|
|
Thread Tools | Display Modes |
#1
|
|||
|
|||
Non Newtonian Propulsion granted
Patent granted for PNN (Non Newtonian Propulsion) in year 2000
http://www.asps.it/pat98.jpg from www.asps.it/pnndatabase.htm , www.asps.it/doni.htm |
#3
|
|||
|
|||
Non Newtonian Propulsion granted
Il giorno domenica 5 gennaio 2020 11:03:25 UTC+1, Sylvia Else ha scritto:
On 3/01/2020 9:57 am, wrote: Patent granted for PNN (Non Newtonian Propulsion) in year 2000 http://www.asps.it/pat98.jpg from www.asps.it/pnndatabase.htm , www.asps.it/doni.htm Farily safe bet that it doesn't work, which would ultimately invalidate it anyway. The main problem with such patents is that unscrupulous people can use them to attract investment from those who think that a patent is more than it is. Sylvia. The fact that missiles have not been able to maintain even an outpost on the moon for 50 years gives you no suspicion. Unfortunately, if the PNN is not financed, the human outposts on the Moon and on Mars will remain a dream and NASA, ESA and Musk remain with their ridicoulous rockets :-) http://www.asps.it/nasaesa.htm |
#4
|
|||
|
|||
Non Newtonian Propulsion granted
On 5/01/2020 9:52 pm, wrote:
Il giorno domenica 5 gennaio 2020 11:03:25 UTC+1, Sylvia Else ha scritto: On 3/01/2020 9:57 am, wrote: Patent granted for PNN (Non Newtonian Propulsion) in year 2000 http://www.asps.it/pat98.jpg from www.asps.it/pnndatabase.htm , www.asps.it/doni.htm Farily safe bet that it doesn't work, which would ultimately invalidate it anyway. The main problem with such patents is that unscrupulous people can use them to attract investment from those who think that a patent is more than it is. Sylvia. The fact that missiles have not been able to maintain even an outpost on the moon for 50 years gives you no suspicion. Unfortunately, if the PNN is not financed, the human outposts on the Moon and on Mars will remain a dream and NASA, ESA and Musk remain with their ridicoulous rockets :-) http://www.asps.it/nasaesa.htm I don't follow your reasoning there. Rockets are difficult and expensive, for sure, but that doesn't mean that there has to be something better. Sylvia |
#5
|
|||
|
|||
Non Newtonian Propulsion granted
Il giorno domenica 5 gennaio 2020 13:41:33 UTC+1, Sylvia Else ha scritto:
On 5/01/2020 9:52 pm, wrote: Il giorno domenica 5 gennaio 2020 11:03:25 UTC+1, Sylvia Else ha scritto: On 3/01/2020 9:57 am, wrote: Patent granted for PNN (Non Newtonian Propulsion) in year 2000 http://www.asps.it/pat98.jpg from www.asps.it/pnndatabase.htm , www.asps.it/doni.htm Farily safe bet that it doesn't work, which would ultimately invalidate it anyway. The main problem with such patents is that unscrupulous people can use them to attract investment from those who think that a patent is more than it is. Sylvia. The fact that missiles have not been able to maintain even an outpost on the moon for 50 years gives you no suspicion. Unfortunately, if the PNN is not financed, the human outposts on the Moon and on Mars will remain a dream and NASA, ESA and Musk remain with their ridicoulous rockets :-) http://www.asps.it/nasaesa.htm I don't follow your reasoning there. Rockets are difficult and expensive, for sure, but that doesn't mean that there has to be something better. Sylvia I hope that you or others who believe in rockets are present when in a fundraising in which we will achieve our goals ... that is NOT THIS https://www.kickstarter.com/projects...project_build# we will be able to demonstrate publicly how the principle of action and reaction is violated. NASA has the kilopower nuclear reactors needed to produce electricity for PNN. We hope to find an agreement with NASA ... always if they want American human outposts on Mars and not play with robots Regards E.Laureti |
#6
|
|||
|
|||
Non Newtonian Propulsion granted
On 16/01/2020 1:29 am, wrote:
