Bob Lazar and Element 115

reply to post by zorgon


It's hangar, not hanger. I'm not a native English speaker anyhow but you should be ashamed of yourself for fouling it up. A "specialist", for God's sake.

It's pathetic that people don't learn proper spelling before they start theorizing about element 115 and other topics in nuclear physics. Go back to your trailer park.

I don't know much Latin so I know I'm going to screw it up. So, how does it go...

The ignorami? Probably.

Originally posted by LUXUS

Originally posted by buddhasystem

Originally posted by LUXUS
So you ask how an atom produces gravity, it is due to the fact that every atom has an area of negative energy density at is core (exotic matter) this core has a polarising effect on the local vacuum energy.

Very cool! And how particles other than atoms produce gravity?

This universe exhibits fractal qualitys and the same holds true for all particles.

Please comment further. Please explain how particles other than "atoms" are still subject to gravity. If you can't please refrain from posting.

Originally posted by zorgon
Here for one...

Did you even bother to read that?

It says, " Testing of a series of ultra-secret prototypes "

Testing, not development....

Area 51/Groom lake are a testing site, not a development site.

Originally posted by LUXUS
Several people have tried to give America free energy but it never turns out well

Very wrong, many have claimed to have a free energy device, but none of them actually work!

Originally posted by dereks
Area 51/Groom lake are a testing site, not a development site.

So in your opinion that hanGAR is at Groom lake not Burbank?

Originally posted by buddhasystem
It's hangar, not hanger. I'm not a native English speaker anyhow but you should be ashamed of yourself for fouling it up. A "specialist", for God's sake.

Well English is my second language but if that is the best shot you have

Originally posted by zorgon

Originally posted by buddhasystem
It's hangar, not hanger. I'm not a native English speaker anyhow but you should be ashamed of yourself for fouling it up. A "specialist", for God's sake.

Well English is my second language but if that is the best shot you have

Right.

Originally posted by dereks
Area 51/Groom lake are a testing site, not a development site.

Are you suggesting that aircraft are not developed at Groom Lake? Aircraft development is an iterative process. Of course they're going to develop and test in the same place. Otherwise they'd have to keep transporting the thing back and forth between a development lab and a test site.

From Wikipedia:
The base's primary purpose is to support development and testing of experimental aircraft and weapons systems.

Clarification:
After reading that back I realized it sounded like I was suggesting that an entire development process had to take place in the same location. I wasn't really suggesting that. Only that some part of the development process would take place at the test site.

Originally posted by zorgon

Originally posted by dereks
Area 51/Groom lake are a testing site, not a development site.

So in your opinion that hanGAR is at Groom lake not Burbank?

Aircraft like the SR-71 and the F-117 were, technically, developed by a private entity (Skunkworks) but tested at Area 51.

However, many private contractors do work there. It seems Area 51 is, first and foremost, a testbed but it's impossible to know what has or hasn't been developed there. Even if someone were to "come forward" with information about what they did there, they wouldn't be able to provide much program-specific information since you're only aloud to speak to certain people while working there.

Military and civilians working there are not allowed to speak with or "intermingle" with one another. Also, from what I've heard, you aren't supposed to talk to anyone but those involved with the project you're tasked/ordered to work on and not in public.

I've been told that public situations are always really odd because noone talks to one another. I'm told lunches at the chow hall are pretty bizarre.

-ChriS

Originally posted by goatfish Otherwise they'd have to keep transporting the thing back and forth between a development lab and a test site.

Yeah and have you seen the road out there?

reply to post by Arbitrageur


Yet, it is still impossible to discount his claims based on that.

Lazar knew that when he came public with his story that he would face a barrage of public scrutiny.

It is possible he purposefully lied about his educational background all along because he didn't want people to discredit his already far-fetched story based on where he got his degree. Also, there is no evidence to suggest that his degree is somehow illegitimate or illegally obtained.

You end up at square one with no evidence for or against his claims. Plus, there's no way to publicly access the "S-4" site at Papoose Lake to tell whether or not it even exists.

Sofar as the story about Lazar's rocket car in the local newspaper, it's plausible that he told the reporter he worked at Los Alamos when he didn't and the reporter didn't follow up on it. However, this directly contradicts what George Knapp claims which is that anonymous sources have acknowledged working with Lazar on specific projects at Los Alamos.

There just isn't enough evidence to tell us whether or not he's telling the truth about working at "S-4" or if it even exists.

-ChriS

reply to post by BlasteR


Thanks but I am trying to find the source of that image... whether or not THAT hangar is at Groom Lake or Burbank. The roof inside looks the same, but I don't have a lot of pictures inside Area 51 hangars to compare

Originally posted by zorgon

Originally posted by goatfish Otherwise they'd have to keep transporting the thing back and forth between a development lab and a test site.

Yeah and have you seen the road out there?

edit on 13-2-2011 by zorgon because: (no reason given)

That's an old pic..SR71??

Wonder why they stopped, did the driver need to pee??

reply to post by backinblack


A-12 mid transport compliments Simon Gray

There is no paved highway to Area 51 just miles of rough dirt road

I wish I hadn't even responded to the "Area 51/Groom Lake isn't a development site" aspect since it is off topic. Bob Lazar never claimed to be working on a development project and he never claimed to work at Area 51. His claim was that he was hired to "back" engineer an alien saucer at a hypothetical research facility in area S4 south of Area 51. Of course the ultimate goal of the project would have been to re-create an aircraft that used the alien technology but according to him that was a ways off. And of course he traveled through Area 51 on his way to work so maybe I'm just being pedantic.

