I am in the Uk and have problems finding small. Wheels for the balance bike . Any suggestions any one? Thank s Jonolydney
Question by Jonolydney | last reply
Hey everyone, I need some help for my project paper. I want to build a self-balancing "one wheel". But I dont know where I can buy a wheel hub motor. I searched on Alibaba and found some fitting ones. A 800W 48V DC Brushless (Wheel Hub-) Motor. But i don´t know which speed motor control is the best for this type of motor. I want to use an arduino uno ! Can someone please Help me finding a motor control ? Thanks a lot :) PS: Sorry for my bad english :) I am german
Topic by Lucafaeth
You know all the kind of training bikes LikeABike and Strider RideOn so many different brands and varieties and naturally them are for the kids so young them have not learned to pedal and keep balance so these first "bikes" are for them to run along like on a "Hobby Horse" kind of thing that have the added safety of both feet on the ground when them need to gain balance again. Them sit and walk or run and seem to really enjoy it. Now suppose you are some 65 years older than these kids. You have the balance and can go by pedaled bike but them are not allowed to take on the Commuter Train or on the Bus that goes to the big Mall you want to visit and when you arrive no bike is allowed in so it get vandalized or stolen outside. But if you had a Walker or Rollator kind of mobility aid then that would be allowed. So what if one took a "Toddler" bike and made a grown up RideOne or BalanceBike for grown ups. No pedals on it. That would not get allowed either unless it has an electric motor and look like an expensive Mobility Scooter. So one need a Rollator that transforms into a RideOn. type of seated thing that can be used to move around on. I wish one could easily combine these two things but I fail to have enough innovation fantasy on how to accomplish this. So I test if kind people here get a clue or hang on how one could do such a thing. Transformer Bike/Rollator or what to name it. I have bought several Rollators and several KickBoard GoPed similar versions one are supposed to stand on or walk behind All of these are hurting the knee. So one need a seated thing. Sure it does exists already. The KneeScooter but that one have a seat that is too narrow so it hurts the butt. The customers complained so now one can buy an extra seat or saddle to it that is broader and less painful. But the KneeScooter does not look like a Rollator at all. It looks like a Scooter. A Rollator need Castering wheels in the front that seems a must. It can be a three wheel as long as the caster is the front wheel. Now if you sit on a four or three wheel thing and push of or kick off with feet on the ground then there is now way to steer the thing. so a transformer bike/rolator need to change from free wheeling caster to a steered caster to be safe. So that is the criteria and difference. In one position it looks like a real standard Rollator that you walk behind or in front off. Then after pushing the magig button it turns into the steerable seated balance bike kind of mobility RideOn for grown ups with knee problems. I have written about this in another post too so hope I am not breaching a hard hitting rule. Here I ask more what to name such a thing and how to make that thing so popular that the accumulated popularity makes the commercial companies aware of the need. If we can come up with a catchy name for such a thing then somebody maybe make one and test the market? On the other thread I ask for somebody to help me figure out how to DIY make one or to modify a standard Rollator so it can fill both functions. You would make me very happy if you come up with a catchy name for such a thing.
Topic by kneeproblemguy | last reply
I'm starting to plan a self-balancing unicycle and I notice several people that have built them are using 450-500W motors. I'd like to use something a bit more robust, like 750W @ 24v, due to terrain. I'm wondering if that's too much and if the guys that are using 500W are happy with the results? Has anybody tracked their current (amps) usage? My guess is that unless you're going full speed and uphill you'll rarely hit full wattage on your motor except for temporary instances. One of the challenges I'm finding is that there are motor drivers up to 25A at 24v or 36v that can handle a bit of surge, but then it takes a huge leap to 160A and 400A surge. I don't think I need something that large and expensive, but my electric motor experience is limited. Could some of you more experienced guys chime in with a bit of advice? Thanks, Gyv
Topic by Gyvven
Designed and Built by Emile Cole Range of Motion Video (profile).... http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=P_vF3...layer_embedded Range of Motion Video (front).... http://www.youtube.com/watch?feature...&v;=E7CEwnOFnCk Hello all.... I've been working on this (hobby status) on and off over the last fifteen years or so.... a mechanism that immediately begins to rotate in either direction with an imbalancing displacement of as little as one degree. With repeated periodic displacements of as little as five to seven degrees its rate of rotation rapidly approaches about a 100 to a 150 rotations per minute over the course of just eight to ten repetitions, all while overcoming only negligible frictional resistance from the main axel (equipped with bearings). It may have some applications for extracting rotational motion more efficiently from wind and wave and maybe a couple of other things too.... or it may just be a work of art.
Topic by EmileCole | last reply
These are aged systems that keep myriad coral reef organisms alive using a delicate balance of natural materials and very reduced manmade gear. They are like ecospheres, but to the 20th power. Compared to an advanced reef aquarium they are just as stable due to design features, and they bring marine science study into the home in a practical manner. There are no others in the world like these designs and they are easy to build but expensive to build as well. I hope you enjoy my invention now posted as an instructible http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=_XOsitYhihc
Topic by brandon429 | last reply
I am trying to calculate the pressure that builds up in a closed vessel containing deflagrating gunpowder. The web gave me several conflicting equations for 70% KNO3 : 30% charcoal gunpowder: 1. 6 KNO3 + C8H4O --> 3 K2CO3 + 8 CO + 4 H2O + 3 N2 Oxygen is unbalanced. 2. 6 KNO3 + C7H8O --> 3 K2CO3 + 4 CO2 + 2 H2O + 3 N2 Hydrogen is unbalanced. 3. 6 KNO3 + C7H4O --> 3 K2CO3 + CO2 + 6 CO + 2 H2O + 3 N2 Carbon is unbalanced. None of these equations have 70:30 by weight saltpeter to charcoal, and none is balanced. To fix the weight: it is possible that the charcoal is not to be completely dry, and that there are a few water molecules hiding out, but there would have to be 8:1 water to charcoal molecules for equations 1 and 2, and 9:1 for equation 3. To maybe fix the balance and masses: if the charcoals had a coefficient of 2, equation 1 would need 1:2 water to charcoal, equation 2 would need 2:2, and 3 would need 3:2. This is assuming that the saltpeter is carrying no water. Potential equations with 2 moles charcoal and carrying water to achieve the right weight ratios and balances are following: (I offer two potential equations each because I lack a reactivity series table and know not how extra atoms would come together. Please alert me if the following equations are just B.S.) 4. a. 6 KNO3 + 2 C8H4O . H2O --> 3 K2CO3 + 3 N2 + 11 CO + 4 H2 + H2O + 2 C ? 4. b. 6 KNO3 + 2 C8H4O . H2O --> 3 K2CO3 + 3 N2 + 7 CO + 5 H2O + 6 C ? Excess carbon would take oxygen from water, or stay carbon, or would the charcoal not be all used up? I assume that the reactant water molecules will remain unchanged. 5. a. 6 KNO3 + 2 C7H8O . 2H2O --> 3 K2CO3 + 3 N2 + 11 CO + 8 H2 + 2 H2O ? 5. b. 6 KNO3 + 2 C7H8O . 2H2O --> 3 K2CO3 + 3 N2 + 10 H2O + 3 CO + 8 C ? Same problem as #4 6. a. 6 KNO3 + 2 C7H4O . 3H2O --> 3 K2CO3 + 3 N2 + 11 CO + 4 H2 + 3 H2O ? 6. b. 6 KNO3 + 2 C7H4O . 3H2O --> 3 K2CO3 + 3 N2 + 3 CO + 7 H2O + 8 C ? Same problem as #4 If anyone can confirm any of these equations or provide a more accurate one, please do. Also, anyone who can tell me the burning temperature of the correct equation, please do.
