on my wall are real nor my atomic bomb design. I do not know if it is high school or college level sophmoric but you do act like a teenager.

I can just say were I to alter or forge a government diploma or even misrepresent it, I would be subject to fine and imprisonment so I do not.

Myself, all I really needed to know I learned in kindergarten like how to wipe my nose, be polite, and respect my elders as they must have learned something to get so old. Apparently you were playing hooky when that was taught you.

I did not come her to teach popular science or make new friends.-I came here to discuss atomic rocket science math and
found none able to do the math or physics or even appear interested. There are plenty here who share your character assesment for you to chat with I am sure.

It is indeed a crying shame the man who invented the atomic rocket that can take mankind to the stars appears such an unlikable person with plenty of facial warts and clearly not a man of the fantasy image you would hope and can imagine to provide you with an engine for star travels in some far distant future. I assure you I am a very nice guy once you get to know me though I care less about first impressions.

I just state the fact and evidence as I find them providing credible reference as I go. Like so:

1. The patent office assessment of my engine.
2. It was not Einstein who claimed nothing could exceed light speed
3. Einstein wrote the book on how to make an atomic bomb- I read
4. Einstein did complete his unified gravitational field equations taught as incomplete in ever major university today and he considered it his greatest work.
5. Scientists in the 1950's claimed Einstein made the claim he invented the bomb considered by most the US government built invention of Leo Silizards invention. So Einstein was called a Fake (actually Faiker-eastern mystic but the newspaper mispelled it)
6. Einstein in 1913 told his friend HG Wells how to build the atomic bomb and told no other till Enrico Fermi in 1938.

Bibliography:
(1)As the United States Patent Office has determined in Form PTOL-456 mailed Oct 13 1988 that the subject matter of my application appears to:

1. be “useful in the production or atomic energy” as recited in 42 U.S.C 2182 (Department of Energy (DOE).
2. “have significant utility in the conduct of aeronautical and space activities” as recited in 42 U.S.C 2457 (National Aeronautical and Space Administration(NASA)

Reference 2
http://65.108.189.168/Docs/WAS%20DR%20N … 0RIGHT.pdf
Dr. Paul Karl Hoiland

"When Einstein wrote down his postulates for special relativity he did not
include the statement that you cannot travel faster than light. There is a
misconception that it is possible to derive it as a consequence of the
postulates he did give. Incidentally, it was Henri Poincare who said "Perhaps
we must construct a new mechanics, ... in which the speed of light would
become an impassable limit." That was in an address to the International
Congress of Arts and Science in 1904 before Einstein announced special
relativity in 1905."

There is zero evidence such a mechanics was ever constructed

3-The reference below is not at the Gainsville (Florida) Sun's website.
It has been long since moved to the newspapers library archives. I got the permission of the author to post in physics groups years ago by email if I made sure I said the name of the paper. I have the complete article and Karen’s phone number and email address, if you want it.
I underlined the significant parts if you just want to scroll down.

Quote..
Gainsville Sun's website link at;
http://www.sunone.com/news/artic...-99h … -99h.shtml
Tuesday, December 28, 1999
Einstein fondly recalled by area woman
By KAREN VOYLES
Sun staff writer
Garland had joined the WACs -- Women's Army Corps -- shortly after it was formed in 1943. She got a top secret security clearance and was sent to work with the Atomic Energy Commission. She had been working on the 59th floor of the Empire State Building handling various clerical duties when her supervisor asked for volunteers.
............"They wanted us to do some typing for him (Einstein)," Garland said. "He wanted to put together what he knew about the atomic bomb in book form so he doled out what he wanted typed, and there was no way someone could put it all together after that."

