Brad Guth's Credentials

Secret237,
But lo and behold, we're now at 991 and counting. I can even see that
Usenet light at the end of your extremely brown-nosed and otherwise
Third Reich minion worthy butt-wipe tunnel from hell.

What's the highest Usenet topic count?
-
Brad Guth

"Brad Guth" whined:

But lo and behold, we're now at 991 and counting. I can even see that
Usenet light at the end of your extremely brown-nosed and otherwise
Third Reich minion worthy butt-wipe tunnel from hell.

What's the highest Usenet topic count?

Is that what you're after, Brad? Attention?

Mummy wouldn't breast feed you enough when you were a baby?

What's the highest Usenet topic count?
Is that what you're after, Brad? Attention?
Mummy wouldn't breast feed you enough when you were a baby?

Yes, you see, all he wants is to be known, I'm going to start to REMOVE
my posts.

William Mook (aka status quo spook and collaborating naysay minion No.2
or No.3 or whomever's using you Usenet name),
I'm thinking that your collective expertise as to rocket science should
perhaps go right into quantum mode. I mean to suggest, as long as that
inert massive Saturn-V/(Saturn 5) of your's had no problems whatsoever
in getting all of that Apollo payload tonnage (plus spare retrothrust
fuel tonnage) past the LL-1 point of no-return within such short order,
then why not utilize more of those same conditional laws of physics and
infomercial-science for going all the way into accomplishing those
quantum thrusters?

Why can't my Ra--LRn--Rn--ion thrusters use some of those very same
conditional laws of physics?

Again, you a taking a true fact and making a totally erroneous
conclusion about it. Sure, radium is nasty and we've got more than
we'd like in the environment. SO? That doesn't change the fact that
we'll be unable to produce more than kilograms of the stuff per year,
even if we were willing to pay $1,000,000 per gram for it!
Obviously mother Earth already has more than her fair share of good old
lead, which used to be partly Rn-222 and so forth until it was once
upon a time the likes of 238U, 235U and 232U. Therefore, of whatever
mother nature can mange on behalf of such radioactive decay is what my
swag is thinking the warm and fuzzy likes of all the "William Mook"
wizards ott to be perfectly capable of gathering up and/or expediting
into a solid cash of LRn or perhaps solid blocks of Rn ice, as possibly
derived from a breeder reactor method that might even require a wee bit
of fusion interaction along with the side benefit of such a process
having generated loads of clean electrical energy in the process.

So, lead comes from the decay of radioactive isotopes over billions of
years.
Actually, at 4.47e9 years for the each half life if 238U is where I do
believe it's taking well over quite a good number of those multiple
billions upon billions of years in order to accomplish the decay
process of turning itself into bulk lead, whereas how many of such half
lives are actually necessary for such a task of getting the likes of
238U all the way from being nasty Uranium to being plain old passive
lead?

You can have too much of something to be healthy and simultaneously
have not enough of the same thing to be industrially useful. This is
precisely the case here.
I do not happen to agree that existing levels of Rn from the existing
Ra can't become sufficient for making such into sufficient volumes of
LRn. The problem is obviously a global fact of logistics, of having
all of that nasty Radium scattered all over and within Earth where it's
often too sparce per km2 for the affordable task of gathering such up.
Otherwise, I'm thinking there's actually the potential of there being
somewhat more Rn-222 running amuck than Xe.

You've just blathered on about how there's too much radium in the
environment and WRONGLY CONCLUDED that means there's an ABUNDANT
supply of FREE radium that is sufficient to your rocket technology.
Your thought process is INSANE and not based in REALITY. I am
telling you this as a friend, and pointing out to you the solid rational basis of my concerns.
I certainly never insisted that there's any such free lunch with
regards to Radium, much less that "there's too much radium in the
environment", whereas instead I've insisted that there's more than
enough to go around and, I've otherwise insisted that most educated
folks would gladly pay big-time for accomplishing most any method of
getting rid of that nasty Radium, or of at least putting it to some
good use before it becomes Rn and subsequently proceeds as to becoming
more of that environmentally and DNA damaging form of good old lead
which we all seem to have a bit too much of.

You missed the point entirely that MILLIONS OF TONS are needed to
produce TONS of thrust - so, the use of ALPHA PARTICLES as a source of
thrust, is impractical!
Replacing the likes of solid Xe or LXe, or even solid H2O (AKA raw ice)
as a source of thruster ions with the slightly radioactive and thus
easily made extra reactive status of available Rn ions isn't nearly as
wussy as you're making it out. Rn is essentially an active cold
cathode resource of such available atoms that are continually looking
for a quick place to go, so that such Rn can eventually turn itself
into atoms of lead. Therefore, instead of shooting this soon to be
lead out the butt of a given ion thruster, you're suggesting that we
just ignore all of that nasty stuff, by way of simply leaving such a
nasty element within our environment so that our DNA and the DNA of
most everything else gets to continually suffer the consequences. Do
you also keep a toxic land-fill in your back yard?

NOW, if you disagree with this, tell us all specifically;
how much radium do you think is needed to make a propulsion system out
of it? why you believe this? how much radium do you think we can
produce on earth? why? how much you think it will cost per gram? and
why?
If a Rn laser cannon is good for an exit velocity of nearly 'c' (that's
obviously in the realm of 299,000 km/s), in which case the amount of
LRn--Rn isn't going to be all that great, and therefore of
decay/birthing of whatever's of extra Rn as derived from Ra isn't going
to be all that demanding. If my swag is within the ballpark as to the
applied energy as for artificially generating those heafty little Rn
ions (that should actually already exist as is), and if subsequently
accellerating such mass worthy ions isn't 0.1% percent of having to
accomplish such with Xe, then where's the big insurmountable problem?

Touting the practicality of radium powered rockets is dishonest in the
extreme, and saying the US never went to the moon, is dishonest in the
extreme, and saying life exists on lifeless Venus is dishonest in the
extreme - by which I mean, is insane!
For the most part reverse all of that and you've got your naysay
mindset self a deal.