Question by tincanz | last reply
It is for a battery pack for a cordless drill made of good sony high drain cells from "died" makita packs. It is for another drill then makita. I found this bms: http://www.ebay.com/itm/Protection-Balance-Module-PCM-BMS-21A-for-5S-18-5V-Li-ion-Li-Po-battery-5S21W005-/321790566576? Should I use an Imax charger, or a regular notebook charger, about 19-21 volts? http://www.ebay.nl/itm/iMAX-B6-Digital-RC-Lipo-NiMH-battery-Balance-Charger-AC-Power-Adapter-PD1205-/291180722863?var=&hash;=item43cbb93aaf
Question by rnijland | last reply
Anyone have info on converting a bike to a trike? My disabled son has balance issues but wants to ride with the family, however we can't afford a new adult tricycle or one of the expensive conversion kits. He's much too large for training wheels to work. I'm hoping to find a way to convert an old bike with minimal expense and no welding.
Topic by valr | last reply
I have bought and built a Xaxxon.com OculusPrime, While the unit is sound i have had problems with LIPO batteries charging wrong even though it has a balance feature , I have also had calibration and program (python) issues where it will work for a day or two then out of nowhere it stops working Does anyone know or have one of these units that could send some much needed help?
Topic by cybersarg
I had an idea for a camera stabilizer a while ago which involves some basic rules of physics. I've done some thinking on it and I can't seem to figure out if it would really work or not. It involves two principles: 1.) Torque (t=f*d) 2.) Inertia (p=m*v) ---- The idea is to combine a gimbal design found on camera "gliders" like these: -Commercial product: http://www.bhphotovideo.com/c/product/521721-REG/Steadicam_MERLIN_Merlin_Camera_Stabilizing_System.html -Homemade design: http://www.diycamera.com/stabiliser/index.html ...with some sort of see-saw to counter the effects of up-and-down motion. Ignoring the fact that this might be somewhat hard to hold such a thing, I just want to know if this would work. ---- Any balanced see-saw will have an equal amount of torque on either side of the pivot point. Therefore, a balanced see-saw will work with 500g hung 10cm from either side of the pivot point, OR 750g 5cm from one side and 250g 15cm from the other side (750*5=3750; 250*15=3750). With this concept, I thought of designing this part of the stabilizer like a small camera jib (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Jib_(camera)). That is, the camera on one end with a counterweight on the other. The pivot point would have a handle or some kind of vehicle mount on it. The stabilization occurs (or so I'm thinking) because of inertia. Inertia=mass*velocity. So, when the pivot point (the handle) moves up or down, one of the sides of the see saw should move up faster than the other. The side that moves up slower (the longer side of the see saw, I'm thinking) should have the camera mounted to it. ---- Is there a flaw somewhere in my thinking? THE QUESTION: Would both sides of an uneven length, balanced see-saw move up at the same time when the pivot point is moved up or down? I'm not really sure and I'd like to hear your input.
Topic by John Smith | last reply
So recently I found a webpage about someone using Phenol for a rotary spark gap for a Tesla, I had never heard of this material and don't know too much about it. For a while now I have wanted to make a whimshurst that is larger than the one I currently have (bought online, a gift from my family) but with my current one i have an issue with the acrylic discs not only not being balanced but also warped causing them to start vibrating on their shaft making it harder to turn the handle. I figure that because every piece of acrylic i have ever worked with has been warped that is would be best to find an alternative. My question is, would it be easier to keep phenol flat and balance or would it be best to stick with acrylic? another thing im curious about is this a material that would even work for this application? Lastly i would like to say that i did try doing a little research on this and didnt come up with anyone trying it for this purpose, i know that in some cases static can act a little differently than normal high voltage arcs (say, from a microwave oven transformer) which brings me to this question. P.S. im not sure what category this should go in, if anyone thinks there is a better one let me know and i will change it.
Question by pmk222 | last reply
So I was lucky enough to snag 35+ Temperature recorders from work today, Each with a 18650 cell (or two) inside. I've already made sure there wasn't a Deposit or return credit on them first so no problem there :) And I already know how to test each cell to see if they hold a charge. Does anyone have some suggestions about how to wire them all together? I was looking at This Movie Earlier and seems they used 30X 18650 cells to build a 37V battery pack My biggest concern is balancing the cells. since 3 are wired in parallel (then 10 groups in series) it seems to me that each cell may receive a slightly different charge. I'm trying to find a 9-cell balancing charger but no luck quite yet. Even if I do, does anyone think that will cause an imbalance in each of the three cells wired in parallel? Also each cell has some sort of an over discharge regulator on it as well. I'm wondering if they would be a factor in charging/Discharging the cells. (First time I've used this many 18650's in one project in a parallel/series circuit ) Any thoughts would be appreciated; I'll be sure to give a Best Answer ;) Hope to hear back soon! Wired_Mist
Question by Wired_Mist | last reply
So I was riding my small razor scooter to school (the kinds that fold up and fit in a backpack) and thought "it would be really cool to make this thing run with a motor." After I got home, I looked at it and thought of a way to make it work. If you put a small rubber piece on the end of the motor and lay that against the wheel right behind the break with some pressure, you could probably make it go pretty fast. The thing I was wondering is what is the smallest motor I could use and still have it work at about the same speed as me pushing with my foot on the road? 50 watts or so? I only weigh 125 pounds and would like it to work with 150.any suggestions? I would like to not have to use a car battery, with all the balance issues and such.
Topic by trenzalorian | last reply
OK, this is another one of those questions I should know, but don't. Mainly because I have never done it before, I have a whim to build an electromagnetic launcher, something table-mounted with a range of around 3-5m (10-15 feet). I'm not after launching nails through Coke cans. I have been browsing the web, and the designs all seem to be much more complicated than is really necessary for toy. The image below is a scan of my badly-drawn thoughts of how simple it should be. Have I got that right? I plan to use a bunch of capacitors harvested from dead electronics and connected in parallel. Is there a recommended total capacitance for such a device? If launching a ring, must the ring slide over the ferrous core, or would there be enough umph to launch a ring balanced just past the end of the core?
