NASA / Musk will kill astronauts for a manned outpost on the Moon

On 5/19/20 2:03 PM, Jeff Findley wrote:
In article , says...

On 5/18/20 10:53 PM, Greg (Strider) Moore wrote:
"Doctor Who"* wrote in message ...

the only response about this is that you don't know how physics
really
works. You only know what you have read in books, but you have never
done a physics experiment yourself.


Far from it, I've done quite a few.


prove it.



Greg is not claiming anything extraordinary. Lots of people have done
physics experiments. So there is no valid reason to question this.

You're the ones making the extraordinary claims (essentially having
discovered a reactionless drive that violates the currently known laws
of physics).

Extraordinary claims require extraordinary evidence. So far, you have a
website and some pictures of an experimental setup. The next logical
step is a peer reviewed paper. Let us know when that's been peer
reviewed and published in a respected physics journal.

Jeff



you are wrong on that. We dislike bureaucracy of "respected" journals.
The next logical step is a live public demonstration and the selling of
working prototypes.

many companies like NASA and SpaceX and Blue Origin can then start to
adapt PNN motors to space probes as a starting point.

On Tuesday, May 19, 2020 at 8:52:20 AM UTC-4, Doctor Who wrote:
On 5/19/20 2:03 PM, Jeff Findley wrote:
In article , says...

On 5/18/20 10:53 PM, Greg (Strider) Moore wrote:
"Doctor Who"Â* wrote in message ....

the only response about this is that you don't know how physics
really
works. You only know what you have read in books, but you have never
done a physics experiment yourself.


Far from it, I've done quite a few.


prove it.



Greg is not claiming anything extraordinary. Lots of people have done
physics experiments. So there is no valid reason to question this.

You're the ones making the extraordinary claims (essentially having
discovered a reactionless drive that violates the currently known laws
of physics).

Extraordinary claims require extraordinary evidence. So far, you have a
website and some pictures of an experimental setup. The next logical
step is a peer reviewed paper. Let us know when that's been peer
reviewed and published in a respected physics journal.

Jeff



you are wrong on that. We dislike bureaucracy of "respected" journals.
The next logical step is a live public demonstration and the selling of
working prototypes.

many companies like NASA and SpaceX and Blue Origin can then start to
adapt PNN motors to space probes as a starting point.

You "dislike" the bureaucracy? That's a clear indicator that you have nothing. You are making excuses now.

On Tuesday, May 19, 2020 at 8:16:45 AM UTC-4, Jeff Findley wrote:
In article ,
says...

On Monday, May 18, 2020 at 1:25:31 PM UTC-4, Jeff Findley wrote:

That piece of paper I received from the Aerospace Engineering department
at Purdue and my current employer of 30 years both seem to belive
otherwise.

Hey there, fellow Big Ten! Penn State here, degrees in chemistry.

Very nice. I've never visited Penn State, but as another Big 10 land
grant university, I'm sure it has a lot in common with Purdue in terms
of how it "feels".

Jeff
--
All opinions posted by me on Usenet News are mine, and mine alone.
These posts do not reflect the opinions of my family, friends,
employer, or any organization that I am a member of.

Penn State's main campus is great except for two things: 1. It's in the middle of Nowhere, PA and 2. It's damned cold in winter!

On 5/19/20 4:39 PM, Dean Markley wrote:
On Tuesday, May 19, 2020 at 8:52:20 AM UTC-4, Doctor Who wrote:
On 5/19/20 2:03 PM, Jeff Findley wrote:
In article , says...

On 5/18/20 10:53 PM, Greg (Strider) Moore wrote:
"Doctor Who"Â* wrote in message ...

the only response about this is that you don't know how physics
really
works. You only know what you have read in books, but you have never
done a physics experiment yourself.


Far from it, I've done quite a few.


prove it.



Greg is not claiming anything extraordinary. Lots of people have done
physics experiments. So there is no valid reason to question this.

You're the ones making the extraordinary claims (essentially having
discovered a reactionless drive that violates the currently known laws
of physics).

Extraordinary claims require extraordinary evidence. So far, you have a
website and some pictures of an experimental setup. The next logical
step is a peer reviewed paper. Let us know when that's been peer
reviewed and published in a respected physics journal.

Jeff



you are wrong on that. We dislike bureaucracy of "respected" journals.
The next logical step is a live public demonstration and the selling of
working prototypes.

many companies like NASA and SpaceX and Blue Origin can then start to
adapt PNN motors to space probes as a starting point.

You "dislike" the bureaucracy? That's a clear indicator that you have nothing. You are making excuses now.



we have to bypass the "peer review" criminals. While we wait for
judgement by a "respected" journal they copy pnn and republish it under
another name.

