|
|
Thread Tools | Display Modes |
#71
|
|||
|
|||
.. What if Tom Hanks filmed the...Future...of NASA instead ofit's past?
On Jun 25, 1:54 pm, Williamknowsbest wrote:
Listen you flaming asshole, if you can erect a $28 billion coal to liquids facility in LESS than 10 years - I'll pay you a considerable sum to do it. I don't think ANY alternative energy program has had this much spent on it. Furthermore, I think if you took ALL the alternative energy programs TOGETHER they wouldn't add up to $28 billion - and I have EIGHT programs like this underway worldwide. So, please forgive me for saying **** YOU and the horse you rode in on you ignorant savage. On Jun 25, 2:12 pm, BradGuth wrote: And so little if anything of "Williamknowsbest" has yet to directly benefit another living or soon to be prematurely dead soul. Even our Zionist/Nazi DARPA (aka New World Order) has been doing a better job than Williamknowsbest. - Brad Guth Brad_Guth Brad.Guth BradGuth We do need to create a vast surplus of green and renewable energy that’ll get the most out of our remaining fossil and biofuel/synfuel spendy alternatives, while creating the least amount of CO2 and zero NOx per KW.hr in the process. Hydrogen and atmosphere alone can not entirely accomplish this without creating NOx, but then green/ renewable hydrogen peroxide along with having to consume as little as 15% fossil or biofuel/synfuel is looking rather good, as well h2o2/ aluminum usage as fuel/energy cells can fill many other portable energy demanding applications, such as personal transportation and light recreational demands. We also need a viable national energy grid to match our 15% portion of the future global 100 TW worth of government, commercial and private electrical energy demands. For safety and energy efficiency on behalf of private homes, offices and commercial operations need to become as much electrified as possible, as well as taken from our new and improved national (meaning interstate/federal) power grids, with remote pocket communities using thorium and a host of perfectly viable forms of renewable alternatives (if need be including those vast farms of Mook PVs). On Jun 25, 1:54 pm, Williamknowsbest wrote: Listen you flaming asshole, if you can erect a $28 billion coal to liquids facility in LESS than 10 years - I'll pay you a considerable sum to do it. At best (Yiddish balls to the wall), we have 100 years of converting our best quality coal and another 100 years of medium to poor quality coal to convert. Then what final century of fossil dregs are we talking about? (lowest grade coal and shale conversions at 10 tonnes per tonne of liquid fuel?) Converting oily sands, oily muck and oily rock/shale into usable road asphalt, aviation, marine shipping, commercial truck, bus and private transportation and recreational usage of various liquid fuels is technically doable, as long as continued CO2 pollution (including NOx and multiple other toxins plus radiation) at $10+/gallon and $1/kwhr isn't a problem. Actually, by the end of 100 years from now and with China plus India taking up the global lions share, we'll be thanking our lucky stars if such liquid fuel is only at $10/gallon, because more than likely it'll be headed towards the WWIII $100/gallon mark, and otherwise our electrical energy looking good at $10/kwhr, mostly because wind, tidal, solar and geothermal as well as thorium and 3He/ fusion derived energy doesn't make weapons grade fuel for accommodating your WWIII, WWIV and WWV. Running the same kind of equipment at the current levels of performance, having the same amounts of cargo and passenger hauling capability via your green hydrogen and fuel cells is a spendy joke, unless utilized as direct combustion along with atmosphere that'll involve our having to capture and/or convert all of that pesky NOx, not to mention dealing with the required volumetric factors of those bulky hydrogen fuel tanks in order to match the 350+ mile automotive cruising range would tend to make any such combination not the least bit comparable, especially if we’re stuck with having the conventional 4-cycle ICE involved with turning them wheels at perhaps 15% thermal dynamic efficiency. Your less than vapor kind of green hydrogen that'll seemingly never come to past unless your offshore bank accounts are getting stuffed with our hard earned public loot is very ENRON/ExxonMobil of yourself. DARPA is obviously quite proud of their brown-nosed minions and fellow rusemasters like yourself, but then so would their Hitler have been impressed. Williamknowsbest: I don't think ANY alternative energy program has had this much spent on it. Furthermore, I think if you took ALL the alternative energy programs TOGETHER they wouldn't add up to $28 billion - and I have EIGHT programs like this underway worldwide. So, please forgive me for saying **** YOU and the horse you rode in on you ignorant savage. At