Topic by Kiteman | last reply
Womble is a 1995...19,000 miles on the clock...British Racing Green...1275cc...MINI MAYFAIR!!!Yes, folks, it has finally happened. I have my Mini. Kitewife spotted him in the local free paper last night, I went to see him this afternoon, took a test drive, and I now have sore cheeks from all the grinning.I'll be taking the cash round on Wednesday or Thursday, bank allowing, and driving away in the most perfect car on the planet.Full service history, four speed box, no servos on the brakes, or the steering. Single-point injection engine, automatic choke, it is absolutely gorgeous...EDITHere he is! I've tweaked the picture a little - it was a 2-second exposure under street lighting, with the camera balanced on a wall.He's really greener than that.
Topic by Kiteman | last reply
Hey everyone ! I'm planning to use a lipo charger from my Ebike to charge some scooter SLA batteries. I'm more of a li-po guy and haven't tried charging 3 SLA's in series before. Original lipo was a 10s 8.8Ah 36V (nominal, maxed out at 42V) and had an on board BMS that took a stright 42V input from the charger. the charger for it will deviver 42V @ 2amp and will let current flow until it hits 42V then automatically shuts off. The scooter batteries are 3X 12V 20ah (six cell I assume?) by all-means, I should be able to wire the three batteries in series, (3 x 14.5V = 43.5V) then my charger should be a direct replacement right? Still need to manually balance them occasionally but for daily use on a 2amp charge should be ok eh?
Question by Wired_Mist | last reply
OK so I am planning to make an even better version of my butler robot https://www.instructables.com/id/Build-Your-Own-Butler-Robot/The question is as follows : do I make it a two wheeled self balancing robot chassis or a six legged spider robot chassis . Which one would you guys prefer .And of course I'll post a detailed instructable on the new butler robot.. :)A side note : Please vote for my butler robot in the contest , because I really want that RoboPhilo walking kit ! I can use that walking robot to experiment and after I understand the concepts behind it I can build my own biped robot ( think giant mech ;) ) I document all my robotics work and I'll be sure to post an instructable on how to build your own mech robot . Btw , expect more instructables from me later this month. I wrote a lot of tutorials on other robotics sites , and now I'm gonna transfer it to here.Thanks,Eric
Topic by Erobots | last reply
Hi all, I have been into DIY Solar / Wind for a while. Everything been working great until I planned to replace my lead acid batteries for the 3.6V LG HG2 3000mAh 18650's. With the lead acid I could power my house anytime during day (using solar panels) or night off-grid with ease. So, I bought a lot of 200 18650's and spot welded them in 4S50P. Balanced them, and all that good stuff (time consuming, and a learning experience). Installed a BMS on it too, have a 30 Amp charge controller for 4x100W solar panels which I reserved for this project. Now, I have been searching for a while if these 18650's can be used anytime (connected to solar panels and with the power inverter feeding the house at the same time) ... with no success.
Question by LuisE47 | last reply
I guess I need to explain that I'm an old guy with a bad ticker. I also have some big time balance issues. I needed to get a little more active and work on my balance, so I bought a bike. The bike is about a million year old cruiser, so I had some work to do before I even took off on it. I cleaned and repacked everything. Then I switched out some parts to make it more comfortable. I replaced the sprocket drive set on the 26 inch bike with one from a 20 inch to make the peddles easier for me to reach. I also used the smaller drive sprocket. That might not have been such a good idea as I have to peddle more to get the same distance. I had intended from the start to install a helper motor so the pedal thing isnt really a big deal. I designed it this way. Motor: 24volt 250 watts from a kids scooter toy. drive: friction with a wheel that sits on the rear tire. Now the motor and mount I have worked out just fine. I'm waiting for everything to arrive so I can begin work. My question is about the power source. I really do not want the power source to ever run the bike. I simply want it to assist me climbing hills. I dont want to run out of oxygen (fuel) as is happening now. So this is my planned power set up, please tell me any flaws you see in it. One twelve volt battery 12ah complete with momentary on off switch. Push the button when I need a little assist climbing a slight grade. A completely secondary battery probably 7ah with its own momentary switch just to kick in on top of the first battery. When both are on, It should make a 24volt system for steeper inclines for just a few minutes at a time. What problems do you foresee. Any advice would be helpful. Did I mention I like to tinker with stuff. I found over the years when you buy something you learn to write a check. When you build something you learn lessons that are transferable to all problem solving. And my wife made sure I knew how to write a check early on.
Topic by retrophoto | last reply
I have a 2009 Maytag Bravos Quiet Series 300 washing machine -- model number MVWB700VQ0. We just moved to a new house, and as far as I know it was working fine in the old house. Now, the cycle starts and water sprays in the machine, then the water runs through the detergent cup. The machine spins to balance the load, and when the tub slows to fill, nothing happens. Doesn't matter what cycle or water temperature, no water is added to the main tub for about the first 8 minutes of the cycle. After that, it kicks in and starts adding water, washes, rinses and drains as normal. I'm not getting any error codes. We checked hoses, water pressure and screens. Thought it might be the water intake valve, but since it's working at other stages in the cycle, it's not that. Does this mean I have a timing issue or something with the main computer component? Again, I've not had any problem that I was aware of until we moved it after it'd been in the same place for 7 years. Thanks for your help!