"He would hand it (the day's work) to you and tell you what he wanted and he would tell us not to worry about punctuation or capitalization or anything right then, said."He wanted universities to be able to study how they had made the atom bomb and he said other people would do all that punctuation." Garland recalled that she was one of about 10 typists who volunteered to work on Einstein's project, a task that took a couple of weeks.
end quote

Reference four
foia.fbi.gov/
link Electronic reading room-famous persons-Einstein, Albert; 11 indented
See link part 9b page 17,18 contained in a .pdf file.
Washington Star Dec 27,1949
Also Einstein Presents New Theory of all motion in the universe -Extending Relativity Theory

foia.fbi.gov/einstein/einstein9b.pdf

Einstein presents New Theory of all motion in Universe

"The unified field theory" It was reveled here yesterday on 20 mimeographed pages-a mixture of typewritten words and squiggly mathematical symbols that even scientists hesitated to interpret. It was the English translation of Doctor Einstein's original German........

................

......In earlier theories Dr. Einstein linked up space and time, matter and energy and gravitation and inertia, but one great force was left out-electromagnetism, an invisible force field that can act at a distance.

The new theory now includes electromagnetism and it and gravitation are viewed as two forms of one overall force.

In his general theory of 1915 Dr. Einstein showed by mathematics that gravitation and inertial were equivalent. This theory was proved when astronomers were able to detect the suns gravity bending light from a distant star.

end quote---------------------------

refrence 5.
http://foia.fbi.gov/einstein.htm]http:/ … nstein.htm
link Einstein, Albert; part 1a gives page 88
Rankin Denies Einstein A-Role
By United Press
Reb. Rankin (D) of Mississippi said yesterday that professor Albert Einstein "had nothing to do" with the atomic bomb and "should have been deported for his Communistic activities years ago" He denounced as "bunk" Einstein, proposal for a world government to prevent an atomic war that might wipe out mankind. Scientists declared Einstein, A naturalized citizen of German birth, had "just about everything to do" with making possible the US development of the atomic bomb.........
....................Rankin concludes with "Every since he published the book on relativity, to try to convince the world that light had weight, he has capitalized upon his alleged reputation as a scientist." Rankin went on. "He had no more to do with the development of the atom bomb than if their hadn't been such a thing Rankin. American scientists developed the atomic bomb and old faker Einstein had nothing to do with it."
end article------

6.
Reference
Citation H.G. Wells The World Set Free, 1914
quote ...And these atomic bombs which science burst upon the world that night
were strange even to the men who used them. end quote.....

In 1963,I read the 1955 dictations signed by Einstein, I read what Einstein said about "how they made an atomic bomb at the Manhattan project" as referenced in citation 3 above regarding His meeting with H.G. Wells in 1913 leading to reference 6 above.

Einstein-Explained how his bomb worked and could be built to his friend Wells. Wells then coined the term "atomic bomb". Einstein liked it so much, that he asked if he could use the name to entitle his invention. Wells agreed if he could use the name in his Next novel. Einstein agreed if Wells left out the "how to" part. Wells protested as his readers required technical details in his writing. Einstein understood, So he came up with alternate technical babble details that sounded like science but was fiction similar to the star trek babble of today so the readers could suspend belief long enough to enjoy the work. And so it was done.

Shortly after Wells published, apparently Fermi read the book and contacted Wells for more information learning Einstein invented it.

Fermi then went to Einstein's house insisting to know how to build the atomic bomb.
Einstein then angrily told Fermi to get out. Shouting, no one will ever use my theories build an atomic bomb as Einstein had decided it to keep it a secret.

An eye witness account was reported by Mae Freeman in her biography of Einstein as she interviewed his house keeper at the time. She said it was a pesky reporter Einstein ejected. Einstein corrected the housekeepers report only after it was already published saying it was Enrico Fermi.