You are cojoining several disparate ideas into a thought system that is
at root insane. World War III, if it ever occurs, has nothing whatever
to do with the abundance of radiuma and radon on Earth today.
Never said it did. How the heck did your perverted naysay mindset ever
come into that pathetic conclusion? I simply think being a tad bit
more honest and otherwise focused upon obtainable goals, especially of
those that'll directly benefit the lower 99.9% of humanity without
taking another bite out of mother nature's ass, as such might actually
go a long ways towards preventing the likes of WW-III and of all those
911's to come.

BTW; 25 kw/m2 per installed footprint of extracting green/renewable
energy has been perfectly doable for the past decade. Instead we've
invested trillions upon trillions per decade into our perpetrated
cold-wars, and we obviously haven't hardly got swuat worth of
green/renewable energy to show for it all, just butt-loads of our
collateral damage and carnage of the innocent, and all of that being
accomplished without a stitch of remorse.

Now, because you cannot logically rebut the good work I did on your
behalf, you trot out a radon equivalent of a nitrogen thruster and try
to convince us that this is what you were talking about all along.
You really don't have any sense of humor, unlike our resident LLPOF
warlord(GW Bush) that thinks exterminating the likes of innocent
Muslims is so funny that he has since entirely warn out is smirk.

I only suggested that the LRn--Rn--ion thruster as an idea worth
considering on a positive note affords a great deal more viable thrust
per gram than your naysayology is giving it credit for, and yet you're
the one that's going absolutely and somewhat out of context naysay
postal because you have no such honest intentions of ever contributing
anything that's constructively positive, only going in for the
topic/author kill until each of those rad-hard NASA/Apollo cows come
home.

: Try to remember, that I'm the village idiot with all of those
efficient
: and clean burning LRBs of h2o2/c3h4o.
This is a non-sequitous statement. There's not enough radium to do
anything useful, the cost of obtaining it is orders of magnitude
greater than other systems, and even if these weren't show stopper, the
physical mechanism you proposed originally is impractical because of
low power and thrust levels.
What another butt-crock of Mook's infomercial crapolla. What the heck
on a stick has your naysay statement as per having anything whatsoever
to do with using those nifty and thrust efficient LRBs of h2o2/c3h4o?

no one is building radium rockets
Double duh, no kidding folks. Secondly, if LRn--Rn--ion thrusters
along with a possible cash of Ra as sequestered within a Rn breader
reactor for 1600+ half life years worth of making more of those nifty
Rn atoms, that which we really don't need all that many of those little
heafty buggers if the cannon exit velocity is nearly 'c'.

Why? Because you are so attached to being right,
Up until nearly seven years ago I was absolutely certain that we'd
walked on the moon. Obviously I wasn't right about that, any more so
than WMD ever existed in Iraq, or of much of anything else our resident
LLPOF warlord(GW Bush) has had to say. The last time I'd checked, not
one soul has died because of my research, or from any of my mistakes or
otherwise from whatever having been discovered, whereas that as of
prior to nearly seven years ago I too was totally snookered and just as
thoroughly dumbfounded as most everyone else (including yourself). I
guess being a dishonest Skull and Bones sort of pervert ******* and
otherwise corrupt to the bone sort of Third Reich minion is what draws
best upon your brown-nose for getting into such butt-wiping action on a
moment's notice. If the likes of Hitler was encharge, you'd certainly
have been one of his top level brown-nose minions.

Too bad I'm stuck with having to use the regular laws of physics, as
opposed to your incest cloned conditional laws of physics that's always
so socially/politically correct and thereby doesn't need to provide any
of those stinking hard-science matter of facts that can be replicated
(such as walking essentially butt naked on the moon).

So, now we're back to using the alpha particles?
No, I believe that were back to using those efficient Rn atoms and
subsequent hefty ions that'll need to get directed and thus utilized
before they turn into lead. I do believe there's a difference.

Obviously I realize that lead didn't come from the lead fairy, whereas
it came via a portion of the decay process from the extremely old likes
of 238U, which along the way was once upon a brief time giving birth to
a perfectly good amount of Rn that really shouldn't be allowed into our
environment.

What do you mean by 'it'??? I'm talking about B11 and Li7 and p - you
seem to be talking about lead, radium and radon. If so, you clearly do
not understand how fusion works. You clearly don't understand the
physics of radioactive decay, and its not surprising you're wrong about
fusion and fission as well as decay.
Once again your naysayism mindset that supposedly so all-knowing is
going absolutely postal. You've obviously got all that "B11 and Li7
and p" stuck somewhere within your tunnel-naysay mindset.

That's why there's so much iron around!
But your warm and fuzzy NASA/Apollo wizards of such rad-hard and
otherwise micro-meteorite proof moonsuit protected DNA found hardly any
iron on their guano moon that's otherwise so portland cement and
cornmeal dusted, much less of their being hardly any titanium nor
having returned with any raw sodium/salts whatsoever, or even of all
that radioactive stuff that was subsequently identified decades later
via good enough satellite forms of remote-science. They also didn't
manage to ever appreciate all of the local Radium and subsequent Radon
gas or that of the somewhat DNA pesk gamma and hard-X-rays. So what if
I happen to fully agree there's loads of natural iron to being had just
about everywhere, thereby exactly what's your off-topic point about
there being so much Iron-56?

Are you suggesting that we should be looking into using Iron--ion
thrusters?

That you think radium or radon can achieve lower costs makes you wrong.
Where the heck did I ever say anything about "radon can achieve lower
cost"?