Question by tlhead | last reply
UK Broadcasting watchdog OfCom has ruled that the Channel 4 documentary The Great Global Warming Swindle broke broadcasting rules by implying that GW was not due to human activity.The film's key contentions were that the increase in atmospheric temperatures observed since the 1970s was not primarily caused by emissions of greenhouse gases from burning fossil fuels, and that the modern focus on climate change is based in politics rather than science. It is seen in some "climate sceptic" circles as a counter to Al Gore's movie An Inconvenient Truth, and credited with influencing public perception of climate science. It has reportedly been sold to 21 countries and distributed on DVD. GW experts featured in the documentary complained that they were quoted out of context, had not been told of the aims of the programme makers, and some quotes attributed to experts were, allegedly, made up by the reporters."It's very disappointing that Ofcom hasn't come up with a stronger statement about being misled," said Sir John Houghton, a former head of the UK Met Office and chair of the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC) scientific assessment. "I know hundreds of people, literally hundreds, who were misled by it - they saw it, it was a well-produced programme and they imagined it had some truth behind it, so they were misled and it seems Ofcom didn't care about that," he told BBC News."The programme has been let off the hook on a highly questionable technicality," said Bob Ward, former head of media at the Royal Society, who played a prominent role in co-ordinating objections to the film. "The ruling noted that Channel 4 had admitted errors in the graphs and data used in the programme, yet decided that this did not cause harm or offence to the audience." Plaintiffs accused the programme of containing myriad factual inaccuracies, but Ofcom says it was "impractical and inappropriate for it to examine in detail all of the multifarious alleged examples... set out in the complaints." On another issue - whether contributors to the programme had been treated fairly - Ofcom mainly found against Channel 4 and the film's producer WagTV. Former UK chief scientific adviser Sir David King had been misquoted and had not been given a chance to put his case, the regulator said. Ofcom also found in favour of Carl Wunsch, an oceanographer interviewed for the programme, who said he had been invited to take part in a programme that would "discuss in a balanced way the complicated elements of understanding of climate change", but which turned out to be "an out-and-out propaganda piece, in which there is not even a gesture toward balance". The film alleged that the IPCC's scientific reports were driven by politics rather than science, and Ofcom ruled the organisation had not been given adequate time to respond. Full BBC article, plus links
Topic by Kiteman | last reply
I have an old moped that I got for cheap and I am trying to fix it up. I replaced the carburetor and the new one is a little bigger even though it is off of another 50cc. It insisted on running extremely lean, but I was able to get the fuel/air mix balanced by putting some foil tape over part of the intake to get more vacuum behind it. It will only run right if the exhaust is on so that it is not lined up perfectly with the exhaust port on the cylinder. If the exhaust is taken off it will start first kick, but if it is lined up the way it should be it will not start. I took it off today and when I put it back on as close to the way it was before it would start but is now running very lean, beyond what I can tune out with the carburetor. If I give it full throttle it bogs and has no power, but it has fair power at 1/3 to 1/2 throttle. It also is getting really hot and has absolutely no power once it gets very hot. Yesterday I hat it all just right and it ran with none of these problems except that full throttle was still not where it got full power. Does any one have any ideas about what I have to do to make it run right? Maybe there is no option but careful misalignment of the muffler? --------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- It turns out that the problems were that the muffler was clogged, and that it was running too lean at first, but too rich once it warmed up. Thank you for you suggestions.
Question by Jaycub | last reply
What I am designing (and planning on working on very soon) is a vehicle with the possible speed of a gokart, but with a propulsion system similar to a bike. The mechanism itself would be a simple push pedal (like a car) but with a gear system like a bicycle. Upon pushing down the pedal, a shaft connected too it would then push against the foremost gear. and that gear would push another and so on until it comes in contact with the rear wheel, propelling it forward. A simple spring between the pedal and floor will allow the pedal to return to the original position. However I cannot seem to get the steering and brake system down right. Should the steering be that of a car and use 2 wheels on the front with a long axel connecting the 2? or more like a bike, with a one wheel turning system. (aka. should it be a 4 wheel or 3 wheel? Might depend on weight distribution and balance, though both could be possible.) and how should the brakes be arranged? a pedal, like a normal car brake, or a stick beside the driver, like an emergency break, as well as where the brake pad would come into contact with the rear. On the axel or on the wheels? Last (and most definitely not the least) is that while this vehicle must be sturdy, it must also be light weight. So any and all material recommendations for parts would be greatly appreciated. (cheap would also be appreciated) (My thought for material) chasis - light, but firm (strong) wood. axels - aluminum or steel tires - Gokart/ riding lawn mower turning wheel/steering - wood or plastic seat - whatever I can find that's soft (not a major thing) safty belt - I may not be able to test out the prototype (kinda thick) so I need the crash test dum *ahem* "driver" to survive incase a crash were to happen. brake pad - rubber so that it causes the right amount of friction but not enough to damage any parts.
Topic by curvy77 | last reply
The Large Hadron Collider(LHC) is to be unveiled this year. It is designed to solve the much talked about energy crisis, and hopes to do so, but can it be worth all of it? From Wikipedia- (On October 25, 2005, a technician, JosÃÂ© Pereira Lages, was killed in the LHC tunnel when a crane load was accidentally dropped. The construction of LHC was approved in 1995 with a budget of 2.6 billion Swiss francs, with another 210 millionfrancs (Ã¢ÂÂ¬140 M) towards the cost of the experiments. However, cost over-runs, estimated in a major review in 2001 at around 480 million francs (Ã¢ÂÂ¬300 M) for the accelerator, and 50 million francs (Ã¢ÂÂ¬30 M) for the experiments, along with a reduction in CERN's budget, pushed the completion date from 2005 to April 2007. 180 million francs (Ã¢ÂÂ¬120 M) of the cost increase have been due to the superconducting magnets. There were also engineering difficulties encountered while building the underground cavern for the Compact Muon Solenoid. In part this was due to faulty parts lent to CERN by fellow laboratories Argonne National Laboratory or Fermilab (home to the Tevatron, the world's largest particle accelerator until CERN finishes the Large Hadron Collider).  The total cost of the project is anticipated to be between US$5 and US$10 billion. On March 27, 2007, there was an incident during a pressure test involving one of the LHC's inner triplet magnet assemblies provided by Fermilab and KEK. No people were injured, but a cryogenic magnet support broke. Fermilab director Pier Oddone stated 'In this case we are dumbfounded that we missed some very simple balance of forces.' This fault had been present in the original design, and remained during four engineering reviews over the following years. Analysis revealed that its design, made as thin as possible for better insulation, was not strong enough to withstand the forces generated during pressure testing. Details are available in a statement from Fermilab, with which CERN is in agreement.)
