Newsgroup: it.discussioni.misteri
Titolo: Mentecatti ! il funzionamento della pnn è già chiarito su Nasa Spaceflight

 
Leggete bene mentecatti col botto
 la PNN è in pieno accordo con le equazioni di Maxwell :-)
e rfmwguy likes this :-)
 
From
 
http://forum.nasaspaceflight.com/index.php?topic=40170.0
 
 
 
 
Note about PNN for NASA spaceflight forum
 
ASPS was founded on June 29th 1979 by myself and an engineer.
 
In our statute is written to pursue the propellantless propulsion as facts demonstrate that through rocketry we can't set and maintain any stable outpost neither on the Moon nor on Mars.
 
Until about 1991 we pursued experimental research on exclusively mechanical prototypes based on the phase shift between action/reaction forces. The goal was not reached because in a mechanical device the action/reaction waves destructively interfere. They interfere just because for them the "Superposition Principle"  is not valid, on the contrary of e.m waves. The prototype didn't thrust.
Here the details: 
http://www.asps.it/Prototipo.htm
 
 
Around 1992 we started researching electromagnetic propulsion.
 
Some ASPS associates want to make a distinction between Mechanical PNN (PNN-M) and Electromagnetic PNN (PNN-E). I don't because mechanical PNN doesn't exist, so there is only the electromagnetic one, PNN for short.
 
Countless has been the tests for researching the phase shift between action and reaction waves of electromagnetic type. Many details are reported on our periodical Nova Astronautica (first number in 1981 - 
www.asps.it/na.htm
)
 
To make it short we started to observe the first experimental results in prototypes tested on ballistic pendulum.
 
Back to our days I've been banned from Nasa space flight forum just for trying to talk about PNN.
 
However it's better if I don't write on your forum because I couldn't say anything more than what I'm doing right now and some controversies regarding my reticence could rise.
 
The fundamental point to understand is that PNN is based on the violation of action/reaction principle. It is a well known fact since more than a century (at least since a long time in various Italian physics textbooks) that this Newton's Third principle doesn't make coherent sense in electrodynamics.
 
The only problem is how to proceed at experimental level from a totally abstract theoretical concept .
 
Here 
www.asps.it/azione.htm
 I gave a theoretical base acknowledged by various physicists (in detail Valter Moretti and Elio Fabri). I kindly ask you to distinguish in that link the PNN physics from the "Crusades" (let's say it's an hobby of mine, as I think about them like various Popes of centuries ago thought about "relationships" with Islam. At 
www.asps.it/occc.htm
 are described my beliefs about it).
 
Now because I can't afford to be followed on this road (experimental procedure for the violation of action/reaction principle) I can't give informations about how to proceed because by having few resources I have to proceed slowly and who can understand the fundamentals of what to do, and owns economical resources, could follow me "very rapidly".
 
 
The road to experimental violation of Newton's Third demanded years and years of researches  and failures to me and ASPS that resulted in PNN of 2004-2005, when we made several road shows both private and public.
 
 
Here 
http://www.asps.it/presentazione.wmv
  PNN is presented by ASPS vice president Massimo Ceccarelli)
 
Here there are some tests, also repeated in a public demonstration at Sheraton Hotel in Rome in 2005 and other roadshows:
www.asps.it/pnn2005.mpg
 
www.asps.it/qct05.mpg
 
http://www.asps.it/Ott05.mpg
 
Admiral Lucio Accardo of Italian navy (V department - R&D)  was also present.
http://www.asps.it/accardo.mpg
 
 
But Italian Navy like any other contacted industries (Alenia Spazio in the first place) wanted the PNN know-how for free so it all came to nothing.
 
At the end we've been founded for just 1 year (a very small funding from an Italian investor). The PNN of the time has been financed only by letting our investor's technical staff to make all the experiment it wanted on the prototype/s of the time. With our PNN demonstrative procedure THROUGH CLOSED BOX no one loses anything. With the closed box one can demonstrate that Newton's Third isn't valid if an investor has a technical team who can understand basic physics.
 
At the end if the investor doesn't fund we don't lose the know-how and no one loses anything.
 
PNN tests with closed box (that is without losing know-how) were conducted following this experimental procedure 
http://www.asps.it/SC2.12.jpg
, also repeated in the ways investor asked for.
 
To that group I experimentally demonstrated that PNN (even if back then through a very small thrust) was a real thing and not a dream.  
http://www.asps.it/mdpnn.mpg
 
 
Then it took me about ten years for a successive improvement.
 
The problems? Mainly technicals: I had to change experimental collaborators (technicians) for unreliability (information leak has always been a problem), then excessive prototype overheatings, preamplifiers and amplifiers in VHF and UHF that often can't bear the required power and performances. Problems that one can't solve with few money and without the aid of people skilled at solid state physics who must be paid.
 
To all of this it must be added the information leak regarding one of my patent deposit copied by two Japanese. Here's the info:
 
I perform the trace of my patent filed in Italy on April 22nd, 1998
http://worldwide.espacenet.com/publicationDetails/biblio?DB=EPODOC&II=1&ND=3&adjacent=true&locale=en_EP&FT=D&date=19991022&CC=IT&NR=RM980250A1&KC=A1
 
There is an article on Nova Astronautica  where the patent was copied by two Japanese a few years later and reissued in their name. Informations that I don't want to spread online.
 
I got the information about the copy of a patent of mine from a physicist from Pisa University practically 12 years later the patent deposit!
http://www.asps.it/apensar.htm
  (in italian)
More information on Nova Astronautica and informational materials that, I repeat,  I can not spread on the net to prevent further copying.
 