Fermi badgered Einstein for years to get him to tell "how" than in 1937 when Fermi asked well can you at least tell me what the casing was made of. Einstein replied "Iron". So in the graph Fermi fabricated below "iron" was to play a predominate role in Fermi's fraud and fabricated evidence. As both Fermi and Silizard speculated for years how it could be built, in 1945 as propaganda officer for the Manhattan project, Fermi released their unworking speculation (neutron chain reaction" on how it could be built to the public stated as fact to keep other countries scientist from building one.

reference 7
my atomic bomb design
http://groups.msn.com/_Secure/0TgAAAKQX … 7795]Genie Bottler

The readers are free to verify any of the above references or ignore them like GNCAvenger habitually does when they do not fit his preconceived notion of what is so.

example: reference 8

http://www.reciprocalsystem.com/cana/]The Case Against The Nuclear Atom

By the way, The Cia did hire thousands of Nazi's giving them new identities after the war as many were allied with our intelligent service (Office of Strategic Services (OSS)" during the war for as long as the just killed communists and jews no one in the state department cared.

The Aamerican soldiers in the field, were dismayed to find their friends crushed under the wheels of Nazi trucks carrying the ford logo of Fords manufactured from 1940 to 1949 and made in germany with a dummy leadership placed in charge by American Tycon Henry Ford to give him plausible deniability while Russion and Jews were used as slave labor.

As they soon became the dirty tricks squad, and I encountered their desendents in 1975 when I was attacked twice on a american miltary base by the Nazi thugs.

One stabbed me in the back (of the leg) but I let him go as he showed courage when eyeball to eyeball, and besides he hit a major artery I had to stop from spurting by applying pressure with both hands learned in my martial arts training.

The second one, I recognized his martrial arts approach so was able to move the lethal target of his attack a few inches so he just missed killing me. He got clean away.

I stayed at work recovering from my wounds for a year till I wrote my supervisor a performance report forcing him to resign. I then left government service keeping my security clearance though it was inactive.

So Rick Dobson does have credibility with me refering to cia nazi thugs plaugeing whistle blowers today as we bear the scars of battles well faught and won. Many world war two veterns will not by a ford even today.

GCNRevenger · 2004-06-17 22:39:43

Ah huh... Well quite frankly, I don't take too kindly to people laying claim to an title they didn't earn when so many (self included) are working their tails off for it... Criminal penalties for lying about your doctorates? No, only if they were accredited or you tried to use them for job/medicine, ones you give yourself don't count... You could be a very nice guy if you didn't try demand respect that you aren't entitled to or ignore intelligent decent from Euler or myself.

Facts? Evidence? Proof? Really...

Patents: The USPTO is not in the business of doing through analyses of patents, only really to see if anyone else has anything similar. They certainly aren't physists, aerospace engineers or mathmaticians. A patent application is meaningless.

Speed limit: If Einstein said 1C was the universal limit or not in the early days of the century, that is the way that it is now, there have been many smart people since Einstein you know. Are we to disreguard what we know now for Newton's incomplete laws? Hardly, the 1C limit for normal behavior of the universe is established and conrete fact, it is proven time and time again, and our physics today is built around it - which I might add has proven to be extraordinarily accurate... and you presume to "know better" than the whole of the modern physics establishment?

And about Einstein himself: Unsubstantiated sensationalistic nonsense... hearsy, rumor,fiction. There is no material at all to back up your outrageous claims about Professor Einstein or The Bomb's history, and is contradictory to the reccorded works of modern historians. Congressmen Rankin is correct, Einstein had very little to do with the design of the American Bomb, only using his notariety to scare us into initiating the Manhatten Project.

And your other "references," please, I can draw you a atomic bomb cartoon right now that would probably work, and you give me a density figure for the fuel and I could draw a scale schematic... Nothing at all special there.

And for a person of your supposed credentials, your final reference, the author is obviously AN IDIOT, just like any educated person who would take him seriously, obviously knowing exactly nothing about chemistry and ranting about the "philosophy of scientific truth."

In fact, I can name you an experiment or two right now to show him wrong: Perform an Atomic Force Microscopy scan of a layer of metal atoms, then perform Rutherfords' particle scattering experiment on the same and compare the radii of the objects detected. The orders-of-magnetude difference would clearly prove the nuclear model.

Questioning the atomic model? More irrelivent pretty graphs and snow cones? Please, see above about "everybody else being wrong and i'm right." ...And hey, there comes out the "Nazi conspiracy to get me!"