least I'm not the one telling lies, excluding evidence and otherwise pretending that I'm somebody that’s worth some extra “$28 billion(x8)” special that I'm not. I'm also not intellectually skewed or otherwise manic bipolar enough to have worked for the likes of your Hitler or those of your New World Order of trickle-up economy that specifically favors and otherwise directly benefits the uppermost 0.1% (or less). BTW, coal gasification is not a Williamknowsbest (aka William Mook) invention, nor is PV derived energy. Obviously those Zionist/Nazi folks have always been darn good at converting coal into synfuel, because it's what gave their puppet Hitler exactly what was needed at the time, including their makings of hydrogen peroxide(h2o2) that's so downright nifty for so many things besides enhanced combustion. Perhaps a greener and cleaner world of 25% renewable hydrogen, 50% renewable hydrogen peroxide, 20% nuclear/fusion and 5% fossil/synfuel is affordably sustainable without the use of those faith-based perpetrated wars or other lethal and collateral damaging alternatives. Of course, in the Williamknowsbest pretend-atheist mindset that is forever hell bent upon forgetting about your sorted past, especially the past of those upper most 0.1% that you continually brown-nose, whereas in your skewed mindset is where the New World Order as the ultimate goal of Mook always justifies the means. In other words, the New World Order of lord Mook is almost complete as long as the public in general can be forever snookered and dumbfounded past the point of no return. - Brad Guth Brad_Guth Brad.Guth BradGuth |
#72
|
|||
|
|||
.. What if Tom Hanks filmed the...Future...of NASA instead ofit's past?
On Jun 25, 5:07 pm, "jonathan" wrote:
"Williamknowsbest" wrote in message ... You've explained why helicopters today aren't being widely used and elided any reference to potential growth... which if investments were made in this technology, would result in improvements in the features you speak about. The future by William was remarkable! And the standard response just as sound. Which is typically along the lines, in some manner or another...."How ya' gonna get enough energy to do...that"? Please never forget what fuels such dreams of future possibilities. The same thing that inspired all those Trekkian dreams of properity and justice......an unlimited and cheap supply of clean energy.....those magical di-lithium crystals. And voila almost anything is possible. Without it, dreams go up in smoke. Instead of detailing an ideal future, as William did so well, by starting from the present and steadily expanding into the future. I would do the opposite, because predicting the future of a real world system is the hardest thing to do of all. I would begin by clearly defining the...abstract...properties an ideal future should display. Just as an ideal society would be an unstable equilibrium between the ....law...and...freedom. Which in abstract are the forces for ....order....and.....chaos. An ideal future should have the very same relationship but within the ultimate paradigm involving the human condition. A future where our ...resources and ...imagination are in balance. But not only in equilibrium with each other, but also at simultaneous maximums. The other necessary condition for self organization. Resouces and Imagination A future where the human race is limited only by it's abilities, it's collective wisdom and imagination, not by resources. Imagination and intellect thrives best under a free society, so it's world-wide democracy, and unlimited, clean and cheap energy that needs to become a reality. For the long term future, does anyone doubt that solar power in some form will replace 'burning the earth' as a source of that ideal energy? Why not make the inevitable a reality as soon as possible? Democracy and Space Solar Power. Freedom for our body, mind and soul. I wouldn't dare go into much more detail. The butterfly effect and all means just a whiff of inaccuracy and the future extrapolations go up in smoke. Jonathan "I Bet with every Wind that blew, till Nature in chagrin Employed a Fact to visit me and scuttle my Balloon!" s It's not that our DARPA Mook isn't capable of fully utilizing the expertise and public funded resources of others, so much as it has to be 100% Mook, or else. If lord Mook were God, energy would become safe, clean and free for all to use. Of course we'd all have to become Einsteins' in order to qualify for using such Mook energy. Since Mook is not God, it seems his offshore bank accounts must first be stuffed with our hard earned loot, and then all the good things accredited to William Mook, along with all the bad things accredited to Muslims or whatever faith-based groups other than Zionist/Jewish. - Brad Guth Brad_Guth Brad.Guth BradGuth |
#73
|
|||
|
|||
.. What if Tom Hanks filmed the...Future...of NASA instead ofit's past?