Topic by BkrevWlevqe | last reply
Global warming, climate change, jelly fish attacks, changed ocean currents...We all know the highlights from the news but what is the real deal behind all of this?It can't be denied that burning fossil fuels with no regrets has an impact on our globe.CO2 and other gasses or elements have been trapped for thausands of years.We release them all into our atmosphere and while doing so keep adding more harmful stuff.So, of course it is easy to say that if we would have nver used our fossile fuels to this extent then our world would be unharmed and a happy place throughout.Even if we would ignore the impossible task of making it where we are right now without having used any fossile fuels: How much would it be different?If we trust the offical climate data that has been collected then it clearly shows a rise in so called climate changing emissions since our industrial revolution started.Be it data from the ice, core drillings or just sample taken from old canyons - the results are all the same.Since the late 1800's there is a steady rise in emissions, CO2 and all the other things we don't really want in our air.And for good reasons all these green advocates try their best to stop us from doing more harm.Since the 80's we started to actually care more, better engines, catalytic converters, cleaning mechanisms for our industiral waste and chimneys.But did it make any change or difference?About 40 years now some countries try hard to do it right, so this must show up somewhere?!Well it does not.You see countries like the US never really cared about climate or the enviroment if there was a cheaper and easier option.Just check how long it took them to even acknowledge that our climate is changing due to our interference...Then there is China and as we have seen with the olympics they literally have to shut down production so you can see for more than a few km...But the same is true for so many other countries.Like everwhere else the industrial revolutions comes sooner or later and as always the cheapest way is done first and for far too long.And with the delay in reactions and consequences it is now certain that the worst is yet to come.Of course there is also another side to the entire story - nature itself.We destroy it where we can to safisfy our need for being cheap.Ever wondered where all this cheap furniture is coming from?Or all the wood used throughout the world?Rainforests are disappearing, flora and fauna is destroyed.In most cases with a lot of fires as it is still the easiest way to clean up when done.Now add the vulcanic eruptions that increased over the past 20 odd years around the world.And if you dare all the bushfires or natural causes.Combined this causes a higher impact than all our burning of fossile fuels - and it adds to the mix.And this brings us back in time.Taking the records of climete conditions all the way back to before the dinosaurs showed us that we had periods of much higher temperatures than what we might see soon.CO2 level at some periods were so high that the earth literally was a green house.So why did we humans amke it anyway onto this earth if chance were so bad?Species adjust, evolve or go extinct, new ones appear...Well, unless you are a croc or so and really don't care about Darvin and evolution ;)Does that mean we are on the way to become a new species?Sadly no, because we are the cause of all our problems.We now use technology and science to adjust nature and the enviroment to our needs.It gets too hot? Well add an airconditioner, will you!?The ground water is too contaminted to drink? Well, why do you think we invented bottled water?!You need room for new homes? Don't mind the flood planes, just drain them and build, there was no flood in over 30 years...See, even if we would go fully green and honur nature around the world from today on.Even if we try to clean up the mess we already created.The effects of what we did over the last 40 or more years are still in progress and far from over.Like a good stew it keep cooking until it is ready to serve.But strenght comes in numbers!Like a virus we keep multiplying even in areas with very limited ressources.After all, we just import what we need..Natural selection is being eliminated so pharma companies can make a living too.From just over 40 years our "natural" life expectency increased now to well into the 80's.You are not fertile? No problem we have means to fertilise your eggs with the sperm from hubby!Already suffering badly from diabetes, asthma or other chronical illness? No problem, have some kids anyway.And just to top it always make sure to avoid natural foods in favour for processed and artificial ingredients.In nature the weak, the sick, the old, the malformed and incapable are a food source.We took this food source away, keet them around, care for them and make sure really everyone has the same chance in life.In life - but not in nature anymore!Social evolution meant that natural selection was no longer a requirement to ensure a strong "tribe" or hunting party.We compensated the drain on ressources and all pharma companies are still very grateful for this.No this is no weird rant on humanity or the idea of some mad person, it is just the naked reality we like to ignore.A horse breeder will not accept a weak and constanlty sick horse for his breeding stock.A broken leg, like for a cow usually just means the animal is put down.Some dog breeders still prefer to cull a few pups just because the color pattern is not nice enough or the ears are too short.Even if you just breed fish you o through all sorts of troubles to ensure you have the best genes available in your tanks.You think this is already going to far with the ideas, I know :(But we have real world examples highlighting the results of the exact opposite: Inbreeding and ignoring the defects in genes and health.The british royal family destroyed the italian and russin monarchies the same was the spanish and protugise, even impacted on the french.In times when there was no clue about genetic defects or deseases that can be dormant in females but very active in males, the british royalty simply kept providing tainted bloodlines to the other royal familes.No offsprings that are male and of good health meant the end of their monarchies.The british survived by allowing the common folk to join the blue blood lines and now it is common in all the monachrchies left in the world.Remove the carries, provide fresh genes to get a better diversity.Really no offence, but just look at Charles and Camilla ;)Jokes aside: the story of the european monarchies shows what happens if things go too wrong.From hunters a gatherers that either kept healthy or died out we eveloved to having a gene pool that is full of nasty surprises.Again no offence meant in any way or to any person!If we compare our world with a big aquarium than it might have eveloved like this:Once there was a bowl full of plants, guppies and lots of other fish and creatures living on each other.Over time the guppies learnt when the feeding times are and made sure they get most of the food.Slowly the other psecies had not enough room and food anymore, only the hunter had a good linving with the huge supply of guppies.Then the guppies managed to reduce the dangers from all predators around and started to really take off.Soon every guppy had only conerns about having a good life and enough food.The waste got more and more, the sick and ill too.The last hunter able to fight them died off as he too suffered from the wasten the changed enviroment and gnetic defects transfered.Now there is little plants left, guppies everywhere, crap everywhere and even those guppies only living a few months still manages to find a partner to ensure their tainted gene pool spreads into the general population.We have no tank owner getting the balance right again, removing the sick and weak, we humans just keep going strong and if the crap pile gets too high we put grass and houses on top of it....We humans don't like to be compared with fish, a virus or any other lower being for that matter.These hings just don't affect or concern us.And anyone who dares to do so anyway has a long list of nasty words thrown at them.Is it because we humans can't tolerate the truth?Or is because deep inside we all know but refuse to think about it?
Topic by Downunder35m | last reply
Designing what is said to be impossible can be tricky, so I will try to give you some tips to reach your goal a bit quicker.A lot of people these days try to start with a wheel.Makes sense in one way as the final goal obviously is something that would rotate.However, considering angles in a rotating system is far easier with a usable baseline!We developed the liear motor well after any rotating electric motor.But only because someone already invented it for us.Making it flat was then more or less about finding a need for it first, like the modern highspeed trains on a maglev principle.If you want to make something move then it makes no big difference if you do it in flat or round.Flat however leaves you more options and much easier adjustments.And you will need a lot of the later...IMHO the best size and option for linear is the N0 model railway system.Tracks are only 3CM wide and second hand carriages to salvage the wheels is cheap.Either way, how would you start?We have multiple choices, like single row of magnets or double, maybe even tripple.Same for the actual magnet orientation.Flat, angled, attracting or repulsing...They all work if you understand how they actually work.Not the principle, the magnets ;)You see, a magnet always has two poles and without trickery both poles will be of even strenght, size, angle to each other and so on.Playing on a small and flat track with little resistance allows to use tiny magnets, like 5mm disc ones.If you follow the common concept of two magnet rows either side at a slight angle then you are half way there.People spent a lot of time trying