Il giorno domenica 5 gennaio 2020 13:41:33 UTC+1, Sylvia Else ha scritto: On 5/01/2020 9:52 pm, wrote: Il giorno domenica 5 gennaio 2020 11:03:25 UTC+1, Sylvia Else ha scritto: On 3/01/2020 9:57 am, wrote: Patent granted for PNN (Non Newtonian Propulsion) in year 2000 http://www.asps.it/pat98.jpg from www.asps.it/pnndatabase.htm , www.asps.it/doni.htm Farily safe bet that it doesn't work, which would ultimately invalidate it anyway. The main problem with such patents is that unscrupulous people can use them to attract investment from those who think that a patent is more than it is. Sylvia. The fact that missiles have not been able to maintain even an outpost on the moon for 50 years gives you no suspicion. Unfortunately, if the PNN is not financed, the human outposts on the Moon and on Mars will remain a dream and NASA, ESA and Musk remain with their ridicoulous rockets :-) http://www.asps.it/nasaesa.htm I don't follow your reasoning there. Rockets are difficult and expensive, for sure, but that doesn't mean that there has to be something better. Sylvia I hope that you or others who believe in rockets are present when in a fundraising in which we will achieve our goals ... that is NOT THIS https://www.kickstarter.com/projects...project_build# we will be able to demonstrate publicly how the principle of action and reaction is violated. AU$ 2,112 pledged of AU$ 5,648,769 goal 6 days to go. Looks like most people know a scam when they see one. Sylvia. |
#7
|
|||
|
|||
Non Newtonian Propulsion granted
Il giorno giovedì 16 gennaio 2020 01:01:43 UTC+1, Sylvia Else ha scritto:
On 16/01/2020 1:29 am, wrote: Il giorno domenica 5 gennaio 2020 13:41:33 UTC+1, Sylvia Else ha scritto: On 5/01/2020 9:52 pm, wrote: Il giorno domenica 5 gennaio 2020 11:03:25 UTC+1, Sylvia Else ha scritto: On 3/01/2020 9:57 am, wrote: Patent granted for PNN (Non Newtonian Propulsion) in year 2000 http://www.asps.it/pat98.jpg from www.asps.it/pnndatabase.htm , www.asps.it/doni.htm Farily safe bet that it doesn't work, which would ultimately invalidate it anyway. The main problem with such patents is that unscrupulous people can use them to attract investment from those who think that a patent is more than it is. Sylvia. The fact that missiles have not been able to maintain even an outpost on the moon for 50 years gives you no suspicion. Unfortunately, if the PNN is not financed, the human outposts on the Moon and on Mars will remain a dream and NASA, ESA and Musk remain with their ridicoulous rockets :-) http://www.asps.it/nasaesa.htm I don't follow your reasoning there. Rockets are difficult and expensive, for sure, but that doesn't mean that there has to be something better. Sylvia I hope that you or others who believe in rockets are present when in a fundraising in which we will achieve our goals ... that is NOT THIS https://www.kickstarter.com/projects...project_build# we will be able to demonstrate publicly how the principle of action and reaction is violated. AU$ 2,112 pledged of AU$ 5,648,769 goal 6 days to go. Looks like most people know a scam when they see one. Sylvia. These https://www.kickstarter.com/projects...project_build# don't make me sell PNN prototypes but only idiocies like medal ,cups and certificates, as you can see in www.asps.it/doni.htm I was paid for this patent granted www.asps.it/Pat98.jpg in 2005 . GRANTED do you understand? No I suppose But the pnn thrust was then very low. Now F432 it is about 100,000 times better that of a solar sail… about like a ion motor You missiles died with a PNN motor you just have to close your sepulcher And scrap the nonsense called rockets. Scam is the comic rocketry : no manned outposts on the moon after 50 years! It is a fact and not an opinion. :-)))) |
#8
|
|||
|
|||
Non Newtonian Propulsion granted
On Jan/15/2020 at 19:01, Sylvia Else wrote :
On 16/01/2020 1:29 am, wrote: Il giorno domenica 5 gennaio 2020 13:41:33 UTC+1, Sylvia Else ha scritto: On 5/01/2020 9:52 pm, wrote: Il giorno domenica 5 gennaio 2020 11:03:25 UTC+1, Sylvia Else ha scritto: On 3/01/2020 9:57 am, wrote: Patent granted for PNN (Non Newtonian Propulsion) in year 2000 http://www.asps.it/pat98.jpg fromÂ*Â* www.asps.it/pnndatabase.htmÂ*Â* , www.asps.it/doni.htm Farily safe bet that it doesn't work, which would ultimately invalidate it anyway. The main problem with such patents is that unscrupulous people can use them to attract investment from those who think that a patent is more than it is. Sylvia. The fact that missiles have not been able to maintain even an outpost on the moon for 50 years gives you no suspicion. Unfortunately, if the PNN is not financed, the human outposts on the Moon and on Mars will remain a dream and NASA, ESA and Musk remain with their ridicoulous rockets :-) http://www.asps.it/nasaesa.htm I don't follow your reasoning there. Rockets are difficult and expensive, for sure, but that doesn't mean that there has to be something better. Sylvia I hope that you or others who believe in