Paul March <
[email protected]> добави в адреси
До: <
[email protected]>
Относно: RE: Mach-Lorentz Thruster (MLT) vs. U-Tron of Otis Carr
Дата: Събота, 2008, Август 2 08:25:30 EEST
Thanks much for taking the time to read one or more of my articles, but from
what I've seen of Otis Carr's work to date, I have no way of quantifying
what he did, for his "physics" is gibberish. And all we have for evidence
for his reported flying saucer flight is his words with NO credible
supporting data of any consequence. Until we have a solid theoretical basis
and set of repeatable data supporting that theory, IMO going off on tangents
following other's approaches to propellantless propulsion (P-P) and warp
drives is a waste of time. The Bible states that everything has a season,
and right now my season is learning the alphabet of physics that concerns
these types of P-P drives that are encapsulated in the MLTs and the QVF/MHD
drives...
Paul March
-----Original Message-----
From: [mailto:
[email protected]]
Sent: Sunday, July 27, 2008 4:41 AM
To:
[email protected]Subject: Mach-Lorentz Thruster (MLT) vs. U-Tron of Otis Carr
Importance: High
Greetings, Mr. March!
I've readed the presentation of yours, which is concentrated on the High
Frequency Gravity Waves and a possibility of a starship with FTL drive in
2040. But I don't understand. Why don't you repeat the experiments of Otis
Carr and Ralph Ring, done in late 50s.? Why don't you build a prototype of
the U-tron? Because from what I see, the craft did have antigravity effects.
http://www.projectcamelot.net/ralph_ring.htmlI'll be thankful if you answer