:We're down to our last tank of gas
No, we're approaching peak production - which will occur between 2012
and 2015 - after that there will be a gradual decline in output, and
prices will rise considerably as demand increases.
Yes Sir, president (AKA oil, NG and nasty coal rich and big-time
radiation polluting) Bush and innocent quail (AKA lawyer) exterminating
Cheney. That's the best energy to the last drop ticket to ride, as to
lie your polluting and subsequent global warming butts off until them
NASA/Apollo cows come home. I mean to say, by then WW-III on behalf of
some other stealth/invisible WMD threat should be quick and essentially
cheap to pull off via our nukes in space. Besides, what's a little
more collateral damage and carnage of the innocent actually worth
theses days? What's mother nature got that doesn't actually belong to
us white (mostly non-Muslim) folks? That must also be why there such
an ongoing taboo/nondisclosure about all the dead and/or dying oil and
gas wells, as well as to why we're having to burn such crapy low-grade
coal and/or extracting oil from sand at the production cost or worth of
$60/barrel and climbing, as opposed to the $1/barrel as available if
such were merely TAKEN from Iraq (I guess that's why we're constructing
that 104 acre and rather heavily fortified embassy).

BTW; Natural gas wells don't gradually run out, whereas they generally
have a few days worth of good production from the moment of seeing a
pressure drop (much like a tank of propane has it's pressure up until
the last portion of liquid is vaporised), and it certainly takes a
great deal of that oil and gas resource for accomplishing the ongoing
task of getting such energy to the end users.

People will be laughing at you long after you're dead, because you are
wrong in so many ways.
Well, unlike yourself, I obviously do make my fair share of honest
mistakes as opposed to your dishonest agendas and ulterior motives of
knowing-thy-enemy so that you can continue screwing-thy-humanity as
well as raping mother Earth until there's none left. However, it seems
they're not laughing about the latest fiasco of such crimes against
humanity, of which your Third Reich of such pagan buttology should be
super-glued to that of our resident LLPOF warlord's. The last time I'd
checked, there are still no such dead or otherwise dying Muslims or
those of any other innocent folks at my feet. Unlike yourself and all
of those you clearly love within your black heart w/o a soul, it seems
that I also haven't perpetrated any of those multi-trillion dollar
cold-wars, nor have I polluted and summarily raped mother Earth for
obtaining my next sorry buck.

I guess my status quo skullduggery merit badge still needs a few extra
of those essential cloak and dagger Mook certified points (perhaps
similar to what got one of your own kind [Jesus Christ] placed on a
stick, or perhaps like having exterminated all of those supposedly
nasty do-gooder Cathars). I suppoise in modern day terms, I could just
have my personal DoD fleet of nearby summaries involved with the task
of taking out the likes of TWA flight-800, or going for the really
big-ass brass ring of getting my oil rich partner Usama to pull off yet
another 911 as the ultimate energy-spike worthy wag-thy-dog.
-
Brad Guth

Brad Guth wrote:
William Mook (aka status quo spook and collaborating naysay minion No.2
or No.3 or whomever's using you Usenet name),

Which has nothing whatever to do with the very real reality that Radium
doesn't occur in sufficiently large quantities to be of any industrial
use involving thrusters.

I'm thinking that your collective expertise as to rocket science should
perhaps go right into quantum mode.

So? This has absolutely nothing to do with the reality that Radium
will never be used as a rocket because its technically infeasible.

I mean to suggest, as long as that
inert massive Saturn-V/(Saturn 5) of your's had no problems whatsoever
in getting all of that Apollo payload tonnage (plus spare retrothrust
fuel tonnage) past the LL-1

We went over the mass-ratios and the rocket equation and the
propellants used, the engine performance, and all the rest and showed
step by step how the Saturn V was nearly optimal for its mission. Of
course this effort was wasted on you because the reality is you are a
****ing moronic lunatic incapable of learning anything, even if
spoonfed to you a piece at a time.
..
And this has nothing whatever to do with the fact that Radium is to
puny a source of power to make any sort of practical rocket.

point of no-return within such short order,
then why not utilize more of those same conditional laws of physics and
infomercial-science for going all the way into accomplishing those
quantum thrusters?

I don't know what you mean by quantum thrusters, because this is the
first time you've used the term. However the radium thrusters you've
proposed earlier, while conceptually clever, cannot work as advertised.


Reality is what reality is. It needs no defense. It needs no support.
We need to understand it only to the extent we wish to use it for our
own ends. Otherwise, we're just jerking off and achieve nothing of
substance.

Why can't my Ra--LRn--Rn--ion thrusters use some of those very same
conditional laws of physics?

Reality is what reality is. Our beliefs about it don't change it.
What we say here on usenet doesn't change it. Whether I agree or
disagree is only important because of the way it makes you feel inside.
How you feel inside doesn't change reality. Reality doesn't need our
defense. It doesn't need our support. Reality is what reality is.

WE need to understand reality only when we seek to do things in
reality. You want to really build a rocket that is capable of
interplanetary travel? Then YOU need to understand a few things. If
you are incapable of understanding those things, then you will forever
be incapable of building an interplanetary vehicle. That may make you
sad. That may make you angry. But the fault isn't reality. The fault
isn't mine. The fault is squarely in you.

Again, you a taking a true fact and making a totally erroneous
conclusion about it.

Look, if you know how to build a radium powered rocket, get some radium
and build it. MY understanding of reality says there's no way in hell
it will ever work. But prove me wrong, take all this abundant free
radium you say we're rotten with, and build a ****ing rocket that
produces 1 ounce of thrust in the lab. Go ahead, prove me wrong. I
dare you.

See? It has nothing to do with me. It has everything to do with
reality. Reality won't let you build your rocket. Not me. I'm just
the messenger. The author of the message is beyond my control - and
beyond yours. Get over it.



vSure, radium is nasty and we've got more than
we'd like in the environment. SO? That doesn't change the fact that
we'll be unable to produce more than kilograms of the stuff per year,
even if we were willing to pay $1,000,000 per gram for it!
Obviously mother Earth already has more than her fair share of good old
lead, which used to be partly Rn-222 and so forth until it was once
upon a time the likes of 238U, 235U and 232U.

Youd didn't read the references I gave. There are MANY pathways from
Uranium and Thorium to Lead. These half-lives are BILLIONS of years.
ONE of these pathways involves radium with a half-life of 1,600 years.
So, this pathway accounts for maybe 1/1000000th the total amount of
lead - because it is relatively shortlived and only one of the steps in
the creation of lead.

