For every action there is an equal and opposite reaction. Sir Isaac Newton.
‘Unless the opposite reaction is diminished’. Gunther K. H. Pfrengle.
The UFO THOUGHT SHOP logo is a Trademark.
Author G. K. H. Pfrengle Signature witnessed by Justice of Peace. Date
Question 1 From: “tony sandy” firstname.lastname@example.org
Sent: Thursday, 11 September 2008
As we go through the universe, the universe goes through us (things don't so much change as ex-change).
(As matter for spirit GP agspri.com)
Looking at the various reports and films of flying saucers, the question arises in my mind, why do the majority spin? There must be some advantage to it. I even remember film of a cylinder in Soviet airspace, that corkscrewed away, pursued by fighters (See gun rifling for the same effect with bullets i.e. spiralled chamber0. We know from their antics that they have some anti-gravity mechanism that allows them to float in mid-air and various shots that seem to suggest short leap teleportation but nobody as far as I know has asked this obvious question or answered (correct me if I'm wrong). There was a question in The New Scientist's Last Word column about why a bicycle is hard to balance and keep upright when stationary but requires little effort when moving. An engineer from some university came up with a really ludicrously complex and totally erroneous answer in my opinion, missing out the simple fact that forward momentum cancels out gravity as long as you are centrally balanced. The same thing is true with spinning tops, balanced on a point - the pull of gravity is equalized all the way around as long as there is momentum driving the top forward, keeping it in place. This point is easily demonstrated by rolling a coin along the ground - as momentum fades gravity starts to pull it to one side in a spiral as we see with liquids (3-D version of this): See books by various authors on Viktor Schaubergers work for follow ups to this. Gyroscopes come into this as well, not only as glorified spinning tops but because of work by people like Eric Laithwaite and other engineers that pinpointed how this spinning motion could be utilized by flying saucers, even if only accidently by inspiring people like me in the UFO field.
Reply 2 Hello ‘tony’
There must be a reason for everything!
So I offer my reasoning for your inquiries, which do not necessarily have to be the ultimate answers but perhaps different and a little deeper to the cause. The spin of flying saucers apart from suspecting it to be a form of space-craft (not a ‘possible’ air-craft) propellant could have another function. Such as gyro flight stabilization or a saucer edging with its rim into the resisting air at high speed creates heat. By the craft spinning into the flight direction this changes the point of entrance constantly and the spin would also displace heat even as a spin on its own. A cylinder type craft moving with a spin at about 300 out of alignment or with a wobble spin into the flight path may offer better heat resistance than a needle nose fighter plane. All this maybe suitable for ET’s, to escape our flight technology but beyond that it’s got to be GM, (see agspri.com). Short leap teleportation can be explained as a periodic gravitational acceleration –deceleration sequence of alien spacecraft (refer GTM Base Table agspri.com). The bicycle balance! Standing still, you have to balance with a left right left right etc. motion by the pelvis or upper body using a plus minus 50mm Balance Length1 (BL)1 confined on the spot. There is no Balance Relieve Length (BRL) by forward motion, it equals zero =‘0mm’. At a velocity from 100mm per second the balance is now relieved, elongated, exchanged over a 100mm length. Your BL1 now operates zigzag diagonal left right left right etc. = BL2. It is not stationary at 900 left right left right any more it is an angular extended BL (motion) by the length of the hypotenuse c = BL2 of 111.8mm/s = BRL/s. That is derived from a triangle with side’s a100mm, b50mm and c111.8mm. The BRL equals thus c/b = 2.236 times BL1 = BRL/s. from zero to forward motion. At a velocity of 1000mm/s the BRL = a1000/b50/s. = 20 times BL1 = BRL/s etc. = (vx/s)/BL1 = BRL/s ratio. The extra length of the hypotenuse c compared to length b for above is now academic. BL1 will also decrease naturally by further acceleration within BL2 hence it will increase the BRL ratio proportionally by (BL2 x vm/s)/BL1-y. The spinning tops operate the same way. If the spinning top has zero rotational momentum standing upright, by an incremental part of 1mm, out of the vertical balance it wants to fall over and it falls that instant. Even under proper angular momentum BR by nature it wants to falls just the same at position a, but position a (10 out of 3600) has many times continuously per second become removed, ‘exchanged’ by 1800 to point b there is no time to fall at point a, or at any other point even, by the less momentum induced, partly upright, spinning top wobble there is no sufficient ‘time laps point’ of attack for gravity to allow its course immediately. The rolling coin has the property of a vertical operating gyro therefore a gravity resisting ‘in space twist stability’. You are aware of it because of the coin experiment and what you have stated in a shortened sense. Think about Sir Isaac Newton planetary motion by gravity its all sort of related were by a planet can not have its own linear momentum to continue unless gravity stops ‘pulling’ on it, it all = momentum/time versus gravity = m/t ‘v’g. Gunther K H Pfrengle agspri.com 16 09 08
Question 2From Kumaran Sanmugathan email@example.com>
Reply 2 The take off and acceleration in proportion with contraction of a Gravitational Time Mechanic (GTM) spacecraft will be instantanteneous. That is if the atoms of all the elements of the craft and within the craft are responding to men made device emitting a gravitational code frequency which is a special bound state electron (bse) vibration. This is what my GTM postulations predict. Thanks for your email. Gunther
How much would it cost to develop your spaceship?
Reply 3 A vessel to withstand space environment, preferable a sphere with three length adjustable legs, portholes and hatch would be the simplest solution, the price could be calculated by any metal shipyard. The technology involving Gravitational Mechanics (GM) to move this ship is a matter of a successful research to find the key to the Universe, ‘the code frequency’ to which atoms obey to, in an anti gravitational sense. Pricing precise scientific electronic equipment, to the ordinary that I use, is ten times the price approx. $100.000 Australian. Bypassing fulltime employment for scientists, mathematicians, electronic engineers, computer programmers by paying these people casual per hour for their service, would be the best economical solution. Most data research orders and collection could be solved over the internet. The hourly rates could be between 80 and 300 dollars Australian. Some time back I estimated this to come to $100,000 per year allowing several thousand dollars for each basic experiment a variation of the same would be considerable less. The cost for the development of such a spacecraft can be sensed by the above. Thanks for your email. Gunther
Nowra NSW AUSTRALIA firstname.lastname@example.org