Physics of Ionising Radiation.

originally posted by: Nochzwei
a reply to: choos

Seriously you need to go back to school.
To be subject to time dilation, you need to be sitting on the tabletop.

Doh!! Of COURSE you do. Completely forgot THAT'S the secret -- you must sit on the tabletop because THAT... makes sense.

Thanks for this - I believe everyone who has visited this thread has actually *lost* intelligence.

Is this what ATS has become? A dumping ground for pointless, mindless posits about how science and physics *do not* work under the thin veil of something being a "fringe" topic making it untouchable to genuine scientific attack?? Sigh....

a reply to: ErosA433

Lol you have not posted an iota of science so far in this cutting edge thread

a reply to: noonebutme

its not a fringe but a cutting edge science

originally posted by: Nochzwei
a reply to: noonebutme

its not a fringe but a cutting edge science

Is it hell.

You're "anti gravity machine" is bunk. Your ideas hold no value outside of a fringe hypothesis You don't accept general relativity yet try to use it to prove your points and "machine". Your science is so far beyond pseudoscience we will have to discover a new name for it. You have yet to prove a single thing and just embrace ignorance.

So where's the "cutting edge science" you are on about?

originally posted by: TerryDon79

originally posted by: Nochzwei
a reply to: noonebutme

its not a fringe but a cutting edge science

So where's the "cutting edge science" you are on about?

just saying the machine is bunk is not contributing to the discussion about a particular subject in the op. so do you have anything to contribute?
for cutting edge science watch the video listen carefully and read papers on
www.scribd.com...
then come back and post

a reply to: Nochzwei

If you remember there were a few of us in your "anti gravity machine" thread showing you where you were wrong. You just dismissed it.

It's been proven that it does not work. Just because you don't believe it, doesn't make it true.

As for ionising radiation. You do know that radiation tends to, well, radiate? So unless your heater has some shielding to protect from all the imaginary radiation, it means there isn't any radiation.

The Documents posted are incoherent and say nothing that explained, much like yourself (are you the author?) it simply professes something to be true, without any proof at all...

The opening proposition is also meaningless, show in time components

E = MC^2 in units is

Kg m^2 / s^2 = kg (m / s)^2

It is not explained, it is simply said in one sentence, I say that whole idea is just wrong, I am a scientist, the author claims to be a marine engineer... GR is highly scientific and not engineering... I believe it to be a misinterpretation of the equation and possibly unit analysis.

There is no cutting edge science to be discussed, because in my opinion what we have is a misinterpretation of physics that is similar to one a 14 year old school boy/girl might make buy reading popular science.

Also showing pictures of some fruit and veg and saying "Proof!" just... is laughable... 100% laughable

Showing micrographs of stainless steel with two different filters and saying "Proof!" is also inconclusive and again, shows the author doesn't really understand what he is looking at.

Soooooooooooooooo yeah my post is likely a waste of time as you will simply respond with what you always do and say "Oh you are dumb, and not a scientist"

Sure sure... believe in fairies if you like

a reply to: TerryDon79

hey come up with the physics of the radiation in the context as mentioned in the op, otherwise all your post is meaningless

originally posted by: Nochzwei
a reply to: TerryDon79

hey come up with the physics of the radiation in the context as mentioned in the op, otherwise all your post is meaningless

Why do I need to explain the physics? You're the one making the claim, not me.

Care to explain exactly how it works? You can write all the equations here so it's easier for all of us to see.

That is if you actually can.

a reply to: ErosA433

hey mate try and come up with the physics for the scenario mentioned in the op, or you have nothing to contribute to this discussion

a reply to: Nochzwei

Actually, I'll explain ionising radiation. It's pretty straight forward.

Time for a science lesson.

Ionising radiation is radiation that has enough energy to free electrons from atom/molecule. That is ionising the atom/molucule. Ionising radiation is basically made up of energetic sub particles, atoms or ions moving at extremely high speed (1% ish of the speed of light) and electromagnetic waves on the high end of the spectrum. The radioactivity is typically alpha particles, beta particles and neutrons.

Gamma rays and X-rays are ionising. Whereas anything below uv is nonionising radiation (laser light, visible light, microwaves, radio waves etc).

Ionizing radiation can also be generated artificially using X-ray tubes, particle accelerators (and other methods that produce radioisotopes artificially).

Does that clear anything up for you?

ETA: Ionisation of materials can increase their conductivity, potentially creating a damaging current level.

originally posted by: Nochzwei
a reply to: ErosA433

hey mate try and come up with the physics for the scenario mentioned in the op, or you have nothing to contribute to this discussion

That's not how this works. You're the one making the wild (and wildly ignorant) claims, thus the onus is on you to back up said claims; Something you have thus far not even begun to do.

a reply to: AdmireTheDistance

have you anything remotely connected to the radiation scenario in the op, to post?

a reply to: AdmireTheDistance

+1 to AdmireTheDistance as I was going to say the same thing.

@Nochzwei - No, it's not up to *us* to prove your so called cutting edge science. That's down to you to do that. You need to demonstrate to us through empirical evidence, not anecdotes or hyperbole.

You need to provide the scientific procedures used in order to independently REPRODUCE the results of the claimed physics.

So far, I've seen nothing from you. You're wasting peoples' time and degrading ATS. Shameful..

a reply to: TerryDon79

thanks im aware of all that.
here i am trying to come up with the physics as mentioned in the op for a particular situation only

originally posted by: Nochzwei
a reply to: TerryDon79

thanks im aware of all that.
here i am trying to come up with the physics as mentioned in the op for a particular situation only

And your situation would be anti gravity causing ionising radiation? Or ionising radiation causing anti gravity? Or a time dilation causes ionising radiation?

Which situation are you actually trying to find the physics for?

I think that is it apparent that Nochzwei argument is the result of Circular Logic.

Nochzwei, did you give this person money because you thought he was correct?

originally posted by: Nochzwei
a reply to: choos

Seriously you need to go back to school.
To be subject to time dilation, you need to be sitting on the tabletop.

ohhh ofcourse how silly of me..

speaking of which do you mean like this?


where the guy, instead of using the safe option of zooming in with the camera functions, places the camera right infront of the distance gauge?

you know, where you claim should be where the time dilation occurs and the very intense ionizing radiation enough to kill any animal lifeform within hours with no protection whatsoever..

i guess time dilation doesnt apply to this guy?

a reply to: choos

He must have anti ionising radiation and anti time dilation skin implants. I heard you can buy them from the same place the op got his science from.

a reply to: TerryDon79

i knew i should have paid attention in pseudoscience classes, maybe i would have known where to get some of that stuff myself.