Do you finally understand? That for every ton of Uranium, for every
ton of Lead there will only be MICROGRAMS of radium. That's why you
won't find more than a frew hundred kilograms in the entire crust of
the Earth.

Therefore, of whatever
mother nature can mange on behalf of such radioactive decay is what my
swag is thinking the warm and fuzzy likes of all the "William Mook"

I don't say these things to **** on you. I say these things because
they are real, You claim here that somehow my estimate of Radium in
the environment of Earth is wrong. You imply above that the abundance
of Radium is on par with the abundance of lead.

WHY DO YOU BELIEVE THIS CONTRAFACTUAL BIT OF INFORMATION?

WHAT EVIDENCE CAN YOU SITE?

You have no basis for htis belief. You have no evidence. The evidence
shows conclusively that the abundance of Radium is about 1/1000000th
the abundance of lead. Why? Because of the way Uranium and Thorium
decays to Lead. that's why. That is reality. Live with it. Now, you
can say all you like that there is a vast conspiracty among all
scientists to supress the information that Radium is really as abundant
as lead. Well, if that's the case, go out and refine a few tons of
Radium and prove us wrong. Then, build a freakin rocket out of it and
prove us wrong that you can get more than 25 watts per kg of the stuff
as alpha particles.

Problem is YOU CANNOT! Why? Because reality is what reality is, no
matter how much you bitch and moan about it.

wizards ott to be perfectly capable of gathering up and/or expediting
into a solid cash of LRn or perhaps solid blocks of Rn ice,

If you believe that Radium can be gotten by the ton and fabricated into
a super duper rocket, do it! do it now! How about getting a kilogram
of the stuff and making a bench top rocket that puts out an ounce of
thrust. Go ahead - do it! Give me a budget of what you think it takes
to refine a kilogram of radium and then build a rocket out of it that
produces 1 ounce of thrust. I will give it to you. But, if you cannot
after spending it, do what you say, then you've got to pay me back 10x.
So, go do it. I challenge you.


vas possibly
derived from a breeder reactor method that might even require a wee bit
of fusion interaction along with the side benefit of such a process
having generated loads of clean electrical energy in the process.

You are ranting and you are wrong wrong wrong.

So, lead comes from the decay of radioactive isotopes over billions of
years.
Actually, at 4.47e9 years for the each half life if 238U is where I do
believe it's taking well over quite a good number of those multiple
billions upon billions of years in order to accomplish the decay
process of turning itself into bulk lead, whereas how many of such half
lives are actually necessary for such a task of getting the likes of
238U all the way from being nasty Uranium to being plain old passive
lead?

Think of water flowing downhill. There's a pool at the top of the
hill. There's a pool at the bottom. Eventually, all the water at the
top, will be at the bottom. Now, connecting those two pools is a
stream. And that stream has several rivulets that connect the two
pools. And there's a little section of that stream calle Radium -
decaying to Radon and the volume of water in that little section is
about 1/1000000th the volume of water in the pool.

There ain't any freakin' radium in the quantities you imagine. Even if
there were, you're limited to about 25 watts per kg, which with the 4.3
MeV energy of the alpha particles is about 1/1000000th the thrust you
need to be interesting.

You can have too much of something to be healthy and simultaneously
have not enough of the same thing to be industrially useful. This is
precisely the case here.
I do not happen to agree that existing levels of Rn from the existing
Ra can't become sufficient for making such into sufficient volumes of
LRn. The problem is obviously a global fact of logistics, of having
all of that nasty Radium scattered all over and within Earth where it's
often too sparce per km2 for the affordable task of gathering such up.
Otherwise, I'm thinking there's actually the potential of there being
somewhat more Rn-222 running amuck than Xe.


No the problem is that in the entire crust of the Earth there is less
than a tonne of the stuff and you'd need millions of tons to be useful,
if you could make anything useful from it.

You've just blathered on about how there's too much radium in the
environment and WRONGLY CONCLUDED that means there's an ABUNDANT
supply of FREE radium that is sufficient to your rocket technology.
Your thought process is INSANE and not based in REALITY. I am
telling you this as a friend, and pointing out to you the solid rational basis of my concerns.
I certainly never insisted that there's any such free lunch with
regards to Radium

Yes you did you freakin liar.

, much less that "there's too much radium in the
environment",

Lying sack of ****.

whereas instead I've insisted that there's more than
enough to go around

Well, in this regard you are wrong. WRONG! Everybody who knows
anything knows your wrong, and they will ALWAYS know that you're wrong.


and, I've otherwise insisted that most educated
folks would gladly pay big-time for accomplishing most any method of
getting rid of that nasty Radium,

Anything? $10,000,000 per gram? I don't think so.

or of at least putting it to some
good use before it becomes Rn and subsequently proceeds as to becoming
more of that environmentally and DNA damaging form of good old lead
which we all seem to have a bit too much of.

Since the rocket doesn't work as advertised, and since there's not
enough radium around to make anything approaching a rocket, this
suggestion would be WRONG!

You missed the point entirely that MILLIONS OF TONS are needed to
produce TONS of thrust - so, the use of ALPHA PARTICLES as a source of
thrust, is impractical!
Replacing the likes of solid Xe or LXe, or even solid H2O (AKA raw ice)

Then why didn't you talk about that rather than radium? You are
morphing your argument. Why? Because your balls are too small to
allow you to admit that you were WRONG - so you compound your
wrongness by lying about **** and trying to fool everyone. The thing
is the only person you're fooling is yourself - and everyone else is
the ****ing world is laughing their asses off at you. You ****ing
moron.

as a source of thruster ions with the slightly radioactive and thus
easily made extra reactive status of available Rn ions isn't nearly as
wussy as you're making it out.

If you think radium produces more than 1/1000000th gee - prove me
wrong. get some radium and build it. I'll pay for you to do it. Just
give me an estimate, and an agreement that if you don't do it, you'll
pay be back 10x.