On Jun 22, 10:36*am, Dave Michelson wrote:
Pat Flannery wrote: C3 wrote: The first step would be to colonize Mars. *McCain has talked about sending a shuttle to Mars. Then McCain knows even less about the Shuttle than he does about computers. Shame on you Pat! *Giving credence to such a distortion. Hint: In order to maintain a strong U.S. presence in space, McCain supports: (1) extension of the shuttle program past 2010, (2) a manned mission to Mars and (3) more funding to support the above. -- Dave Michelson An extension of the shuttle program? Yikes those Dinos are getting old. Then McCain should pilot ever mission. |
#74
|
|||
|
|||
.. What if Tom Hanks filmed the...Future...of NASA instead ofit's past?
On Jun 26, 5:08*pm, American wrote:
On Jun 26, 10:08*am, " wrote: On Jun 26, 8:46*am, American wrote: On Jun 25, 6:27*pm, " wrote: On Jun 25, 11:52*am, Williamknowsbest wrote: You've explained why helicopters today aren't being widely used and elided any reference to potential growth... which if investments were made in this technology, would result in improvements in the features you speak about. * *People with ALL heavier-than-air technology, including cars have greatly overestimated * *their abiliity with future technology. * *Which is mostly why the brighter people turned their wasted garages * *in computer and laser factories. * *And turned their houses into PV Cell Solariums. * *And turned their idiot malls into Hologram outlets, * *And turned their bridge companies into titaniium companies. * *And tunred their idiot electric companies into microwave companies. * *And turned their idiot schools into philosophy satellites. * *And turned their idiot army into cell phone repairmen. * *And turned their idiot coal companies into robot dodgers. . Just like old cars in junkyards, highway infrastructures should be- come outdated as skycars become popular. However, it would seem that the current highway infrastructure completely opposes gutting the system of pork-barreled costs to mass transit, as well as gut- ting the ensuing environmentalist purge on whatever free market system of capitalism that might get in the way. Paul Moller - not Barack Obama, or John McCain, needs to be elected President. This will have the effect like the multinational companies had with Bush - unless the political infighting between the Moller protective associates conflicted with the Blackwater associates, then all hell would break loose. The price of gasoline would not be controlled enough with Moller's innovation into the transportational infrastructure, because just about every borough, town, and city, foreign and national, would have to eventually for- feit a large portion of their tax infrastructure to non-pork projects (an impossibility with entitlement bureaucracies like ours). Therefore, due to "unforseen circumstances", the price of gasoline would immediately rise to over $10.00/gallon, prompting most people to stay at home instead of driving to work. * *Many people are finding that an exellent oppurtunity regardless of fuel prices. * *Since the governemnt jerks not only have gasoline prices rigged, * *they have insurance premiums, and home heating prices rigged also. * *Which is why internet, PV Cells,digitaltheatre, GPS, Cruise Missiles, * *Adaptive A.I. *blue lasers, non-idiot robotics, and Stem Cells catch on so * *quickly with morons. *The price of gasoline would not have to go up right away, but because of the threat that President Moller faced from the transnationalists, instead of advancing the civilization, continued to retard development against clean and cheap energy, so that only the rich are hovering to work in the M-200X, while the poor of us are left to fend for ourselves. No, the Day of the Golden Calf is already upon us. American- Hide quoted text - - Show quoted text -- Hide quoted text - - Show quoted text -- Hide quoted text - - Show quoted text - I must apologise about the en.wikipedia.org'd version of the Skycar market. Servers like 'en.wikipedia.org' only offer the populist inter- pretation - the bureaucratic, SEC one. Hear the truth from the inven- tor's own mouth, and you'll see today what he's still up against: *In response to the abovementioned SEC complaint, Dr. Moller *explains the case to The Wall Street