Victor Espinoza's: Thread of Intrigue

[Kittamaru]

Obviously you are skipping the background research. Try doing that before you reply. You are doing what scientists do, make a statement, and then later find out that you are wrong. Like I said... the scientific method doesn't work, and you are helping to prove it.

Gravity can be a push force.

The bending of spacetime was never proved.

Doppler shift works towards a black hole if you use a gas flowing towards it, but the gas would vanish in the hole. So you move matter towards points in every direction, you get the Doppler shift.

I ignore the scientific method because it doesn't work. I figured that out based on all of the false positives in science.

Yeah no... sorry, but I think I'm just going to disregard you from now on... at least Victor is willing to try and prove his points... you're just trying to stick your fingers in your ears and go "lalala everyone else is wrong, I'm right".

Present some shred of evidence that the Scientific Method doesn't work, and we'll talk.

As for the doppler shift working towards a black hole... what are you even TRYING to state with this? "You move matter towards points in every direction"... what does that mean? Are you trying to expand matter into several different vectors/dimensions at once? And of course the gas vanishes into the hole... there IS no argument being made here to disprove doppler shift...

Bending of spacetime was never proven... of course not. However, it's not been DISPROVEN, and it's the best working model we have at this time. Don't like it? Disprove it. Otherwise, shut up about it.

And show me ANY instance of gravity being a push force...

*shakes head*

Propellant of centrifugal force​

The idea is to remove the force of reaction of the turbines blue, creating a centrifugal force that will push sideways to the turbines blue:

[video=youtube;Qpd5pLUpSK0]http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Qpd5pLUpSK0&hd=1[/video]

Red is an electric motor
Green is a cylinder
The blue are turbines ejecting pressure to the alternator and pushing.
Black is an alternator of blades.

Very affectionately,
Victor Elias Espinoza Guedez
February 16, 2014

I'm sorry Victor, but I don't see any way for this to transfer the centripetal force of the rotating cylinder into the turbines or alternators. Even if you filled the cylinder with a fluid, the entire assembly is rotating - there would be net zero force imparted on the turbines.

That, and even if the motor could impart spin on the turbines, you would still be losing energy due to losses from friction, electrical resistance, etc. That is why you can't stick a generator onto an electric motor, and have the motor spin the generator to power the electric motor - in the end, resistance and friction kills the system.

 

[Uncle Pythagoras]

Yeah no... sorry, but I think I'm just going to disregard you from now on... at least Victor is willing to try and prove his points... you're just trying to stick your fingers in your ears and go "lalala everyone else is wrong, I'm right".

Present some shred of evidence that the Scientific Method doesn't work, and we'll talk.

As for the doppler shift working towards a black hole... what are you even TRYING to state with this? "You move matter towards points in every direction"... what does that mean? Are you trying to expand matter into several different vectors/dimensions at once? And of course the gas vanishes into the hole... there IS no argument being made here to disprove doppler shift...

Bending of spacetime was never proven... of course not. However, it's not been DISPROVEN, and it's the best working model we have at this time. Don't like it? Disprove it. Otherwise, shut up about it.

And show me ANY instance of gravity being a push force...

*shakes head*

I'm not expanding matter, I'm contracting matter with a red shift into holes just to show that you can contract with a red shift... the scientific method...

7 + 3 = 10

3 + 7 = 10

You can reverse physics, and get the same result. Gravity can be a push, gravity can be a pull. The Universe could be expanding, the Universe could be contracting. All measurements are relative. the scientific model is relative to your intelligence. I am very intelligent, I can show that gravity is a push force, and I can show that the Universe is contracting, but no formula can do that.

 

[Kittamaru]

I'm not expanding matter, I'm contracting matter with a red shift into holes just to show that you can contract with a red shift...

You DO realize that Red Shift occurs on objects moving away from the OBSERVER, right? It sounds to me like you are suggesting that because we see a red shift on objects being pulled into a black hole that doppler effect is wrong?

the scientific method...