Anyway, my personal opinion is that you can't truly debunk Bob based on the physics of the systems he described since they rely on a material (or materials) we just don't have: namely, a very specific isotope of element 115. I think it's fair to say what he describes is unlikely based on our current understanding of theoretical physics but that's as far as you can go until we have materials and perform experiments to show that what he described is wrong.

Besides using 115 as a fuel for an anti-matter reaction he also suggested that ALL stable elements with large atomic numbers (none of which have been discovered by man) have a field of strong nuclear force (which he calls gravity A) that extends slightly beyond the atom. He claims that this force acts similar to the gravity we know and that it can it can be magnified and directed (a process which he doesn't describe at all). It would also be possible to prove this true or untrue by experimentation IF we can obtain a stable element with a large atomic number.

Physics aside all you can do is look at the credibility of the witness. And this is where Bob fails. The evidence looks like he lied about attending MIT. Yes the government could attempt to cover up his past records but there's always stuff they couldn't destroy and I'm not saying this based on the fact he's not in the yearbook because I'm not in any of my college yearbooks either. But I do have a diploma I can show. I also have pictures and people who would vouch for me. Also, people I know who graduated from MIT have a class ring; it's a real tradition there. So there's no good way to truly erase that someone at least attended a university. There would be some proof and Bob can provide none.

Now that's not to say that his entire story is a lie although It very well might be. He did pass a polygraph with flying colors which is at the very least a data point in his favor. Based on that possible scenarios are:

A) He's a sociopath who knows he's lying but can lie without being detected.
B) He was delusional at the time (ie. A Beautiful Mind)
C) He was the subject of some crazy psychological experiment. Perhaps chosen because he applied and lied on his resume thus setting him up to be discredited if he went public with what he believed to be the truth.
D) He was chosen to be a disinformant and seeded with this information while believing he was actually part of a project to reverse engineer an alien saucer.
E) He's telling the truth. It's ALL TRUE!

I think based on Occam's Razor the most likely truth is A or B (or some combination). Although I don't think you can rule out C or D based on the data (plus those are awesome conspiracy stories). Anyway, no matter what the truth is you pretty much have to just toss out the Bob Lazar story since he isn't a credible witness.

reply to post by zorgon


I haven't seen the road but I live in Las Vegas now. I'm thinking of possibly driving out next week to check out Rachel. Although I might not since I know there's not much to see. I've seen videos of people driving up to the Area 51 gate but that seems kind of pointless and stupid. But who knows I've been known to do stupid and pointless things.

Well heck they make a good meal at Rachel but once you leave the highway you need good shocks We killed two trucks taking mining stuff out on similar roads. I hear Glenn Campbell still does the odd tour these days

area51looseends.blogspot.com...

Last one was three months ago

Originally posted by buddhasystem

Originally posted by LUXUS

Originally posted by buddhasystem

Originally posted by LUXUS
So you ask how an atom produces gravity, it is due to the fact that every atom has an area of negative energy density at is core (exotic matter) this core has a polarising effect on the local vacuum energy.

Very cool! And how particles other than atoms produce gravity?

This universe exhibits fractal qualitys and the same holds true for all particles.

Please comment further. Please explain how particles other than "atoms" are still subject to gravity. If you can't please refrain from posting.

What I meant by the universe exhibiting fractal geometry is that all matter is made in the same way. At the centre is a nodal point, a core with a negative energy density. This negative energy density causes a localised polarisation of the quantum fluctuations which in turn sets up an angular/rotation of the partial about its core.

If you get two casimir plates and place them close together the result is that some wavelengths between the plates are excluded. The result of this is that a region of negative energy density has been artificially created. Energy always wants to flow from a region of higher energy density to a region of lower energy density. The two plates are thus pushed together from the outside. This push is no different then the force we call gravity and acts on all matter.

It is possible to reverse this force so that matter can be created which sends out repulsive waves and thus would rise off the ground, this is levitation.

Originally posted by goatfish
Besides using 115 as a fuel for an anti-matter reaction he also suggested that ALL stable elements with large atomic numbers (none of which have been discovered by man) have a field of strong nuclear force (which he calls gravity A) that extends slightly beyond the atom. He claims that this force acts similar to the gravity we know and that it can it can be magnified and directed (a process which he doesn't describe at all). It would also be possible to prove this true or untrue by experimentation IF we can obtain a stable element with a large atomic number.

It is really hard to imagine that the proposed new field (gravity A) would exist in the nucleus of one element but not in nuclei of very similar elements. Bob's explanation is something like there is not enough concentration of energy in the solar system to make this happen. Since he offers no real theory to explain that and his other claims, there is little that can be done to either prove or disprove any of that. I personally don't believe any of it.

reply to post by zorgon


John Searl is full of it, I met him when I was a school boy and at that time he was saying a demonstration model would be ready shortly....anyway a good many years have passed since I was a school boy and he is still telling the same yarn.

When you say "they" wont make us one do you bean the government or the ETs? The government have had this technology since the 1930, ETs have had it a bit longer

Humans have had this technology in the past, the existence of those devices in Tibet makes me think the story about Atlantis is true!