Rn is essentially an active cold
cathode resource

Oooo.... scientific terminology - you've gotta be right then! POSER!
Reality doesn't care about your bull****. No sane person - which is
nearly everyone reading this, - cares about your bull****. Only YOU
care about your bull**** because only you are fooled by it. You
****ing idiot.
..
snip

Don't you have a ****ing life? You ranted on for thousands of words
saying absolutely nothing. Sheez. I'll send a hooker over to you as
well - since you seem to need it. Just let me know male or female and
what age?

Brad Guth and William Mook, two of the Usenet's finest. Both are
knowledgeable, though they throw 'curves' from time to time, and
communicate easily in this fast and loose medium. Brad advocating the
exploration of Venus using radium powered ion engines in 'lighter than
air' waveriders. William hunting down wrongful views of aeronautics
and space technology.

According to William Mook neither radium powered ion engines nor
waveriders are the way to go. Instead, vertical rockets should
continue to put satellites into orbit and little else because little
else can be done with Earth's puny technology. I believe that
William's mindset is explained by his remark:

""Well, in this regard you are wrong. WRONG! Everybody who knows
anything knows your wrong, and they will ALWAYS know that you're
wrong."

William Mook is showing quite a bit of emotion in this post. It is
possible that he was told he was "wrong" repeatedly when he was young.
So, now he hunts down "wrongful" things on the internet. In doing this
he accompiishes some positive effects because he 'stirs things up' and
forces 'skillful defense' on the part of constructive posters, such as
Brad Guth.

He is very blunt at times: "Lying sack of ****." Or, how about: "Yes
you did you freakin liar." Or, "I don't say these things to **** on
you." But, all in all, gets his point across and is sometimes at least
a little helpful with technology, theory, and facts, which sets him
apart from the common Borg of the Internet that simply attack for the
simple joy of totally destroying intelligent thoughts.

Brad Guth, on the other hand, persues his interests in a carefully
devious fashion both stretching his imagination to include far away
places, like Venus, and envisioning far out technology such as huge
waveriders ships made of basalt that could 'float' in the thick
atmosphere of Venus. Currently he is touting the advantages of Radium
Power for interplanetary spaceships.

" If my swag is within the ballpark as to the
applied energy as for artificially generating those heafty little Rn
ions (that should actually already exist as is), and if subsequently
accellerating such mass worthy ions isn't 0.1% percent of having to
accomplish such with Xe, then where's the big insurmountable problem?"

Brad does, however, have a tendency to mix politics and emotion with
his posts. Here he is replying to William Mook in a very typical Brad
Guth manner:

" I guess being a dishonest Skull and Bones sort of pervert
******* and
otherwise corrupt to the bone sort of Third Reich minion is what draws
best upon your brown-nose for getting into such butt-wiping action on a

moment's notice. If the likes of Hitler was encharge, you'd certainly
have been one of his top level brown-nose ..."

This is the natural reaction of a genius with imaginative ideas to a
knowledgeable hardened traditionalist that searches the Usenet looking
for aberrant posters with wrongful (new and fresh) ideas. It is my
belief, however, that William Mook has latched onto the fact that
Radium Ion Thrusters don't produce a lot of thrust, though they should
be perfectly acceptable for travel once a waveriders has gone byond
atmospheric drag and the pull of gravity.

The fact remains, however, that waveriders are better than vertical
tubular rockets (William Mook's hangup) and that ion engines -- as well
as electrogravitic -- will be very useful once the waverider is in
Interplanetary Space. But contrary to Brad Guth's, somewhat wrongful,
theory that Radium Ion Engines could blast off from Earth, though Ion
engines may be quite useful once in Outer Space.

And, yes, 'Electrogravitc Propulsion' needs to be thoroughly examined
as well. It's possible ability to reduce air friction and assist with
propulsion both in the atmosphere and in Outer Space is of great
importance.


tomcat

Which has nothing whatever to do with the very real reality that Radium
doesn't occur in sufficiently large quantities to be of any industrial
use involving thrusters.
William Mook,
I've seen a few reports that are likely going to argue that point.

We went over the mass-ratios and the rocket equation and the
propellants used, the engine performance, and all the rest and showed
step by step how the Saturn V was nearly optimal for its mission. Of
course this effort was wasted on you because the reality is you are a
****ing moronic lunatic incapable of learning anything, even if
spoonfed to you a piece at a time.
Obviously my naysayology is not up to Mook standards, as I simply don't
buy it, especially since it's been taking so much extra effort with the
task of deploying of the much less payloads as of today. How can your
rocket-science be losing so much ground? or were those German Third
Reich scientists actually smarter than normal ETs that simply knew a
whole lot more as of four decades ago than the best of whatever we know
as of today?

And this has nothing whatever to do with the fact that Radium is to
puny a source of power to make any sort of practical rocket.
I'm thinking that you just don't know where to look for Radon, or how
to best apply such nifty stuff.

I don't know what you mean by quantum thrusters, because this is the
first time you've used the term.
By quantum I suggesting upon the likes of the NEC/Wang FTL notions of a
given photon conduit, waveguide or CW laser beam of photons as
traveling at one speed can in fact accommodate a secondary payload of
other photons as traveling through the very same medium, except as
making considerably greater velocity than the primary stream of
photons. I'm also thinking of once getting past a given nullification
point is where a very small amount of thrust is going to achieve
horrific velocity in such a negative gravity (pulling) situation, such
as between LL-1 and the moon, or especially between sol-L1 and Sirius
should become worth a great deal of acceleration per joule of applied
thrust, that is unless there a terminal velocity or slug limitation to
such space travels.

However the radium thrusters you've proposed earlier, while conceptually
clever, cannot work as advertised.
Then we need to change the infomercial in order to advertise this in a
different light.

Reality is what reality is. It needs no defense. It needs no support.
We need to understand it only to the extent we wish to use it for our
own ends. Otherwise, we're just jerking off and achieve nothing of
substance.
I've used the honest reality of observationology, of my best deductive
WYSIWYG reality and lo and behold, you don't see a damn thing other
than hot rocks, not even a massive fluid arch, and why is that?