7 + 3 = 10

3 + 7 = 10

Congratulations... you discovered the Commutative Property...

You can reverse physics, and get the same result. Gravity can be a push, gravity can be a pull. The Universe could be expanding, the Universe could be contracting. All measurements are relative. the scientific model is relative to your intelligence. I am very intelligent, I can show that gravity is a push force, and I can show that the Universe is contracting, but no formula can do that.

Okay, but by the logic you JUST used, I can disprove it... why?

5-3=2
3-5=-2

Uh oh... I changed the order and now they don't equal up... so no, apparently you cannot reverse physics.

Please show some sort of proof that gravity can push. Show some evidence that the scientific model is relative to intelligence. You claim you can... time to put your money where your mouth is mate.

 

[victorespinoza]

Propellant of Centrifugal Force​

[video=youtube;Qpd5pLUpSK0]http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Qpd5pLUpSK0&hd=1[/video]

Red is an electric motor
Green is a cylinder
The blue are turbines ejecting pressure to the alternator and pushing.
Black is an alternator of blades.

Very affectionately,
Victor Elias Espinoza Guedez
February 16, 2014

 

[Uncle Pythagoras]

You DO realize that Red Shift occurs on objects moving away from the OBSERVER, right? It sounds to me like you are suggesting that because we see a red shift on objects being pulled into a black hole that doppler effect is wrong?



Congratulations... you discovered the Commutative Property...



Okay, but by the logic you JUST used, I can disprove it... why?

5-3=2
3-5=-2

Uh oh... I changed the order and now they don't equal up... so no, apparently you cannot reverse physics.

Please show some sort of proof that gravity can push. Show some evidence that the scientific model is relative to intelligence. You claim you can... time to put your money where your mouth is mate.

Objects move away from you if they contract away from you. If you have a room full of balloons and inflate them all they all move closer together, if you deflate them all they all move further apart. Now if you slightly alter the physics towards holes you get everything flowing towards points. Contraction towards points moving away from you. So now you get photons moving towards those points, and guess what? It looks like the bending of spacetime!

5-3=2
3-5=-2

You reversed the physics of mass and Gravity. Mass should always be a negative number, but scientists do not know that.

 

[Kittamaru]

Propellant of Centrifugal Force​

[video=youtube;Qpd5pLUpSK0]http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Qpd5pLUpSK0&hd=1[/video]

Red is an electric motor
Green is a cylinder
The blue are turbines ejecting pressure to the alternator and pushing.
Black is an alternator of blades.

Very affectionately,
Victor Elias Espinoza Guedez
February 16, 2014

You've already posted this Victor; my point is, there is nothing there to impart force UPON the turbines... there is no pressure. And again, a perpetual system like that will not work due to losses from friction and resistance.

Objects move away from you if they contract away from you. If you have a room full of balloons and inflate them all they all move closer together, if you deflate them all they all move further apart. Now if you slightly alter the physics towards holes you get everything flowing towards points. Contraction towards points moving away from you. So now you get photons moving towards those points, and guess what? It looks like the bending of spacetime!

What in the world are you talking about? No, not at all! Yes, if you have a set of balloons in a finite space and inflate them, they appear to take up more space... however, they do not "move". And what do you mean "alter the physics towards holes"...? That makes no sense. Are you saying push them toward the hole? And how does that look like a bending of space time? That makes NO sense.

5-3=2
3-5=-2

You reversed the physics of mass and Gravity. Mass should always be a negative number, but scientists do not know that.

Why should mass be a negative number? And if that were true, then how do you explain such well known things as kinetic energy? I mean, to figure kinetic energy: .5m*v^2 (one half times mass times velocity squared)... in your impossible scenario, all kinetic energy would be a negative result, as a negative times a positive is always a negative, and since the velocity is always going to be a positive (since any number squared is invariably positive)... yeah, what you are saying is impossible.