Rxke · 2004-06-18 03:00:13

I've read parts of your 'design for an atomic bomb,' and it concludes with:

# The force of the explosion is contained until it bursts the casing producing shrapnel. The size of the shrapnel determines the name of the bomb. If it blows the casing to steel atoms, it is an atomic bomb. If it blows these atoms to their basic hydrogen atoms, it is a hydrogen bomb. Blowing these atoms to their subatomic particles makes a neutron bomb.
# Surrounding the bomb with bands of metals to produce enough strontium 90, cobalt 60 and other poisons waste saturates the atmosphere killing all higher life forms. Its name is Dooms Day.
# The earth's flash point is unknown; however; enough bombs can be detonated in one place to determine it by experiment. Its name is Star Maker.

Do you mean: Fe is turned to H,... just surround the bomb with metals, and it will turn into strontium,cobalt,...How? Wich metals do you mean? Fe?

starship1 · 2004-06-18 21:13:04

I've read parts of your 'design for an atomic bomb,' and it concludes with:
# The force of the explosion is contained until it bursts the casing producing shrapnel. The size of the shrapnel determines the name of the bomb. If it blows the casing to steel atoms, it is an atomic bomb. If it blows these atoms to their basic hydrogen atoms, it is a hydrogen bomb. Blowing these atoms to their subatomic particles makes a neutron bomb.
# Surrounding the bomb with bands of metals to produce enough strontium 90, cobalt 60 and other poisons waste saturates the atmosphere killing all higher life forms. Its name is Dooms Day.
# The earth's flash point is unknown; however; enough bombs can be detonated in one place to determine it by experiment. Its name is Star Maker.
Do you mean: Fe is turned to H,... just surround the bomb with metals, and it will turn into strontium, cobalt,...How? Which metals do you mean? Fe?

Thank you for reading "A Definitive Analysis of Atomic Power"
It was filed with the US Patent office in the disclosure document program as it was the first publication establishing the date of invention of my rocket engine,. though the date of conception of the invention dates at 1967 having been etched in stone in 1967. Reviewing my work for release of national security secrets the government placed no security restrictions on my work as it was designed from public domain bomb secrets.

The original work contained the parts list and functions in order of assembly. When I made the website that is now down, I alphabetized the parts list and hyper linked the table of contents to the different sections. That has led to some confusion so I am redoing what is on the web so some of the illustrations are not viewable until I can free up some of my 3MB storage allowance placing all the illustrations in the document and putting the parts list and functions back in order of assembly for clarity as time permits.

Strontium 90 and Cobalt 60 are two of the most toxic elements on earth surpassing even Plutonium 239 and Uranium 235 for the toxic effects on humans. Nanograms will cause cancer and using them for shrapnel around a atomic bomb they are airborne as microscopic specs circulating through the food chain until all higher life forms are dead from the dirty bomb hence it's name doomsday device.

Examining the atomic bomb test from boosted atom bomb tests in the 1950, hydrogen was found that had to come from many of the casing iron atoms fissoning to hydrogen-hence the nomenclature hydrogen bomb though hydrogen was not on the parts list but formed after the iron container was blown to smithereens.

My uncle used to build them for the Air Force in the 1950's at the Pantex plant outside Amarillo Texas were I lived. Home on leave with a coworker as they discussed in the car their work, I was busy memorizing it in the back seat of the car at age 6, for later understanding as I thought it would be a handy thing to remember so did so as he test fitted each manufactured component for proper fit in the iron casing as the engineering blueprints coming out of Oak Ridge were from fair to poor quality. When a twelve year old boy in 1958 designed an atomic bomb the newspaper reported many of the bombs internal shapes, they matched and added to what I remembered from my uncle so at age 10 I designed my first complete atomic bomb. Three years later I read Einstein's 1955 signed work claiming he invented it and describing how to build it and how it worked so in effect verifying my previous atom bomb design and the atomic bomb Genie Bottler of 1977, though I lost that original signed work, I now give reference from one with a top secret security clearance who helped him write the book in the mid 1940's on how they built his bomb at the Manhattan project.