Transcript: *TWST: Looking back over the years as you’ve worked on these *things, has there been any controversy? I read that the SEC *issued a complaint. *Dr. Moller: That’s correct. *TWST: Could you explain that? *Dr. Moller: Yes. Any non-public company (which we were early on) *that raises money from what we would call angel investors or *any investors has to raise it under certain SEC regulations that *require you to determine that you are dealing with sophisticated *investors. A lot of that is true, but it is still why the truly sophisticated inventors microcomputers, post neanderthal robots and lasers, adaptive AI(++ +), GPS, non Wal-Mart Holograms, USB, and Cruise missiles for wanks like IBM and the SEC. The problem is that sometimes people who become *investors in your company will exaggerate their own net worth or *sophistication, and it’s really up to us to determine whether *that’s valid or not. We did have some investors come on board that *the SEC argued were not sophisticated. Normally this kind of issue *is resolved by providing a rescission agreement so that the in- *vestor can get his money back plus 12% interest. We have used this *before successfully when any issue came up. The individual we were *dealing with within the SEC resisted this approach. We believe he *did so knowing that the investors in question did not want their *money back and this would have voided his case. Any small com- *pany that has faced off against the SEC will tell you that you do *not fight this powerful government agency. You accept a fine to *settle. You don’t accept guilt. You’re not claimed to be guilty, *but a fine is a way of getting rid of something that you could *never win if you really try to defend yourself. If anybody has ex- *perienced a fight with the IRS or the SEC, they learn quickly *enough that, as a small company, you don’t have the government *resources to legally fight it. The few who try always lose. *In the SEC's repost above, they state that "The company was sup- *posedly engaged in the development of a revolutionary personal *aircraft, dubbed "the Skycar," that would allow a person to travel *at speeds over 400 miles-per-hour above roadways for about the *same price as a luxury automobile..." The Skycar exists and has *flown on many occasions. *The SEC is not the FAA, so they're only looking at the sale of *stocks by Moller, not the validity of the Skycar. *The earlier versions of the Skycar, the M200x, flew successfully *for over 200+ flights, both in VTOL mode and in level flight. *Only a few other aircraft have accomplished that: the Harrier AV-8, *the Osprey, the BA609, and the F-35B Joint Strike Fighter (JSF). *That puts Moller in some very heady company. As I had made the statement earlier, Moller is still holding out to those who wish to reproduce the invention material, as per a power- ful arm of the government - the SEC - so as to engage in a war of LICENSE in order to update whatever the FAA might or might not have to mandate, in terms of its having to "flight certify" along with the military and heavy commercial types of aircraft, which is total bunk... These vehicles, IMO require no FAA certification. (Neither do rear- propeller semi-powered delta-wing gliders, for that matter, in most states). Mid air collisions are much less probable when there are several altitude levels for traffic to move through. We need neither licenses or certifications for these machines... The whole thing is a scam by the Fed to suck more money away from the people that know of a better, less mass-controlled way of transportation, but Moller is being made to look like a swindler, when he's just a smart inventor with a better idea... American 'Then the LORD said to Moses, "Go down, because your people, whom *you brought up out of Egypt, have become corrupt. *They have been *quick to turn away from what I commanded them and have made them- *selves an idol cast in the shape of a calf. They have bowed down *to it and sacrificed to it and have said, 'These are your gods, *O Israel, who brought you up out of Egypt.' *Exodus 32:7,8 Reference: http://daviswiki.org/Moller_Internat...0677bad158...- Hide quoted text - - Show quoted text - |
#75
|
|||
|
|||
.. What if Tom Hanks filmed the...Future...of NASA instead ofit's past?