not only to let the cart being attracted by the first magnets but also to let them pass out at the other end.In case you wonder why:Being able to be "sucked" in means you will have some force pulling on your cart from the next stage.Being able to fully pass through and preferably gain speed, means the cart would go from one set of magnets to the next - motion is accomplished.Let me give you my personal favourites for 5mm disc magnets:1. The rows are at an angle of 4-5° like a slim V-shape.2. Same as above by with the orientation changed by 90°The first basically means you have the magnets facing up while in the second you would have them mounted vertically.Both have good and bad sides and I think it is easiest to start with the first option.Here you would have a row of magnets at a slight angle either side of the track.Lets say it is all pointing away from you, then the north row would be left, south row on the right of the track.If you start narrow or wide depends if you want attraction or repulsion forces to work with.Again, it makes no big difference really, just a different way of operation, most seem to prefer repulsion though thinking the forces are greater - this is not true though ;)A very often copied way of mounting the working magnet (s) on the cart is by placing a magnet with south facing down on the left and one with north facing down on the right of the cart.Here you have the big problem of manipulating fields.The forces are quite strong and it seems the obvious choice but should be left for the advanced classes.Let me try to explain:No matter the site of your work magnet it has a very narrow acting field.Means you have a lot of attraction forces going only downwards and not providing any energy to move your system ;)If you orientate a magnet (stack) so north faces to the right and south to the left on either side of the cart you have more options.If the stack or single magnet has the correct length to match the angle of the magnet rows then a funny thing happens.Assume the outer most magnet is at about the same distance from center as the first magnet in the row.Means the inner most and opposing one is further away and the attraction forces gain the upper hand.While moving along though it moves away from the magnet row and whie still gaining force the last magnet in the row stops the cart dead center.This is the common scenario you see on the web when people try and fail.Now if you change the length of your working magnet and position in relation to the magnets in the row you can use the changes to your advantage.You can add slim disc magnets either side of your stack and observe the change in behaviour and where the cart starts to be repelled or gets stuck.In a bad case it starts fast but then stops with a big wobble back and forth.The perfect balance and size means the cart is attracted once it comes close to the magnet rows.There should only be a tiny sopt of very little repulsion right before the cart takes off.Like a hair trigger on a good gun if you know what I mean.It should then see some accelleration till about magnet 5-7 in a row of 14.From there it should level out and roll trough and keep rolling.I assume your first attempts now get you to the point where you cart start really nice, slows down a bit and seems just to miss a tiny extra push to make it out.It it shoots to the last magnet in the rows and then settles back to one or two before the end you are close!We have now two basic ways of manipulating the magnetic fields in our favour, or to "cheat" phsyics.Closing the gap.You will have realised by now that you need at least two stages for your system to be tested properly.Preferably 3 to get a 120° angle in a rotary conversion, but 5 would make sure there is hickups.This also means distance is now something to play with.Remember the pull before get at the same level with the first magnet in the rows?This is the first force we utilise by bringing the second stage at a distance CLOSE to take over the pull.Close because we don't want it to pull the cart out just like that.It would create a big "bump" and in a rotary system massive and unwanted vibrations.Instead we weaken the last magnet in either row.We still want to keep its pull but not so much the holding force that makes our cart go stuck here.Placing a magnet orientated in the same direction as your rows at the end of the row will change how and where the field of the last magnet in the row goes ;)Just to be precise: If the magnet in the row is north up and south down then the added magnet should have the poles 90° to that and in the same direction as the row.Depending how high, how close and with wich pole you place it the fields will change.You want to lower the locking force by at least 50% here - that will be suffient to overcome the holding force and gives the next stage a good chance to take over.It can also help to provide a sacrificial pole below the last magnet in the row.Again if north would be facing up then the lower magnet would also face north up but with a small distance to the upper manget.Ok, what happens here exactly?If I would want to be precise here you would need to read an awful lot, so make it simple...The lower magnet provides a way for the upper magnets south pole to get somewhere else instead of back to its original north pole.It also means there is another north pole "pushing" the north of the upper magnet more flat at the bottom half.This weakens the field strenght.Distance is key.The added magnet at the end does a similar thing.It provides attraction or repulsion forces that affect the field shape of the last magnet in the row.Imagine you have north facing towards the last magnet:You would push the last bit of the field up while also providing a very sharp end instead of a big round shape.The south pole of the last magnet also gets attracted by this added magnet, even more with one magnet below it.With those two added magnets you should be able to fully overcome the binding effect stopping your cart.It won't start and keep going when you let go of it half way down the track though, you need to start with the first magnet or give it a push to overcome the first binding effect.After that momentum takes over.If it really is that simple then where are all the successful videos about it?They are out there, you just need to look quite long for them.Most people still literally think only linear.A magnet has north and south and we can't change it - but we can...With field manipulations as above and shielding we get so much more than what physics currently dictates.Keep in mind that adding shielding under your rows of magnets will also affect how all works together ;)Some people forget this when using ferromagnetic things way too close to their testing area.Distance is also vital to keep in mind when experimenting.The closer two magnets are greater their forces to each other.You can utilise this for example by lowering magnets that seem to be far too strong in your configuration and cause a binding effect ;)And as said, shielding is nice thing for triack too - imagine what would happen with sielding on the sides of your magnet rows... ;)Make a negative into a positive!Extremly strong binding forces at a certain point in your track design can mean you might be able to utilise it instead of trying to waste it.Added magnets can divert the field to quite some extend.Shielding however can also direct them somewhere else - like in the core of a transformer where it all goes in a great circle.Even strips of shielding connecting magnets from one row to the one on the other side of the track can be utilised.Like that you turn two small magnets into one long one with twisted poles at the end.Provides more field strenght too and makes it good for areas with little to no attracting force to the cart.Then there is bigger design...Some people add a center magnet.With one on the cart and one in the center of the track you can create a cancellation field.The rows bind while the center magnet wants to push.If place where there is still enough forward momentum or even acceleration but close enough to the binding magnets it is possible to greatly lower the binding effect.But keep in mind you need to consider the added repulsion or compensated the field so it is most active towards the moving direction and less strong to where the cart is coming from.Advanced manipulations.You can machine magnets, sandpaper, file, grinder, CNC....Imagine you cut a square dice magnet from one corner to the other.Depending on how you have the field orientation you can end up several variations.But if north faced up in your dice then it will still face up in the cut pieces!Cut a pyramid and you end with a big flat south pole and a pointy north pole - and with extreme field strenth in this pointy bit.Similar story with half moon shapes.Imagine you machine a flat block magnet so you have a half moon with its pointy bits facing down and big round bit up.If north was up in the block and you shape the moon correctly then you end with two strong south pole points and a north pole that is strongest right between those points.Why is this so interesting you might wonder?Imagine you already know a magnets pole does not care if gos back to its own opposite or that of a different magnet.Then you also know you can machine and shape magnets to your will.Now imagine that for a change:Precisely machined pyramids that have the top chopped off.All tops in this example facing being the north poles and big bottom south.If you then machine a precise iron core block you make a nice cube.With magnets we need really good glue and a good press to make it happen.But if the center core is of proper size then we end with a block magnet that has a south pole on all sides.Of course to be 100% perfect we would need a zero tolerance gap but good glue and high forces can come quite close.Works as a sphere too but would even have clue where to start to machine the magnets LOL
Topic by Downunder35m