Il giorno martedì 19 maggio 2020 16:50:02 UTC+2, Öö Tiib ha scritto:
On Tuesday, 19 May 2020 17:35:03 UTC+3, wrote:
Il giorno martedì 19 maggio 2020 15:45:02 UTC+2, Öö Tiib ha scritto:
On Tuesday, 19 May 2020 13:45:03 UTC+3, wrote:
Il giorno martedì 19 maggio 2020 12:15:04 UTC+2, Öö Tiib ha scritto:
On Tuesday, 19 May 2020 11:35:02 UTC+3, wrote:
Il giorno martedì 19 maggio 2020 10:10:02 UTC+2, Öö Tiib ha scritto:
On Tuesday, 19 May 2020 10:50:02 UTC+3, wrote:
Il giorno martedì 19 maggio 2020 09:15:03 UTC+2, Öö Tiib ha scritto:
On Tuesday, 19 May 2020 09:55:02 UTC+3, wrote:
Il giorno martedì 19 maggio 2020 00:50:02 UTC+2, Bob Casanova ha scritto:
On Mon, 18 May 2020 14:19:08 -0700 (PDT), the following
appeared in talk.origins, posted by :
- mostra testo citato -

- nascondi testo citato -

"Know-how" is nice, but proves nothing. A public demo
determines validity.

A public demonstration will be made with a registered patent .... but it will be made in Rome (Italy)

On what exhibition it will be made?

we (ASPS www.asps.it ) will do the exhibition with journalists, cameras, and above all experimental evidence with open pnn box and other details.
At the same time we will put some prototypes and a user manual on sale ... etc ... etc...

Blah blah. It will fly around on what exhibition carrying your flag of asps?

From how he writes it seems that he has made the wrong predictions on the pnn. :-)
Don't suffer so obviously that I'm sorry :-)

You giggle because your pnn device can't fly? Seems mad.

Ion propulson can't lift off ... then on your opinion doesn't exist :-)

Ion thrusters do not matter since your constant spam (including first
post of this thread) implies that you compete with propulsion
that lifts stuff to orbit, and not with ion thrusters.
So bait and switch?


If it can't
fly then there are no point of burdening a rocket with its weight..

You understant nothing ... so it is for me to lose my time :-)

I understand that you just wiggle there and clear bait and switch
bull**** indicates that you have nothing. Neither competitors for
ion thrusters nor conventional chemical rockets.

in fact since 50 years with the supposed missiles you have a moon base on the moon, more **** on Mars. Facts and not words :-)
PNN will destroy trombetta astronautics.
This year we start

Fine. If you don't then you stop posting your bull**** January 2021?

bull**** is an astronautics that loses more than 99% of the mass to go and return from the moon (Apollo 11).
With rockets you don't colonize nothing!

On Tuesday, May 19, 2020 at 11:32:19 AM UTC-4, Doctor Who wrote:
On 5/19/20 4:39 PM, Dean Markley wrote:
On Tuesday, May 19, 2020 at 8:52:20 AM UTC-4, Doctor Who wrote:
On 5/19/20 2:03 PM, Jeff Findley wrote:
In article , says...

On 5/18/20 10:53 PM, Greg (Strider) Moore wrote:
"Doctor Who"Â* wrote in message ....

the only response about this is that you don't know how physics
really
works. You only know what you have read in books, but you have never
done a physics experiment yourself.


Far from it, I've done quite a few.


prove it.



Greg is not claiming anything extraordinary. Lots of people have done
physics experiments. So there is no valid reason to question this.

You're the ones making the extraordinary claims (essentially having
discovered a reactionless drive that violates the currently known laws
of physics).

Extraordinary claims require extraordinary evidence. So far, you have a
website and some pictures of an experimental setup. The next logical
step is a peer reviewed paper. Let us know when that's been peer
reviewed and published in a respected physics journal.

Jeff



you are wrong on that. We dislike bureaucracy of "respected" journals.
The next logical step is a live public demonstration and the selling of
working prototypes.

many companies like NASA and SpaceX and Blue Origin can then start to
adapt PNN motors to space probes as a starting point.

You "dislike" the bureaucracy? That's a clear indicator that you have nothing. You are making excuses now.



we have to bypass the "peer review" criminals. While we wait for
judgement by a "respected" journal they copy pnn and republish it under
another name.

And you think using a pseudonym like "Dr Who" advances your case? You are a troll.

On 5/19/20 6:27 PM, Dean Markley wrote:
On Tuesday, May 19, 2020 at 11:32:19 AM UTC-4, Doctor Who wrote:
On 5/19/20 4:39 PM, Dean Markley wrote:
On Tuesday, May 19, 2020 at 8:52:20 AM UTC-4, Doctor Who wrote:
On 5/19/20 2:03 PM, Jeff Findley wrote:
In article , says...

On 5/18/20 10:53 PM, Greg (Strider) Moore wrote:
"Doctor Who"Â* wrote in message ...

the only response about this is that you don't know how physics
really
works. You only know what you have read in books, but you have never
done a physics experiment yourself.