On Jun 25, 4:18*pm, Williamknowsbest wrote:
Ducted fans can be quieter and more efficient than free rotors of the same diameter operating at the same rotor speeds http://www.esotec.co.nz/hb/HTML/DuctMyths.html Saying that winged vehicles are necessarily less efficient than wheeled vehicles and so they cannot ever compete is like saying that rubber tires on asphalt is necessarily less efficient than steel wheels on steel rails so automobiles will never compete. *Obviously long distance trucking and automobiles (along with airlines) kicked train ass back in the 1950s and 60s. * Why? * Because efficiencies are only one decision point in a large decision matrix. * Knowing how these decisions are made, andengineeringsolutions not possible with other technology, assures economic success. For example, one thing about trains versus automobiles, automobiles can travel pretty much anywhere a horse can - trains are limited to tracks and stations. Well, that is so untrue,it's why SUVs, and digital conputers, and lasers, and fiber optics, and PV cells, ansd robots, and USB were invented. Since the only place cars can go, is to the same place that Exxon can go. Which is to the idiot Department of Transportation. * *This gave trucks and automobiles huge logistical advantages over trains and streetcars - which was exploited by auto manufacturers to efficiently compete with trains. * *Airlines are far more costly and less elegant than train travel - with many of the logistical problems of train stations - yet they competed effectively due to their greater speed. *Ditto for ocean travel - despite the inefficiencies of air travel when compared to ocean going vessels. Point to point travel in a quiet, safe, reliable, fully automated VTOL aircraft summoned by a GPS enabled telephone - that arrives in less time than it takes for a long red light to change green - and delivers up to 4 passengers with luggage to any point within a 600 mile radius of their current location in less than 2 hours - at a cost of less than $60 per passenger - would kick ass of airlines and automobiles - and establish themselves as a permanent feature in the transportation matrix - once all the elements are in place. Moller has been ineffective because he hasn't had the $3 billion needed to make such a system work *and likely doesn't think about his market and so forth - merely the technical issues facing him at any time. Fact is, properly developed, 400,000 moller sky cars per year could be sold world wide today - once certain features were in place. * 90% of these would be sold to private owners - among the 9.5 million millionaires in the world today. * 10% of these would be sold to 'network' owners - who would use half the air miles available on the airframe personally, and pay a paltry $520 per month - and the other half of these would be sold on a charter basis for $5 pick up fee and $0.75 per mile distance charge. Over a 12 year period 4.4 milion vehicles would be in service, and the airline industry would be about 1/3 its current size - and perhaps may not even exist in its current form. Jumbo jets may go the way of the dirigible. Despite supposed inefficiencies of wings versus wheels. |
#76
|
|||
|
|||
.. What if Tom Hanks filmed the...Future...of NASA instead ofit's past?
On Jun 25, 4:02*pm, Williamknowsbest wrote:
According to the Merrill Lynch 2007 World Wealth Report there are 9.5 million millionaires in the world and they control a total of $38.5 trillion - nearly all of which is liquid and available for investment and consumption. If 5% of this money was direct toward the purchase of VTOL capable capable aircraft, that would amount to $2 trillion - and at $500,000 per copy, that would be 4 million vehicles. * Spent over a 10 year period, that would be a production rate of 400,000 per year. * With an airframe lifetime of 10 years - this sizes your factory. Well, that would be an interesting economic investment if millionaires knew anything about aircraft other than Donald Trump. But, since the idiots don't, that's why the smart money just still makes, Cruise Missiles, Drones, Robots, A.I.(+++++), Lasers, non-idiot Holograms, and DVD+RW Demand relative to production, sizes your price. This is given to engineers to achieve price points and volume within this 'production box' = there's also the recurring cost of maintaining and operating the vehicles. Fuel and Oil Scheduled Maintenance Labour Unscheduled Maintenance Labour Engine Overhaul Airframe Overhaul Airframe Lifed Items http://www.helinews.com/turbinecomparison.shtml Say, $150 per hour - and you fly 300 mph - that's $0.50 per mile - 30,000 miles per year - that's $15,000 - which is nothing for these folks. * Costs could be double that - and it would still be nothing. 