Even before the repulsine saw some attention during WW2 there were sightings of what we know call the classic UFO shape.Be it in Austria, Poland or other places in Europe, people reported weird disk like thing with a dome flying around.What leaked in images and documents after the war shoed that the repulsine looked basically identical to what people saw as a UFO in the sky over big parts of Europe.Then again, the repulsine appearently never made it a usable stage, same for most jet fighters at the time and still they flew around...If we now just take it for granted that actual test flights really happened back then you might wonder why we did not see any after the war anymore.For most critics it is a simple sign of facts and "confirms" that the replusine might have been a nice idea but never anything that really left the ground.As said, I often like to dig deeper and in this case the digging took far more years than what I planned on.I can not provide any solid proof for the following but I am sure even a sceptic will come to similar conclusions after reading it.Try to find some "eye witness" reports from people who saw the so called "Roswell UFO".Yes the one that made Area51 so secret and famous...Reports can be boiled down to some essential features of the hull, for those who saw it proof that it is alien.Three distinct round shpes on the underside, like you add the bottom of an egg to a round disk.Said disc of the bottom was also shaped like a wing, or the flying disk toys our kids like to play with.On the other side the shape grew up like a half shphere with an added cone or round top on it.On these area they claimed to have see engine outlets or similar and appearently the top cone was spinning in another direction than the rest of the UFO.Now I am no expert for Roswell but if I leave area and time out then I could have been fooled to think these people discribed exactly the same thing people saw a few year eariel flying over Europe.The Roswell UFO was not from another world, just stolen from the looser of a really bad war.What was seen was a working Repulsine, be it an original or something the US created from the 5 prototypes that disappeared after the war.Ha, ha, good one, then why don't we saw them flying after this anymore?Well, for starters it was a testflight gone wrong.Presumable it was planned to be limited to Area51 but the pilot lost control.Considering the Nazies appearently did their best to kill everyone involved in the project before the aliies arrived it is no big surprise.What that test flight would have shown is the impossible manouvers people already witnessed over Europe.90° or more turns at full speed instead of making a turn like a plane, sudden changes in alitude as well as accelleration on a level that makes even modern rockets blush.And if it really was the first bigger testflight they did it explains the big secrecy about the Roswell incident and what followed and created Area51 as we knew it.A "weapon" capable of these things would mean total dominance and options to impove planes and more.So why did they not even do that - or did they?The repulsine was created based on what we call today fringe- or pseudo- sience.If there is only one peroson, or a few that can even understand the claimed working principles that it can't be science as we know it.So, lets take a look what things were already heavily used in the repulsine that "we" claim to have developed or discovered decades later.Coanda effect.When air travels over a surface then it will follow the surface.You can try this with paper strips and blowing on them as well as a stream of water and some shaped objects.Long known but never found any real use until the military picked it up.For example air inlets were then developed to utilise the coanda effect.Remember how a lot of them these days look like a ducted fan housing?The round and slightly conical shape of the inlet will actually act like an airfoil and provide lift - of pulls forward in the direction of the air flow direction of the engine.I supercars we use it to create more downforce and better aerodynamics.Venturi effect.Again a very old one but funny enough also a major factor to make a jet engine work.Tesla turbine.In the Repulsine the rotating copper disks acted like a huge Tesla turbine by using a similar effect.The space between the disks got smaller and smaller towards the outer perimiter.Due to the fast rotation the molecules were accelerated and this created a partial vacuum.We use these principles today for specail vacuum pumps but also in military applications.Harmonics.Without harmonics and resonance the Repulsine would have been impossible.And at a first glance it seems we never made any use from that bit of the machine.Then why do we design exhaust systems in such a way than already the extractors ensure a pump like action and controlled backflow?The sound a good exhaust makes is also based on using the harmonics created by the explosions in the cylinders and expanding gasses.We learned that it is far more efficient to use harmonics and resonance in an exhaust system from somehwere ;)Plasma.The repulsine was said to have emitted a bright glow during certain movements or speeds.To create plasma we need a lot of energy, not so much however if the plasma is a by-product anyways.We learned that a high enough voltage differencial in a vacuum can create a nice plasma arc.From there things like analog TV monitors were created.But we never made anything that creates plasma for any use in an atmosphere.Well, unless you start to check supersonic rocket engines and other things.The working principle is very, very close here in some applications like the ramjet.Vortex energy.Today we see all vortex energy stuff as a free energy scam or at best a waste of time.But from the inlet to the outlet the entire Repulsine utilised what we now know as vortex energy, vortex math and so on.The air is twisted and spun around so many times that it is hard to keep track - but it always happened in a harmonic and resonant fashion.In some way this is implepemented in very expensive cars to keep the ventilation system almost silent even at full power.If you ever take an expensive car apart you might wonder why the air system is not as smooth and straight as you would have expected to get this silence ;)There is more but the list would become too long ;)So, if the repulsine was really that great then why was it taken apart to only utilise fractions of it in other things?If you have something really great that combines a lot of things then no one would suspect if you "developed or discovered" some of it in other projects.And to give you a very bad comparison for the other way around:If you know how to combine a petrol engine with some long blades then you could fly!I know, we did that already but you get the point.I can give you a motor and blades but that would not mean you could build a plane or even helicopter!At that time and still today something like a Repulsine would upset the "balance of power".If claims are correct then the engines of the repulsine were only required to provide the enrgy for directional changes or speed but it flew on "free energy" as the main engine system.In lame words like a jumbo jet that only needs a small engine for the hydraulics and electricity...Another big problem is the replication even if you would have a complete and working model to disect.You see most parts were brazed or welded as screw or rivets would have been problematic in certain areas.Other parts like the Kudo horn like intake systems would even today pose a challenge if you want to replicate them 100% correct.And if your understanding of science and physics greatly differs from those who originally created the thing...If your understanding tells you a dice has 6 sides (we all know that) but in my understanding it would have 16 then you would never understand how my dice rolls ;)Bringing true free energy of any form into this world is only allowed if someone can still make good money from it.Just check solar cells and wind generators - we all can have them but our providers make sure they have enough of them as well ;)Will we ever see a fully working Repulsine again?Of course !Some people like old cars, some collect old planes or old machines and tools.A great project for people in the right trades is always to build thier own little steam engine.So to say as a reminder of how it all started.Same will happen with the Repulsine as the first really utilised free energy machine the world had.The war and killings were not what really scared the world.This happened and will happen over and over again to various extends.Really scary was once certain people realised what might happen if over there the war would end with a victory and people would have time to develop for peaceful things instead.Without the war or this idiot Hitler a peaceful war would have taken over the world by storm.Those making sure we know nothing else but paying for our fuel and energy would have lost their monoply.Times change though...We destroyed our world with our needs for fossil fuels and electricity.What is left we destroy by chopping it down, digging it out or just by building new estates on prime farm land.People are now more desperate then ever to find ways to reduce their energy bills or enviromental impact.Otherwise Google wouldn't make billions on all the fake free energy videos out there.But what would it take to recreate the Repulsine?The person able to come up with the understanding of at least attempting to build one again would need to have certain qualifications and titles.He or she would hold a Nodel price for completing some of our known laws of physics or for finding some of the still missing ones.It would be a quite hard to understand and like person too, maybe even highly autistic.The person would also have an addiction like need to complete things, add the missing bits.And of course a totallydifferent understanding on how nature and