ManMade UFO Caught On Google Earth?

by metatron 83 Replies latest jw friends

  • Bobcat
    Bobcat

    The "g-force" that would be felt in a turn is unrelated to gravity. That might seem counter-intuitive, but it is true. In a zero-g enviroment, anything having mass and speed would also be affected by "g-forces" if it attempted a turn. The harder the turn, the harder the forces.

    In outer space gravity is used, like wings, to facilitate a turn. Gravity is what permits orbiting (which is a constant state of turning) without wings.

    It is theorized that "mass" is a product of something called the "higgs field" which is believed to be everywhere. The higgs boson was recently in the news in connection with the LHC. It is the subject of intense research. Theoretically, to avoid "g-forces" one would need to interrupt or counter-act the effects of the "higgs field." In effect, become "mass-less." Again, theoretically speaking, if one understood and could control the "higgs field," one could also perform zero-g turns. Alternatively, something (or someone) made of material/energy that is "sub-higgs" would be "mass-less" as we understand mass. And would thus be unaffected by g-forces (and gravity for that matter), and capable of such abrupt turning.

    Looked at from another angle, a moving body (w/ mass) would be affected by one of the laws of thermodynamics - a body in motion tends to stay in motion. The laws of thermodynamics explain effects. The "higgs field" theory is an attempt to understand what causes those effects.

    ******************

    On another idea expressed (of a pilot being encased in water to avoid g-forces):

    In aviation there is a similar idea that can often be found in books about flight theory. That is, 'What if birds on a plane started flying. Would the plane suddenly become lighter?' The answer is no.

    For a pilot encased in water, the incompressability of water would be bad for the pilot unless he was protected somehow. He wouldn't be incompressable.

    *******************

    On the idea of a diver breathing a fluid to allow for deeper diving:

    I think there are already breathing devices used to do this. The idea is that the (oxygen carrying) fluid in the lungs creates a greater pressure to counter-act the great outside (of the body) pressure so as to prevent lung collapse. I believe there are functional limits though.

    ********************

    On the matter of friction thru a fluid (such as air):

    The Russians developed (and fielded) a torpedo a few years ago that could travel 200+ mph underwater. It does it by emitting air (or a gas of some kind) from the nose that encases the torpedo in a medium that produces less friction than water as it travels. I don't know if the West has copied that yet.

    Russia is currently fielding some defense related items that reflect "outside of the box" thinking. The US, no-doubt, has toyed with the same things - often, long before the Russians, but the US (in recent years at least) has been spending to much in wars. Wars shift resources away from research and wear out already existing equipment. In the last 20 years or so, there has been a gradual shift in leading (military) technology away from the West in some key defense related areas. (I might add, China is also in on this game - often as the 'quick learner' among nations. They aren't too proud to copy (and improve upon) an existing idea.

  • Satanus
    Satanus

    'For a pilot encased in water, the incompressability of water would be bad for the pilot unless he was protected somehow. He wouldn't be incompressable.'

    The pilot is mostly water, too, that water is also uncompressible. As for the lungs, sinuses etc, the scuba type aparatus would have the job of increasing air pressure to equal the surrounding water pressure. For the water buoyant pilot at 9 g's, it's the same as for a scuba diver at whatever water depth equals the pressure on water at 9 g's.

    S

  • Satanus
    Satanus

    Remember that:

    ' The human body is more than 60 percent water. Blood is 92 percent water, the brain and muscles are 75 percent water, and bones are about 22 percent water."

    S

  • elderelite
    elderelite

    That is basically true satanus but consider: a diver at 33 ft is in 1atm, 66ft 2 atm etc ... The diver dosent have a special aparatus persay to compensate, its simple physics. The air in his tank naturally wants to fill the void in his lungs with enough to compensate for the pressure of the water PROVIDED his tank has sufficent air pressure to compensate. The regulator makes that air available at a reasonable pressure to be handled , essentially ambient pressure. 9g (gravity d 9) is the equilivant of a diver going to 297 ft under water. This is doable and is done by tec divers but its requires specific mixtures of gasses. All im saying is, while do able its not easy and it dosent adress the main issue: your taking the water and moving the water. With the person in it. The person is still moving and still subject to loads... It wouldnt negate the pressure of a high speed 90 degree turn (like a light cycle) and may only make it worse. It would be interesting to see solid testing and research but my gut says it dosent add up.

  • perfect1
    perfect1

    huh

  • Satanus
    Satanus

    W the scuba style breathing, the point is to boost the internal body pressure to equal the external liquid pressure, otherwise, the pilot wouldn't be able to breath, and would black out. Yah, i know they need special mixes and all that. Let the scientists worry about that.

    'your taking the water and moving the water. With the person in it. The person is still moving and still subject to loads... It wouldnt negate the pressure of a high speed 90 degree turn"

    Well, i'm not saying the guy wouldn't feel anything. Only that his surrounding bubble of water (gelled, to stop slosh), would theoretically, react equally as fast, or faster than his water laden body would to the g forces of a 90 degree turn. So, in effect it would basically negate the 90 degree turn pressure. Actually, since the body is less than 100% water, i would think that it's reaction to g forces would lag behind the reaction of gelled water to g forces. It might tend to float to the surface a bit, in that bubble, during the turn. Still, this thing seems like it should be workable.

    S

  • Bobcat
    Bobcat

    Satanus:

    The pilot is mostly water, too, that water is also uncompressible.

    I see your point now. I was imagining a pilot floating in water, but not having the water in him.

    I would imagine that it is the not water items in a person's body that would suffer from the effects of compression.

  • elderelite
    elderelite

    So heres my thinking satanus: we agree on the air supply and the pilots air cavities not being compressed. The whole scuba thing we agree on the physics of...

    But the more i think of it the more i am convinced being encapsulated in water wouldnt protect a pilot. It dosent add up. The water that the pilot is on moves the same as air. Both are fluids from a mechanical pov, and water is even used to help test and measure aerodynamics. The water would react exactly as being encased in air and would not protect from g forces being transfered to the pilot i susspect. It would be very interesting to see if anyone has done the real world tests. Surly we are not the first blokes to discuss this.... But until we see some real data i would bet everything i have that water would be irrelevant/netural in the transferance of g forces

  • Satanus
    Satanus

    'The water that the pilot is on moves the same as air. Both are fluids from a mechanical pov, and water is even used to help test and measure aerodynamics.'

    That's where the gel would come in. It wouldn't move much.

    'The water would react exactly as being encased in air and would not protect from g forces being transfered to the pilot i susspect.'

    The protection comes from the gelled water reacting to the g forces the same as the human body does. If the pilot had his butt in the water instead of on a seat, the water would be pushing back w the same g forces as his putt is exerting. That's how buoyancy is mantained, pressure applied to the pilot is the same, from ALL directions. As well, the pressure of his body water is equal to the outside water pressure, as are his lungs, from the pressurized air from the regulator. But again, i'm not saying that it would be perfect and he wouldn't feel anything in a 90 degree turn. I would say that handling it wouldn't be a serious problem.

    S

  • Satanus
    Satanus

    EE

    I agree, we can't be the first to talk about this subject. A google search didn't turn up anything much on it, however....

    S

Share this

Google+
Pinterest
Reddit