Those that did not read the book signed by him do not know how it works, beyond the unworking speculation of a neutron chain reaction released to the press in 1945 from the Manhattan project as misinformation by Fermi as was the propaganda officer working for the Office of Strategic Services (OSS) who wanted to mislead the world's scientist on how it worked so no other country could build it.

He failed as he only fooled most people but not all of the time and not all the people all the time, so international controls all on the radioactive metals are required to bottle the atomic genie long enough for me to place them in deep space with my rocket engine in a lower solar orbit outside the hands of future terrorist.

I demonstrated this requirement with "Genie Bottler" as the purpose of my report as secret science dooms mankind to ignorance and domination by those possessing it. so knowledge must be spread to all men and used for all mankind not just used by a power hungry few.

Now radioactive metals are treated like precious metals with that same level of security instead of the required higher international security for toxic metals as the simple bomb machines are easy to build in a small machine shop given radioactive metal of 10% or greater stable to unstable radioactive isotopes as bomb grade metal of 90% ratio is not required.

It has to change or it is only a matter of time before terrorist explode one again on people like was done to Hiroshima and Nagasaki by terrorists in 1945. Lower percentage can even be used as shrapnel around chemical dirty bombs.

No doubt all radioactive metals need to be off the face of the earth and I am just the toxic garbage man with the rocket engine needed to take them out of the range of terrorists to fiancé my trip to the stars planned afterwards.

GCNRevenger · 2004-06-18 21:44:27

Wooooow maaan... acid trip city... singlehandedly saving the world from nuclear terrorists by getting rid of all nuclear material to fund starship's starship program...

Even more Enrico Fermi conspiracy fun... "neutron chain reaction is a lie"... memorizing atom bomb designs overheard at age 6... "lost signed work of Einstein"... its too much!

-------------------------------------------------------------------

For the edification of more lucid folk, the "Hydrogen Bomb" name in reality is referring to Hydrogen isotopes being fused through atomic fusion to release a much larger secondary quantity of energy as a booster in an atomic bomb, the "Thermo" in "Thermonuclear." It has nothing to do with the fission of Iron or Oxygen or other nucleii into Hydrogen atoms. Iron and Oxygen nucleii happen to be extremely stable, and even an atomic bomb couldn't smash them effectivly.

Euler · 2004-06-18 22:40:31

It should also be noted that unlike conventional bombs(where shrapnel causes most of the destruction), nuclear bombs have very light casings that do not contribute significantly to the destructive power of the weapon. Colbat-60 and Strontium-90 are fission fragments produced by decaying Uranium or Plutonium, and do not come from bands of metal surrounding the bomb.

Rxke · 2004-06-18 23:29:27

That's why i asked... Metal casings massively turned into other stuff by merely expoding a nuke sounds a bit "alchemic" to me...

Starship1, your claims sound more improbable by the day, IMHO.

I have several questions, but I'm afraid of the answers...

starship1 · 2004-06-19 01:18:48

Alcamaic?

That reminds me. I was amazed reading the alcamist Roger Bacon's french thesis on measuring the velocity of light more than 400 years ago, to find the words fission and fusion used in the text.

Readings further, I found he coined the words in his transmutaion of base metals into gold experiments funded by the king and the terms were used to describe combining atoms of lighter than gold metal at the atomic level to produce atoms of gold by fusion and fission splitting atoms of metals heavier than gold to crate gold atoms.

I then learned he thought it was not cost effective as it needed more energy as work to do it than the gold produced was worth. as demostrated in some nuclear reactors today producing trace amounts of gold with high enrgy inputs. But he did not tell the king that as the king thought a good scientist could transmute base metal into gold.