Far from it, I've done quite a few.


prove it.



Greg is not claiming anything extraordinary. Lots of people have done
physics experiments. So there is no valid reason to question this.

You're the ones making the extraordinary claims (essentially having
discovered a reactionless drive that violates the currently known laws
of physics).

Extraordinary claims require extraordinary evidence. So far, you have a
website and some pictures of an experimental setup. The next logical
step is a peer reviewed paper. Let us know when that's been peer
reviewed and published in a respected physics journal.

Jeff



you are wrong on that. We dislike bureaucracy of "respected" journals.
The next logical step is a live public demonstration and the selling of
working prototypes.

many companies like NASA and SpaceX and Blue Origin can then start to
adapt PNN motors to space probes as a starting point.

You "dislike" the bureaucracy? That's a clear indicator that you have nothing. You are making excuses now.



we have to bypass the "peer review" criminals. While we wait for
judgement by a "respected" journal they copy pnn and republish it under
another name.

And you think using a pseudonym like "Dr Who" advances your case? You are a troll.




**** Off.

In article ,
says...

On Tuesday, May 19, 2020 at 8:16:45 AM UTC-4, Jeff Findley wrote:
In article ,
says...

On Monday, May 18, 2020 at 1:25:31 PM UTC-4, Jeff Findley wrote:

That piece of paper I received from the Aerospace Engineering department
at Purdue and my current employer of 30 years both seem to belive
otherwise.

Hey there, fellow Big Ten! Penn State here, degrees in chemistry.

Very nice. I've never visited Penn State, but as another Big 10 land
grant university, I'm sure it has a lot in common with Purdue in terms
of how it "feels".

Penn State's main campus is great except for two things: 1. It's in the middle of Nowhere, PA and 2. It's damned cold in winter!

Middle of nowhere and damned cold in winter, yep sounds like Purdue too.

See, I told you that it would likely have a lot in common with Purdue!
;-)

Jeff
--
All opinions posted by me on Usenet News are mine, and mine alone.
These posts do not reflect the opinions of my family, friends,
employer, or any organization that I am a member of.

In article , says...

On 5/19/20 2:03 PM, Jeff Findley wrote:
In article , says...

On 5/18/20 10:53 PM, Greg (Strider) Moore wrote:
"Doctor Who"* wrote in message ...

the only response about this is that you don't know how physics
really
works. You only know what you have read in books, but you have never
done a physics experiment yourself.


Far from it, I've done quite a few.


prove it.



Greg is not claiming anything extraordinary. Lots of people have done
physics experiments. So there is no valid reason to question this.

You're the ones making the extraordinary claims (essentially having
discovered a reactionless drive that violates the currently known laws
of physics).

Extraordinary claims require extraordinary evidence. So far, you have a
website and some pictures of an experimental setup. The next logical
step is a peer reviewed paper. Let us know when that's been peer
reviewed and published in a respected physics journal.


you are wrong on that. We dislike bureaucracy of "respected" journals.
The next logical step is a live public demonstration and the selling of
working prototypes.

Reading between the lines, I read that you think no respected journal
would publish your paper.

many companies like NASA and SpaceX and Blue Origin can then start to
adapt PNN motors to space probes as a starting point.

Sure, if you prove it actually works in space. Again, extraordinary
claims require extraordinary evidence.

Jeff
--
All opinions posted by me on Usenet News are mine, and mine alone.
These posts do not reflect the opinions of my family, friends,
employer, or any organization that I am a member of.

On 5/19/20 11:46 PM, Jeff Findley wrote:
In article , says...

On 5/19/20 2:03 PM, Jeff Findley wrote:
In article , says...

On 5/18/20 10:53 PM, Greg (Strider) Moore wrote:
"Doctor Who"* wrote in message ...

the only response about this is that you don't know how physics
really
works. You only know what you have read in books, but you have never
done a physics experiment yourself.


Far from it, I've done quite a few.


prove it.



Greg is not claiming anything extraordinary. Lots of people have done
physics experiments. So there is no valid reason to question this.

You're the ones making the extraordinary claims (essentially having
discovered a reactionless drive that violates the currently known laws
of physics).

Extraordinary claims require extraordinary evidence. So far, you have a
website and some pictures of an experimental setup. The next logical
step is a peer reviewed paper. Let us know when that's been peer
reviewed and published in a respected physics journal.


you are wrong on that. We dislike bureaucracy of "respected" journals.
The next logical step is a live public demonstration and the selling of
working prototypes.

Reading between the lines, I read that you think no respected journal
would publish your paper.

many companies like NASA and SpaceX and Blue Origin can then start to
adapt PNN motors to space probes as a starting point.

Sure, if you prove it actually works in space. Again, extraordinary
claims require extraordinary evidence.

Jeff



you are a stalker.