You simply can't use one interpretation of your reality in order to
suit the given mainstream status quo mindset, and at the very same time
not allow the use of that very same applied reality on behalf of
favorably and thus constructively interpreting whatever's to be seen
that looks so gosh darn intelligent/artificial about Venus. You
continually seem to use double if not triple standards as your form of
damage control, such as evidence exclusion works nearly every time.
So, if you folks can use such evidence exclusions and those conditional
laws of physics for your benefit, then perhaps so can I and others that
elect to believe the evidence which proves we've been snookered by way
of those having "the right stuff". Obviously the decades old Mook
"right stuff" is whatever includes those massively inert rockets that
simply outperformed the very best of anything that exist as of today
that isn't half as inert massive per payload tonnage getting so quickly
past LL-1 and safely into orbiting our badly mascon affected moon that
also measures as being so extra gamma and hard-X-ray nasty.

Your "reality is what reality is" is exactly what sucks and blows
whenever there's any hint of our being snookered by the mainstream
status quo that corrupt to the Skull and Bones point of no return. No
amount of your damage control, hype or wag-thy-dog is every going to
alter the facts that we've been summarily lied to, and that you're very
much a part of that lie. You can apply all the lies you want, even
beyond the poing of our never seeing those NASA/Apollo cows coming
home, and lo and behold it's still the matter of fact of Jews having
pointed out whomever was rocking their profit gouging boat and mindset
to those nice Romans that were their partners in crimes against
humanity, and I don't believe anything except the names have changed.

WE need to understand reality only when we seek to do things in
reality. You want to really build a rocket that is capable of
interplanetary travel? Then YOU need to understand a few things. If
you are incapable of understanding those things, then you will forever
be incapable of building an interplanetary vehicle. That may make you
sad. That may make you angry. But the fault isn't reality. The fault
isn't mine. The fault is squarely in you.
Where's the fault? It seems that we already have the basics of
interplanetary capability (at least robotically), except that our wussy
DNA and for a few other good reasons can't seem to survive the same
trip, especially if being associated with the naked likes of our gamma
and hard-X-ray moon, or just for getting our DNA summarily nailed via
the secondary/recoil worth of contributed radiation that going to be
derived from the mass of our very own spacecraft, that is unless
there's either a great deal of low density shield in sufficient volume
or we're packing along a good deal of energy for sustaining a personal
magnetosphere.

But prove me wrong, take all this abundant free radium you say we're
rotten with, and build a ****ing rocket that produces 1 ounce of thrust
in the lab. Go ahead, prove me wrong. I dare you.
What's to dare? I'm saying it's perfectly doable and you're the one
that's going naysay postal with all of your conditional laws of
physics, infomercial-science that too often sucks and blows, and just
out of spite being a super naysay wizard on a stick by way of excluding
whatever evidence suits your side of a given argument. There's no
question that a radon breeder reactor can be devised that'll provide a
continuous supply of those capably fast moving Rn-222 atoms.
Radium(Ra) itself may need a little fusion help with the process of
improving upon the rate of decay, but so what? An onboard reactor that
includes the element and byproducts of radium shouldn't have any
problems with giving up those spare atoms of Rn-222.

See? It has nothing to do with me. It has everything to do with
reality. Reality won't let you build your rocket. Not me. I'm just
the messenger. The author of the message is beyond my control - and
beyond yours. Get over it.
Unfortunately, my current line of credit isn't sufficient for my
personally accomplishing this task of a 238U--Ra--LRn--Rn--ion or
perhaps that of involving a touch of a He3/fusion boosted
Ra--LRn--Rn--ion thruster from scratch, but otherwise nationally we
already own everything that's been bought and paid for several times
over, and obviously the only problem is from the naysay likes of
yourself that isn't about to lift a finer that's not better needed for
picking your butt sucking brown nose. So yes, it is you and of your
kind that are at the root of the problem(s), and perhaps otherwise at
the root of all else that's evil.

Just think if the likes of Einstein had similar anti-think-tank of
naysayism and with such a black heart as your's, whereas such we'd
still be living in caves and afraid of fire, and/or the likes of Hitler
would be encharge (of which might actually not be much worse off than
our GW Bush or of a few presidential terrorist before his time).

ONE of these pathways involves radium with a half-life of 1,600 years.
So, this pathway accounts for maybe 1/1000000th the total amount of
lead - because it is relatively shortlived and only one of the steps in
the creation of lead.

Do you finally understand? That for every ton of Uranium, for every
ton of Lead there will only be MICROGRAMS of radium. That's why you
won't find more than a frew hundred kilograms in the entire crust of
the Earth.
Since there are likely millions if not potentially billions of tonnes
of raw lead to go around, which by the way makes Earth or that of
whatever ran itself into and thereby merged with or perhaps having
nutron zapped mother Earth into initially becoming radioactive, as
being a wee bit older than we've been informed, but then so what if
it's a million to one shot in the dark. As of today we simply don't
require all that much Rn-222 for the task and/or demands upon
accommodating sufficient ion thruster fuel, especially if it's kept
briefly in the LRn format or perhaps as a frozen solid form of radon
that's getting replenished via a breeder reactor.

According to a global Rn map; In certain places upon Earth there's
more free Rn-222 being made available than is humanly safe for being
around, whereas I suppose that represents the likes of Ra is somewhat
nearby and in sufficient volume to ve been sustaining that Rn level of
dosage.

I don't say these things to **** on you. I say these things because
they are real, You claim here that somehow my estimate of Radium in
the environment of Earth is wrong. You imply above that the abundance
of Radium is on par with the abundance of lead.
The likes of Einstine implied a great many things. So, what's your
point? Is it that we should all stop our independenly thinking of
whatever's possible? Should we also assume that lord Mook is
all-knowing and thereby 100% right, that there's no other intelligent
life within the universe, much less upon Venus or any other planet
except mother Earth?