Instead he discovered a way to transmute his empty pocket air into the kings gold, by writting volumes of grant proposals to the king on how it was possible with just a little more funding and time making a very comfortable living on the kings gold while coding the lab books describing his more worthwhile experiments that he actually spent the money while defrauding the king out of his gold as money for research was readily available and funding for development was not just as is found today. cocealing the fraud in a second set of coded books.

Fermi knew the above so when Einstein told him how to build the atomic bomb, he drafted the letter Einstien signed to the president requesting to fund for inventing an atomic bomb but negleting to tell the prsident it was alrady invented by Einstein in order to get the available research funds. The fraud worked and Fermi got the peresidents mioney.

Einstein was told to keep quite or go to jail for veing a german posseing bomb technolgy so Fermi stole his invention giving invention credit to Leo Silizard who helped draft the letter and one Einstien had coautored patents with and Einstein knew leo as one who would steal anything not nailed down. At that time Einstein, did not want the invention credit as he Alfred Nobel as one who was spit on in public and called the merchant of death for just inventing TNT. till his death in 1955 Einstein regretted signing that letter so told the above story of inventing the atomic bomb in 1913 and signing his name and I read it in 1963.

Any way belive it or not as all the above is true to the best of my knowledge which is 8000 plus class rommon hours of higher education anywhich way you want to look at it so it is easy to see why I just might know a little something your professors did not know simply cause I spent more time in school than most all of them.

As much as I enjoy chatting with skeptics and knocking the legs they stand on out from under them. I leave sunday from my texas year and a half vaction to go to my house in oklahoama and it maybe weeks or months before I get back on line and the time to waste with this group.

I used the year and half to make a propasal to NASA under project prometheus to make a atomic rocket engine, but found on submiisons they actullay do not have any money near the 111 million requested for the three years to produce and develop my engine as they are not actully working on proposing atomic propulsion sytems but proposing small electric generators for chemical propulsion systems.

Perhaps I should learn from Bacon and Fermi and pretend I did not already invent my engine just to get the research funds available promis to invent one someday.:D but even I admit it is a bit tacky and just perpetuate the fraud so will stick with the truth.

meanwhile be sure and have the last say if you are not trained to notice the ring of truth.

New Mars Forums

Announcement

#26 2004-06-15 14:20:01

Re: Hybrid Fisson/Fusion Reaction Engine

#27 2004-06-15 15:23:07

Re: Hybrid Fisson/Fusion Reaction Engine

#28 2004-06-15 16:00:39

Re: Hybrid Fisson/Fusion Reaction Engine

#29 2004-06-16 01:10:06

Re: Hybrid Fisson/Fusion Reaction Engine

#30 2004-06-17 08:55:44

Re: Hybrid Fisson/Fusion Reaction Engine

#31 2004-06-17 09:14:53

Re: Hybrid Fisson/Fusion Reaction Engine

#32 2004-06-17 10:47:52

Re: Hybrid Fisson/Fusion Reaction Engine

#33 2004-06-17 11:32:45

Re: Hybrid Fisson/Fusion Reaction Engine

#34 2004-06-17 18:09:18

Re: Hybrid Fisson/Fusion Reaction Engine

#35 2004-06-17 19:51:19

Re: Hybrid Fisson/Fusion Reaction Engine

#36 2004-06-17 21:22:03

Re: Hybrid Fisson/Fusion Reaction Engine

#37 2004-06-17 22:39:43

Re: Hybrid Fisson/Fusion Reaction Engine

#38 2004-06-18 03:00:13

Re: Hybrid Fisson/Fusion Reaction Engine

#39 2004-06-18 21:13:04

Re: Hybrid Fisson/Fusion Reaction Engine

#40 2004-06-18 21:44:27

Re: Hybrid Fisson/Fusion Reaction Engine

#41 2004-06-18 22:40:31

Re: Hybrid Fisson/Fusion Reaction Engine

#42 2004-06-18 23:29:27

Re: Hybrid Fisson/Fusion Reaction Engine

#43 2004-06-19 01:18:48

Re: Hybrid Fisson/Fusion Reaction Engine

Board footer