 

[Uncle Pythagoras]

You've already posted this Victor; my point is, there is nothing there to impart force UPON the turbines... there is no pressure. And again, a perpetual system like that will not work due to losses from friction and resistance.



What in the world are you talking about? No, not at all! Yes, if you have a set of balloons in a finite space and inflate them, they appear to take up more space... however, they do not "move". And what do you mean "alter the physics towards holes"...? That makes no sense. Are you saying push them toward the hole? And how does that look like a bending of space time? That makes NO sense.



Why should mass be a negative number? And if that were true, then how do you explain such well known things as kinetic energy? I mean, to figure kinetic energy: .5m*v^2 (one half times mass times velocity squared)... in your impossible scenario, all kinetic energy would be a negative result, as a negative times a positive is always a negative, and since the velocity is always going to be a positive (since any number squared is invariably positive)... yeah, what you are saying is impossible.

Like a sand timer with the sand moving down holes and scaling down by evaporation, and each grain of sand is a point. Put billions of sand timers next to each other. Now all of those points are contracting, and moving away from each other which stretches the outside of the sand timer as everything scales down. The sun, a huge sand timer appears to bend spacetime. The rainbow showing the colours of scaling points. The evaporation is recycled as magnetism. Iron filings fit in the holes left behind by a bar magnet.

All you are saying is that kenetic energy doesn't use mass, it uses gravity. Gravity is the positive flow force into negative mass holes.

 

[James R]

Victor:

I think that the distance caused by the atom, separates the ether. And there is a black hole, where it comes and goes the air or composition of the fields of the atoms of gas.

A black hole inside a balloon would suck the air in, but it would never release it again. So, once again, how do you account for a cooled balloon re-inflating when you warm it up again?


Motor Daddy:

So the black hole you put in the Earth increased in volume and gained mass? Did the density remain the same? Is the density at the core of the marble the same as the density at the surface of the marble, or does the density increase as you get closer to the center?

I think the density of a black hole increases as its mass increases (taking the radius of the hole to be the Schwarzschild radius). This density is, however, a calculated or average figure for all the space inside the event horizon.

It doesn't make much sense to talk about the interior of a black hole as if it is similar to the space outside, because in fact it is very different. Every bit of matter inside the event horizon moves inevitably towards the singularity, for example. Therefore, in a sense, all of the mass is located at a single point at the centre of the hole.

 

[paddoboy]

It doesn't make much sense to talk about the interior of a black hole as if it is similar to the space outside, because in fact it is very different. Every bit of matter inside the event horizon moves inevitably towards the singularity, for example. Therefore, in a sense, all of the mass is located at a single point at the centre of the hole.

And in effect then, all any BH is, is critically curved space/time [with a Singularity occupying a point in the middle]

 

[victorespinoza]

Second example of Propellant of centrifugal force.

Second example of Propellant of centrifugal force.​

[video=youtube;XnSZ93ervoo]http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=XnSZ93ervoo&hd=1[/video]

Very affectionately,
Víctor Elias Espinoza Guedez
16 February 2014

 

[James R]

And in effect then, all any BH is, is critically curved space/time [with a Singularity occupying a point in the middle]

Yes.

 

[Kittamaru]

Like a sand timer with the sand moving down holes and scaling down by evaporation, and each grain of sand is a point. Put billions of sand timers next to each other. Now all of those points are contracting, and moving away from each other which stretches the outside of the sand timer as everything scales down. The sun, a huge sand timer appears to bend spacetime. The rainbow showing the colours of scaling points. The evaporation is recycled as magnetism. Iron filings fit in the holes left behind by a bar magnet.

I feel like you just threw a can of alphabet soup at me and expected it to make sense... please tell me you are working through a translator like Babelfish, because I really have no idea WHAT you just tried to say.

All you are saying is that kenetic energy doesn't use mass, it uses gravity. Gravity is the positive flow force into negative mass holes.