the universe work.David T. from England is such a person, or at least the closest mankind can offer so far.He can see math in his head as shapes and images.Complex math problems appear to him like developing landscapes in high detail.He even learned to speak icelandic fluently within 7 days!!Imagine such a person would develop an interest in the old pioneers like Schuberger, Newman, Tesla and so on?Where we normal people fail to see any relevance or connection a guy like David would be able to literally see how all these inventions and ideas connect.He would be able to SEE the math behind it!Knowing how something was supposed to work and combining what is known through patents, drawing, videos or reports would enable such a person to make conclusions.For example where we might just see a nice pattern when we throw a stone into an undsturbed lake such a person would also already know and see the corresponding math the created the waves and why they were created exactly like this.Assuming David has no real interest in such things, then is it possible others already try?Sadly yes and even worse they do it with kids.Learning methods that are different can bring great results.For example while we use a calculator for big numbers some kids attend really strict and performance based classes to do this with an ancient abacus!After years of hard and often painful training they are able to it with a small abacus that only has a single row of discs.Shortly after they graduate to a virtual abacus - they only twitch their fingers in the same motions they would use on the real thing, but the disks and rods are all just visualised in their heads.That however is all meant as an improvement and the kids do it because they want to and not because they are forced to.Like learning to be a chess champion before even being old enough to work...In china however we have a very selective education program.Kids are not just trained slightly different to our kids but also closely monitored on their progress.As soon as one stands out for some skill it is subject to examination.Being well above average here means it is an opportunity for the kid and the parents - on paper at least.We in the western world would see it as a viscious circle though.Over the years china developed not only a better understanding of how these special kids brains actuall do their things but also how to create tests for this purpose.What looks like impossible or nonsense to most kids will trigger a scecific response and understand in those that are special.We would create something that allows parents to know early on where the kid has really good skills and what activities should be promoted.In china though the parents receive a nicer flat or some additional income while kids are send to a far away school.Again we would refer to such a school more as a boot camp.Discipline is at least on military levels, same is the punishment system.In most cases families are not reunited for many years, phone or even video calls only happen in the rare times when western TV crews are allowed a sneak peak.I just say: If a kid would see the parents often enough then it would not only know what to talk about but also be happy to talk to them - this however you won't see.It is like they talk to some distant uncle or such.What is really scary though is how these kids are trained to see their purpose and how important it is to be the best in what they do.Imagine you lost your kid at an early age and the only thing you got over the year was letters from the government saying how well it is doing and that you can be proud of it.Then it graduates and you are not even allowed to be there on that day...After that the kid is gone for good, you get a new flat and your proud kid supports you with some nice extra income.You don't get to know where it is working, what it is doing or if it might just be attending some university.By any standards these graduated kids can be seen as a great number of genius young people.Math, music, languages, science, you name it and they will have the experts aged below 20 for it.But what do they do once school is finnished and life starts?So far no reporter or family was able to figure it out.Means they don't appear in some high profile company, they don't start a successful business or teach at any public or private school.I leave it up to your imagination where thausands of kids find secret employment once they graduated....If, at least in theory we could be able to understand all these old technologies then why don't we at least try?Everyone has a goal, some desire a happy family and nice house, other need fame or just money to be happy.With that comes greed.You might have a really nice car but that does not mean you would give to some neighbour for a trip.Even if it just a nice rose garden, you might not want to share the views with anyone.This is true on all levels and we created a term for it "Need to know basis".If you just operate a press in a factory then you don't need to know when or what the next job is that comes for your press.You will know when it arrives and can check the documents attached.You don't need to know that your council is expanding and it is only seen as a courtesy to let you know on some notice board or in the local newspaper.And even our government does the same.What we do from the first days of our new baby we do on all other levels in the same way.What the baby does not need to know we won't tell or show.But we provide all the littly anklebiter needs to develop and be happy.Changing nappies, feeding, proving comfort when sick or having a nightmare.Later we teach language and other skills like walking.It goes on as you know...Humanity as a whole is like a little kid as well.If we would know all the little, dirty secrets then we would riot and go mad.Things that are of no concern are nothing we need to worry about, so we don't get to know them either.Knowing how build the latest fighter jets is seen as a thing that would give a possible enemy an advantage.Makes a lot of sense to everyone as these things might have to protect us one day.The questions that remain are:If humainty is a child, then how old are we now or when do we graduate?If there is a collection of secret and old knowledge then who owns and controls it?What would it take to force the release of all the things people actually created for a better world and not to be locked away?As funny as it might sound but one answer to all these questions would be to do nice orund trip in your Repulsine.Fly over ever single country in this world.Let their guided missle and what not chase you and once enough show then how quickly you can make a 180° turn to get behind them.So called unimportant countries might ignore you and the people only enjoy a nice show.Those powerful enough will fear you and think it was "the other side" showing their superiority.Once done with your round they all will have to realise there is a new power that is at the helm now: Knowledge and understanding.No more secrets, a repulsine for everyone who wants the plans to build one.A new world would start.Ever thought about that when wondering why all these "Aliens" we see in their ships in our skies never land to say hello ? ;)Even if they would be Aliens and not just some human pilot in some experimental craft:Shouldn't this demonstration of absolute power and control without any violence tell us something?The Repulsine need to come back to life to end all this UFO nonsense and Alien theories out there.You hear the sounds, see the ligh show and impossible abilities.And suddenly most if not all UFO sightings would have a common factor again.Just because the Repulsine is claimed to be lost and that it never actually worked despite film evidence showing the opposite does not mean there is no one using the technology.A working Repulsine available to everyone would also kill the doubt on so many other old inventors and "fringe" scientists.Science and physics would need to be redifined as would be able to find a lot of missing links.I know there is not only a lot of people out there trying to get what they can about the Repulsine but also that there are others who try to prevent this.You have a really easy time getting permission examine some old and histrically important artefact from a museum than getting just a hands on approch for what remains of the Repulsine in various places.Not even decent 3D scans will be allowed.Anything like just getting a tiny pipe cam inside is rejected with the excuse it could cause damage.If the thing is a hoax and never worked then why would it be so important to never touch or move it? ;)I recently got word that two of the remaining Repulsine "artefacts" were examined by the same group of "scientists".This happened in the late 80's and said scientists were claimed to have had acces to a collection of spare parts for the original Repulsine that was lost after the war.A private collector was also mentioned who denied all access but what he had in a secure storage facility appearently disappeared shortly after his refusal.Putting all the dots and hints together it would mean that someone in the late 80's was able to get literally everything that is left of the project in his hands.Those who claimed to have seen these scientists working on the Repulsine leftovers claim they used top notch technology to do so, including 3D scanners - and those were basically imossible to get back then for any uni out there...The laptops used were said to use touchscreens and were connected to all sorts of equippment.And they did it in almost total silence, like a group who studied a performance many times and knew exactly what do when and where without the need of many words.Professional in examining something unknown all all possible levels.I was unable to get any information on these scientist or who they worked for.But if you are one of them and readin this then I would love to hear from you!
Topic by Downunder35m | last reply