4 million aircraft x $15,000 per year = $60 billion/yr 400,000 aircraft per year x $500,000 = $200 billion/yr With highly automated flight controls, which Moller is talking about it makes more sense to arrange fractional aircraft ownership, and pay just the recurring cost - that way So, an 'air taxi' that serviced say New York, would fly someone point to point say 10 miles - for $10 - and make a decent profit. * This could easily transition to a cross country flight - of say 300 miles - for $230 - without all the hassle at the airport and such. So a GPS enabled cell phone would call an air taxi to dispatch an automatically guided Moller skycar to your point of call - in minutes picking you up. * There'd be a $5 pick up fee - non-refundable - and $0.75 per mile distance fee - all billed when you entered your destination code during your call. * In fact, GPS derived 'waypoints' could be stored on your phone - so that you would just select 'home' or 'golf' or 'Laguna Fred' or 'Matt' as you desire. How many aircars would be needed for this? Well, here are the sales of the top 11 airlines in the world; AirFrance *KLM * $31.0 billion Lufthansa * * * * * *$26.5 billion TUI * * * * * * * * * * $24.3 billion AMR Corporation $22.6 bilion JAL * * * * * * * * * *$18.1 billion UAL * * * * * * * * * $18.0 billion Delta * * * * * * * * *$17,3 billion British Airways * *$17.0 billion Virgin Group * * * *$08.0 billion Cathay Pacific * * $07.7 billion * TOTAL * * * * * * $190.5 billion At $0.75 per mile this represents a potential market for 445 billion miles - with up to 4 passengers - 1,780 billion seat miles - at 50% occupancy 890 billion passenger miles. Ride sharing options on the software would be welcome ways to increase occupancy and reduce passenger costs. *That $230 cost could be reduced to $62 per passenger if shared by four -each paying a 'pickup' charge. Say a Moller based air taxi service penetrates 20% of this market - that's 90 billion miles per year. * Limiting service to 4,383 flight hours per year - and an average speed - of 300 mph - that's 1,314,900 miles per vehicle. *That's 68,446 vehicles. - say 80,000 vehicles - 20% of one years production One year's production i.e 200,000 vehicles - operated tihs way - could displace the airlines for short haul travel - while 80% of production would fill 50% of millionaire buyers over a 10 year period - at these prices. Of course as prices drop, private ownership of vehicles would increase and taxi or fractional ownership would decrease. A 1/32nd share in a Moller Skycar at $500,000 is $15,625 - that's $150 per month over a 10 year period. * With 4,000 flight hours divided by 32 is 125 hours per year - at $150 per hour that's $1,563 per month - $1,713 per month - which is less than the cost of some sports cars. They could trade hours, at $0.75 -or sell to qualified outsiders for the same price, with a $5 processing fee per trip - If they flew half their miles and sold the other half at $0.75 - their costs would be slashed to $541 per month - which would motivate signing up for the deal - since that would allow them to fly 15,000 miles at about the same cost as a new automobile. 2.56 million network owners would support 80,000 aircraft at 1/32 ownership interest in a program like this. So, as we range from the very wealthiest of folks to the less well off folks who have a million or less, but a decent income and credit rating, a program can be imagined for them. *Even at today's fuel prices. http://www.helinews.com/turbinecomparison.shtml Here's a plane that has VTOL capabilities and a 600 mile range and travels at 600 mph. * Of course the cost is 100x that of Moller's vehicle. * Yet it gives us a window of improvement we might expect for advanced systems in the future. With aerial refueling, or some sort of beamed power - to increase range - if done at a reasonable cost - today's airline/airport system would go the way of train stations - as small automated VTOL aircraft carried people point to point. |
Thread Tools | |
Display Modes | |
|
|
Similar Threads | ||||
Thread | Thread Starter | Forum | Replies | Last Post |
.. What if Tom Hanks filmed the...Future...of NASA instead of it's past? | jonathan[_3_] | Policy | 60 | August 5th 08 01:41 PM |
NASA NAMES NEW ROCKETS, SALUTING THE FUTURE, HONORING THE PAST | Jacques van Oene | Space Shuttle | 0 | June 30th 06 07:34 PM |
NASA Names New Rockets, Saluting the Future, Honoring the Past | [email protected] | News | 0 | June 30th 06 07:21 PM |
MD History Talk, Roger Launius, "NASA: From the Past to the Future" | LooseChanj | History | 14 | August 10th 03 02:16 AM |
Past, Present and Future of the SCT | Rod Mollise | Amateur Astronomy | 64 | July 29th 03 03:36 PM |