rockets are present when in a fundraising in which we will achieve our goals ... that is NOT THIS https://www.kickstarter.com/projects...project_build# we will be able to demonstrate publicly how the principle of action and reaction is violated. AU$ 2,112 pledged of AU$ 5,648,769 goal 6 days to go. Looks like most people know a scam when they see one. I might be wrong but I don't think this is a scam. It seems to me that they are genuinely trying to develop non Newtonian propulsion. And I think that they think that they really do have a wonderful technology. I think they are wrong and I don't think anything interesting is going to come out of that. But it doesn't seem to me that they are trying to commit fraud. They have a gizmo that seems to vibrate when they turn on the switch and they do measurements on that vibrating gizmo and seem to think that they have something. If they were scammers they would show their gizmo actually accelerating when they flip the switch on. I didn't see that. For space related scammers I would look more in the direction of SpinLaunch, they seem to know what they are doing. Alain Fournier |
#9
|
|||
|
|||
Non Newtonian Propulsion granted
On 17/01/2020 11:41 am, Alain Fournier wrote:
On Jan/15/2020 at 19:01, Sylvia Else wrote : On 16/01/2020 1:29 am, wrote: Il giorno domenica 5 gennaio 2020 13:41:33 UTC+1, Sylvia Else ha scritto: On 5/01/2020 9:52 pm, wrote: Il giorno domenica 5 gennaio 2020 11:03:25 UTC+1, Sylvia Else ha scritto: On 3/01/2020 9:57 am, wrote: Patent granted for PNN (Non Newtonian Propulsion) in year 2000 http://www.asps.it/pat98.jpg fromÂ*Â* www.asps.it/pnndatabase.htmÂ*Â* , www.asps.it/doni.htm Farily safe bet that it doesn't work, which would ultimately invalidate it anyway. The main problem with such patents is that unscrupulous people can use them to attract investment from those who think that a patent is more than it is. Sylvia. The fact that missiles have not been able to maintain even an outpost on the moon for 50 years gives you no suspicion. Unfortunately, if the PNN is not financed, the human outposts on the Moon and on Mars will remain a dream and NASA, ESA and Musk remain with their ridicoulous rockets :-) http://www.asps.it/nasaesa.htm I don't follow your reasoning there. Rockets are difficult and expensive, for sure, but that doesn't mean that there has to be something better. Sylvia I hope that you or others who believe in rockets are present when in a fundraising in which we will achieve our goals ... that is NOT THIS https://www.kickstarter.com/projects...project_build# we will be able to demonstrate publicly how the principle of action and reaction is violated. AU$ 2,112 pledged of AU$ 5,648,769 goal 6 days to go. Looks like most people know a scam when they see one. I might be wrong but I don't think this is a scam. It seems to me that they are genuinely trying to develop non Newtonian propulsion. And I think that they think that they really do have a wonderful technology. I think they are wrong and I don't think anything interesting is going to come out of that. But it doesn't seem to me that they are trying to commit fraud. They have a gizmo that seems to vibrate when they turn on the switch and they do measurements on that vibrating gizmo and seem to think that they have something. If they were scammers they would show their gizmo actually accelerating when they flip the switch on. I didn't see that. Of course, you could be right. They may just be misinterpreting what they're seeing, or indeed outright deluding themselves. But I don't know that too much can be read into the lack of a manifestly positive result, because a scammer would know very well that if they created a fraudulent demonstration of that, they'd attract the kind of people who would be capable of exposing the fraud in short order. Better to offer a tantalising glimpse of what is offered, with promises of great things to come that somehow never materialise. In the mean time the money invested can be spent on the salaries of the scammers. Sylvia. |
#10
|
|||
|
|||
Non Newtonian Propulsion granted
Il giorno venerdì 17 gennaio 2020 01:41:48 UTC+1, Alain Fournier ha scritto:
On Jan/15/2020 at 19:01, Sylvia Else wrote : On 16/01/2020 1:29 am, wrote: Il giorno domenica 5 gennaio 2020 13:41:33 UTC+1, Sylvia Else ha scritto: On 5/01/2020 9:52 pm, wrote: Il giorno domenica 5 gennaio 2020 11:03:25 UTC+1, Sylvia Else ha scritto: On 3/01/2020 9:57 am, wrote: Patent granted for PNN (Non Newtonian Propulsion) in year 2000 http://www.asps.it/pat98.jpg fromÂ*Â* www.asps.it/pnndatabase.htmÂ*Â* , www.asps.it/doni.htm Farily safe bet that it doesn't work, which would ultimately invalidate it anyway. The main problem with such patents is that unscrupulous people can use them to attract investment from those who think that a patent is more than it is. Sylvia. The fact that missiles have not been able to maintain even an outpost on the moon for 50 years gives you no suspicion. Unfortunately, if the PNN is not financed, the human outposts on the Moon and on Mars will remain a dream and NASA, ESA and Musk remain with their ridicoulous rockets :-) http://www.asps.it/nasaesa.htm I don't follow your reasoning there. Rockets are difficult and expensive, for sure, but that doesn't mean that there has to be something better. Sylvia I hope that you or others who believe in rockets are present when in a fundraising in which we will achieve our goals ... that is NOT THIS https://www.kickstarter.com/projects...project_build# we will be able to demonstrate publicly how the principle of action and reaction is violated. AU$ 2,112 pledged of AU$ 5,648,769 goal 6 days to go. Looks like most people know a scam when they see one. I might be wrong but I don't think this is a scam. It seems to me that they are genuinely trying to develop non Newtonian propulsion. And I think that they think that they really do have a wonderful technology. I think they are wrong and I don't think anything interesting is going to come out of that. But it doesn't seem to me that they are trying to commit fraud. They have a gizmo that seems to vibrate when they turn on the switch and they do measurements on that vibrating gizmo and seem to think that they have something. If they were scammers they would show their gizmo actually accelerating when they flip the switch on. I didn't see that. For space related scammers I would look more in the direction of SpinLaunch, they seem to know what they are doing. Alain Fournier I think you will have to expand the set of scammers who say that Newton's III principle can be violated in electrodynamics :-) And don't think I'm the only one :-) From www.asps.it/pnndatabase.htm PNN THEORETICAL AND EXPERIMENTAL DATABASE 1) From the thread on NG free.it.scienza.fisica entitled The third principle of dynamics sometimes does not apply? https://groups.google.com/forum/?hl=...ca/eUUCW9P6NVA On 27/04/16 20:00, Giorgio Pastore wrote: Interesting. It increases the personal statistics of people who should know it but they don't (about the possibility of violating the III principle of dynamics). And many graduated in physics seem to ignore it (or to have forgotten it if they knew it in the past). Your post confirms that this is a widespread gap. I also add that the electromagnetic case is not the only one. It doesn't apply to apparent forces. It doesn't apply to the case of forces that are not attributable to sums of couple interactions. Giorgio Pastore (Professor at University of Trieste) …………………. PhD Valter Moretti says that practically the III principle makes no sense in electrodynamics probably for the facts that Newton didn’t know electrodynamics www.asps.it/azione.htm ………….. 2) A webpage by Professor Elio Fabri, former professor at University of Pisa with whom I've had countless controversies form many years (over 15 years) about the violability of Newton third principle. At least in Italy recently he has become the best academic propagandist of the violability in electrodynamics of the principle of action and reaction With this paper basically he practically dismantles years and years of controversies with the undersigned http://www.sagredo.eu/varie/terzopr-em.pdf from www.asps.it/setupdip.htm E.Laureti |
Thread Tools | |
Display Modes | |
|
|
Similar Threads | ||||
Thread | Thread Starter | Forum | Replies | Last Post |
Non Newtonian Propulsion (PNN) for Interstellar Flight | [email protected] | Policy | 6 | February 5th 19 07:49 PM |
Non Newtonian Propulsion (PNN) | [email protected] | Policy | 0 | October 5th 18 10:09 PM |
Non Newtonian Propulsion | asps | Policy | 12 | October 26th 05 03:27 AM |
For decades the press took NASA granted | Matt | History | 2 | September 19th 04 05:24 PM |
Non Newtonian Propulsion (PNN) videoclip | asps | Policy | 0 | November 5th 03 09:30 AM |