WHY DO YOU BELIEVE THIS CONTRAFACTUAL BIT OF INFORMATION?
As per exactly what you've contributed, wherever there's lead is
obviously where there once used to be the likes of 238U, 235U and 232U
that are capable elements of giving birth to the likes of Radon, of
which most forms of DNA have not been willing to evolve past the point
of such being an acceptable element for our environment that's somewhat
going to hell as we speak. Of course, your all-knowing conditional
laws of physics and via your GW Bush certified infomercial-science
that's based upon such buttology doesn't even believe in global warming
as derived from humans badly utilizing our available resources, nor of
hardly any value of life itself (most of what's important having
nothing to do with humanity). Your infomercial-science doesn't even
believe that diatoms matter, any more so than your science on a
infomercial stick doesn't believe there's any other viable forms of
intelligent other life in the Universe. Gee whiz, where's not the
"CONTRAFACTUAL BIT OF INFORMATION" within your mindset?

Just because you're either summarily dumbfounded or just spook like
good at your job of pretending at being dumbfounded, and otherwise into
butt-licking your collective Skull and Bones way through life, doesn't
represent that your personal knowledge and from all of those your
brown-nose as been continually sucking up to, has been into honestly
sharing in all there is to know. Since when has our government as
we've known it been honest and open mindset about physics, science or
even with regards to history?

No the problem is that in the entire crust of the Earth there is less
than a tonne of the stuff and you'd need millions of tons to be useful,
if you could make anything useful from it.
If there's supposedly so darn little natural radium running amuck, and
if radium isn't being created within existing reactors or otherwise
possible to artificially concentrate, then why all the amounts of
radon(Rn-222) in our environment?

Is there any chance that radium could be a direct or indirect element
of solar and cosmic influx?

Obviously there's more than bucket loads of radium available on our
moon? but according to Mook it's supposedly not available upon Earth?

Seems using reverse math is suggesting if there's X amount of Rn per m3
or per km3 of Earth and otherwise within that of our near-surface and
sub-surface atmosphere and water, whereas then there simply has to be a
fairly good cash of available Ra. Unfortunately, this Ra and
subsequent Rn isn't found in any one nifty spot, although according to
a global map of Rn, there are places as having way more than their fair
share, and as such having ventilation systems running in order to
evacuate/extract such nasty gas from the sorts of places we humans need
to occupy.

I'm still not the village idiot of a fool on the hill that's suggesting
as to gathering up the elements of natural Ra or that of whatever's
been artificially created as Ra and of subsequently such having
produced Rn, LRn or potentially the solid ice form of this element is
ever going to be dirt cheap, that is unless you'd care to place a value
upon human plus other lives that would have been extended and/or given
a higher quality of life if it weren't for all the Ra--Rn gas and of
those subsequent lead deposits (some of which getting directly
contributed by way of our nuclear power industry) that have been
artificially assisted for their getting into our environment.

I believe that you're the one that wants to place those nukes in space,
and to otherwise utilize the likes of 235U for accommodating your
nuclear impulse rockets that'll have to obviously involve the process
of extracting and disposing of the wussy element of Ra before ever
getting a sufficient mass of 235U for your rocket thrusting demands.
Excluding evidence of your wish having to essentially discard the
element of Ra as supposedly being of such a nearly nonexistent element
isn't reality, it's being a mainstream status quo liar. Only a pagan
soul having placed such a low value upon all of life as we know it
would have even bothered to have excluded upon the hard-evidence of
what the likes of radium and the subsequent radon offers as a negative
impact.

How much extra Rn and of the subsequent lead do you think our
environment and of the vast diversity of life sequestered within can
withstand?

Taking advantage of whatever's already existing in nature and of
otherwise safe keeping the inventory of whatever's currently being
discarded into our environment seems perfectly doable, especially if it
weren't for all the naysay buttology as clearly represented by lord
Mook that's continually running us amuck.

BTW; I don't merely argument morph by way of asking further questions
or simply by way of adding further information and/or having given
those alternative interpretations as to whatever my swag thinks should
be taken into consideration. Unlike yourself, I don't have to lie my
balls off simply because I can't see past my extremely brown nose (like
the big one you've got to work with). Like why the heck are your
infomercial-science balls so naysay hung on that "1/1000000th gee -
prove me wrong" factor?

Since you're so gosh darn Rn naysay; How much typical Xenon is there
per m3 or per km3 of Earth?
What's the Xenon cost per kg of first obtaining and then getting and of
sustaining Xenon ice as per ion fuel in space?

How long does such a cash of a solid/frozen form of Xe as wussy ion
thruster fuel tend to last?

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Xenon
"Xenon is a trace gas in Earth's atmosphere, occurring in one part in
twenty million. The element is obtained commercially through extraction
from the residues of liquefied air. This noble gas is naturally found
in gases emitted from some mineral springs. Xe-133 and Xe-135 are
synthesized by neutron irradiation within air-cooled nuclear reactors."


That one in 20 million seems a wee bit sparse, though somewhat of a
byproduct of obtaining the likes of pure LOX, LH2 and LN. And via
"synthesized by neutron irradiation within air-cooled nuclear reactors"
is interesting that Xe is getting so derived yet according to our
naysay lord Mook the heavier element of Rn isn't so easy to come by.
Why is that?
-
Brad Guth

Brad Guth wrote:
Without forming into another new black hole, this anti-think-tank of a
Usenet from hell couldn't possibly get any more naysay or least topic
constructive if they tried.
Brad Guth and William Mook, two of the Usenet's finest. Both are
knowledgeable, though they throw 'curves' from time to time, and
communicate easily in this fast and loose medium. Brad advocating the
exploration of Venus using radium powered ion engines in 'lighter than
air' waveriders. William hunting down wrongful views of aeronautics
and space technology.
tomcat,
Actually, my mindset (all three remaining dyslexic cells worth) remains
as wide open to the best available swag of whomever has similar or
better ideas. It's of these all-knowing folks like lord/wizard "Mook"
that are pretty much stuck in their naysay mode, especially with
regards to anything that could possibly rock his good mainstream status
quo ship LOLLIPOP, that which has us humans essentially moonsuit
butt-naked walking on our dark and nasty moon without so much as a
single strand of our frail DNA getting nailed.