Pardon my french... but how the flying fuck does kinetic energy use gravity? Where, in that equation, is gravity even MENTIONED? And "positive flow force into negative mass holes"...? WHAT?!? WHAT DOES THAT EVEN MEAN?

Seriously, stop vomiting alphabet soup at me!

 

[Kittamaru]

Second example of Propellant of centrifugal force.​

[video=youtube;b1lUgP2kipI]http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=b1lUgP2kipI&hd=1[/video]

Very affectionately,
Víctor Elias Espinoza Guedez
16 February 2014

Alright, need some additional explanation on this one, preferably in english Far as I can tell, you have a cylinder that is spinning with two motors (jets?) inside.

 

[victorespinoza]

Alright, need some additional explanation on this one, preferably in english Far as I can tell, you have a cylinder that is spinning with two motors (jets?) inside.

YES, with two motors (jets?) inside. (ELECTRICAL)

 

[Kittamaru]

Still not really sure what you are trying to do with it. The entire assembly is spinning - what you could try would be to use a planetary gear setup and isolate the motors inside so they do not spin, and turn them via the planetary gear system. However, again, due to losses from friction and resistance, it would still be a net loss in power.

 

[victorespinoza]

Still not really sure what you are trying to do with it. The entire assembly is spinning - what you could try would be to use a planetary gear setup and isolate the motors inside so they do not spin, and turn them via the planetary gear system. However, again, due to losses from friction and resistance, it would still be a net loss in power.

While turning the turbine JETS, EXPEL pressure of air against the wall.

 

[Kittamaru]

Ah ok so the jets are powering the turbine. Makes more sense. What is this setup intended for? And the air pressure against the wall of the cylinder wouldnt really do anything near as I can tell, except perhaps create a wind funnel effect if the jet exhaust is angled correctly.

 

[victorespinoza]

Ah ok so the jets are powering the turbine. Makes more sense. What is this setup intended for? And the air pressure against the wall of the cylinder wouldnt really do anything near as I can tell, except perhaps create a wind funnel effect if the jet exhaust is angled correctly.

I want to avoid the impulse of the turbines jets with centrifugal force. And use compressed air to impulse of the cylinder or propellant.

 

[Captain Kremmen]

Ah ok so the jets are powering the turbine. Makes more sense. What is this setup intended for? And the air pressure against the wall of the cylinder wouldnt really do anything near as I can tell, except perhaps create a wind funnel effect if the jet exhaust is angled correctly.

It will do absolutely nothing, because all Victor's systems are closed systems.
Nothing that Victor has invented will work because it contravenes Newton's Third Law.

For every action, there is an equal and opposite reaction.
The statement means that in every interaction, there is a pair of forces acting on the two interacting objects. The size of the forces on the first object equals the size of the force on the second object. The direction of the force on the first object is opposite to the direction of the force on the second object. Forces always come in pairs - equal and opposite action-reaction force pairs.
http://www.physicsclassroom.com/class/newtlaws/u2l4a.cfm

This invention is a kind of perpetual motion machine.
Energy is supposedly removed from the system, but the original energy remains in full.
You could take some of the energy from the turbine to power the fans, and they would run forever producing free electricity.

In short, it is ideal material for the pseudoscience section.
It is truly Democratic that Victor has a place to speak, not undisputed of course, but unhindered.

 

[Uncle Pythagoras]

I feel like you just threw a can of alphabet soup at me and expected it to make sense... please tell me you are working through a translator like Babelfish, because I really have no idea WHAT you just tried to say.



Pardon my french... but how the flying fuck does kinetic energy use gravity? Where, in that equation, is gravity even MENTIONED? And "positive flow force into negative mass holes"...? WHAT?!? WHAT DOES THAT EVEN MEAN?

Seriously, stop vomiting alphabet soup at me!

It makes perfect sense, and isn't even complicated.