Actually, Brad, I am feeling a little sympathetic with Mook. I did
some checking into aircraft lateral motion mechanics and found formulas
that were not only unduely complex, but filled with constant factors
that appear to require that the lateral motion be clocked in advance,
then plugged into the constants, so that the lateral motion forumula
works.

Well, what is the need of the formula in the first place?

That the Tsiolkovsky Equation doesn't work on aircraft is now very
obvious. It is a vertical flight only formula and has some very real
difficulties with that too.

I am now looking into force formulas, but so far they have constant
factors that have to be rigged in advance as well. The raw -- and
somewhat uninformative -- Newtonian Force Formula [ F = M * V ] is very
straight forward but doesn't really do much for any specific aircraft.

The conclusion I am coming to is that, lacking actual flight data, is
that Thrust in Pounds makes sense relative to the weight of the
vehicle. ISP is a real factor as well, and so is the pounds per second
to produce the thrust using the fuel's specific impulse ( ISP ).

You can easily figure the length of total burn that your vehicle is
capable of. It is simply the pounds of fuel multiplied by the pounds
per second that the engines require.

Once thing is for sure, it takes lots of Force (Thrust) to kick a
vehicle into the air, and it takes a lot of fuel burn time with a high
ISP to reach orbit and continue on to escape velocity. It, therefore,
makes sense to include extremely high ISP Ion Engines along with some
high thrust motors to get you off the ground and out of the atmosphere.

I said at the beginning that I am now a little more sympathetic to
William Mook because I know he was dealing with formulas that are over
EVERYBODY'S head, not just his. They are poorly understood or else
they wouldn't need the crutches of constants that require the formulas
answers in advance -- which is somewhat circular.

But I am continuing to research the subject in hopes of developing the
finest possible waverider Cargo Hauler for Outer Space. I still
believe that it is possible. In fact, the latest researchs lean toward
Rocketdyne F-1 engines AND Rocketdyne SSMEs and ION Engines, with
Morton Thiokol SRBs used as RATO units and then jettisoned.


tomcat

tomcat wrote:
Brad Guth wrote:
Without forming into another new black hole, this anti-think-tank of a
Usenet from hell couldn't possibly get any more naysay or least topic
constructive if they tried.
Brad Guth and William Mook, two of the Usenet's finest. Both are
knowledgeable, though they throw 'curves' from time to time, and
communicate easily in this fast and loose medium. Brad advocating the
exploration of Venus using radium powered ion engines in 'lighter than
air' waveriders. William hunting down wrongful views of aeronautics
and space technology.
tomcat,
Actually, my mindset (all three remaining dyslexic cells worth) remains
as wide open to the best available swag of whomever has similar or
better ideas. It's of these all-knowing folks like lord/wizard "Mook"
that are pretty much stuck in their naysay mode, especially with
regards to anything that could possibly rock his good mainstream status
quo ship LOLLIPOP, that which has us humans essentially moonsuit
butt-naked walking on our dark and nasty moon without so much as a
single strand of our frail DNA getting nailed.




Actually, Brad, I am feeling a little sympathetic with Mook. I did
some checking into aircraft lateral motion mechanics and found formulas
that were not only unduely complex, but filled with constant factors
that appear to require that the lateral motion be clocked in advance,
then plugged into the constants, so that the lateral motion forumula
works.

Well, what is the need of the formula in the first place?

That the Tsiolkovsky Equation doesn't work on aircraft is now very
obvious. It is a vertical flight only formula and has some very real
difficulties with that too.

I am now looking into force formulas, but so far they have constant
factors that have to be rigged in advance as well. The raw -- and
somewhat uninformative -- Newtonian Force Formula [ F = M * V ] is very
straight forward but doesn't really do much for any specific aircraft.

The conclusion I am coming to is that, lacking actual flight data, is
that Thrust in Pounds makes sense relative to the weight of the
vehicle. ISP is a real factor as well, and so is the pounds per second
to produce the thrust using the fuel's specific impulse ( ISP ).

You can easily figure the length of total burn that your vehicle is
capable of. It is simply the pounds of fuel multiplied by the pounds
per second that the engines require.

Once thing is for sure, it takes lots of Force (Thrust) to kick a
vehicle into the air, and it takes a lot of fuel burn time with a high
ISP to reach orbit and continue on to escape velocity. It, therefore,
makes sense to include extremely high ISP Ion Engines along with some
high thrust motors to get you off the ground and out of the atmosphere.

I said at the beginning that I am now a little more sympathetic to
William Mook because I know he was dealing with formulas that are over
EVERYBODY'S head, not just his. They are poorly understood or else
they wouldn't need the crutches of constants that require the formulas
answers in advance -- which is somewhat circular.

But I am continuing to research the subject in hopes of developing the
finest possible waverider Cargo Hauler for Outer Space. I still
believe that it is possible. In fact, the latest researchs lean toward
Rocketdyne F-1 engines AND Rocketdyne SSMEs and ION Engines, with
Morton Thiokol SRBs used as RATO units and then jettisoned.


tomcat




CORRECTION: Newtonian Force Formula [ F = M * A ], vice [ F = M * V
}.

I guess that a 16 pound lead shot put going 100 mph has no force unless
it is accelerating at the same time. Yes, I know, Newton said that
force accelerates things and doesn't just give them velocity. But if a
16 pound shot put were going 100 mph I don't want to get hit with it.


tomcat

tomcat,
According to our lord/wizard "Mook", inert mass such as the horrific
amount that was associated with his Saturn-V doesn't seem to matter as
to having obtained orbit, plus having achieved the necessary extra
velocity along with energy to spare for having deployed all of that
payload and so quickly to/from our moon. Go and refigure that one and
you'll win a seriously big-time rocket-science award.

Replace those spendy and still fairly risky/lethal "Morton Thiokol SRBs
used as RATO units and then jettisoned" with the fully composite LRBs
of h2o2/c3h4o (or of whatever's offering better density) and you'll
obtain nearly 50% more payload that's getting into orbit, and without
hardly 5% the environmental pollution impact at that.
-
Brad Guth