Now let's come back to action/reaction principle and to an event (A NEW KIND OF INERTIA LAW) which is to me is more important than the thrust itself: the changing of inertia law by the system that violates the action/reaction principle.
Now our new ballistic pendulum, that someone would like me to spread over the network for free along with F242, not only detects the pressure from F242 but also the new law of inertia.
 
Recently I came to know about this fantastic correlation:
 
EmDrive experimentally verified that "Thrust signals even after the electrical power was turned off" (from 
http://www.sciencealert.com/independent-scientists-confirm-that-the-impossible-em-drive-produces-thrust
)
The same occurs with more grandeur and evidence for F242
https://neolegesmotus.wordpress.com/2016/04/24/f242-is-now-at-2-56-grams-of-thrust/
 
http://www.asps.it/assettof242.htm
 
For me "Thrust signals even after the electrical power was turned off" is not a measurement error and agrees with findings in F242, in the sense that the violation of Newton's Third principle involves a change of the law of inertia and therefore the law of inertia for systems that violate the third principle (PNN and Emdrive) is a uniformly accelerated motion!
 
Who says I don't use mathematics simply must go at 
http://www.calmagorod.org/inerzia-della-pnn/
 [English at 
https://neolegesmotus.wordpress.com/2015/10/01/as-if-one-wasnt-enough-pnn-breaks-another-law/
 - Sergio] and tell me if in his opinion the violation of action/reaction principle doesn't imply a change in inertia law. I only mathematically defined an hypothesis completely theoretical about the inertia deriving from violation of action/reaction principle.
 
One salient characteristic of the system that changes inertia law is that when the power supply is turned off the motion isn't uniform and linear anymore but uniformly accelerated, thus the mass of the movable object must decrease when speed increases in order to conserve the energy. It's like if a force was still present.
 
Now this "seems" it has been observed also with the EmDrive.
 
With F242 I'm observing several times this phenomenon with more grandeur on my new ballistic pendulum (not patented)
 
 
To recap, in my opinion the violation of Newton's Third (which for me it occurs also in the EmDrive) implies:
 
1.	the impulse conservation (momentum) through electrodynamic field (also Moretti says this in 
www.asps.it/azione.htm
)
2.	the thrust increase for the same energy used: F242 increases the thrust for the same energy used and I'm observing this experimentally through the new kind of ballistic pendulum
3.	I specify: when powered the prototype progressively increases its inclination.. but I can't increase too much the thrust duration due to thermal issues (since the thrust can't convert itself in kinetic energy on the ballistic pendulum it convert itself in thermal energy)
4.	the most important fact: only by violating the Third and by changing the inertia law (in the one I mathematically defined it's even exponential!) the moving object accelerate even with engine turned off. What does it mean? That moving object mass must decrease when speed increases in order to conserve the total energy. On Reddit one immediately said to me: then it doesn't work! But I didn't reply him that Relativity has NOTHING to do with the sum of all non-null internal forces of a mass. What do I want to say? That in physics the concepts are valid only with the procedures used to define them and NOT with those they HAVEN'T BEEN defined with. In my opinion only by changing the law of inertia one can face interstellar travel.
 
Note about the displacement current:
 
With a few other physicists I'm fighting for years a battle about the nonexistence of the displacement current. Nonexistence in which many physicists from the past haVE believed as it lacks any measurement of its fatal magnetic field.
 
From 
http://citeseerx.ist.psu.edu/viewdoc/summary?doi=10.1.1.205.6223
 
One can read in the abstract:
Physics literature on the displacement current from Maxwell to the present day is reviewed with the intention of clarifying the concept. Two major traditions of interpretation are identified, one deriving from Maxwell which maintains that the displacement current is electromagnetically equivalent to an electric current and one deriving from Lorentz which denies that there is any displacement current. The article attempts to resolve various outstanding ambiguities and it concludes with an assessment of the present status of both traditions of interpretation. The appropriateness or otherwise of introducing the concept of a 'displacement current ' to undergraduates is also discussed briefly. 1. The controversy Maxwell's displacement current, first introduced in 1862, has been the subject of both admiration and controversy for more than a century. To-day, important questions still remain unresolved, most notably whether or not it represents an electric current in some real sense, whether it produces a magnetic field and whether or not all currents are closed--all closely related issues. Why does the controversy continue? Not, I believe, because of unrecognized physical principles, or because of insufficient conceptual effort by physicists. .............. 
 
and there is also a certain H.A.Lorentz,  who denied any physical consistency to the fatal magnetic field by displacement current.
In addition to the never remembered enough contradiction that Maxwell, as known, introduced the "displacement current" because he believed the ether existed. From:  
http://www.jpier.org/PIER/pier144/30.13111501.pdf
 
Ether is given as nonexistent ... but the displacement current as formally existent :-).
 
 
So denying the orthodoxy any will to make a measurement (in the far field, not the near, of the fatal magnetic field of displacement current) I offered a pnn propulsion system that worked with it.
 
Probably they already went to Mars with it without me knowing.  :-)
 
What is described at 
www.calmagorod.org
 is written on purpose for physics orthodoxy which does not want to take note since CENTURIES that in that field Maxwell's equations are wrong and that in free space only the electrical component propagates, not the so-called electromagnetic wave.
 
But I wrote that site mainly for a la Japanese PNN  cheaters! In the sense that I want to decide what they have to copy and I also filed a patent to make the bait more tempting.
 
I have written several times about this Nova Astronautics for many years... and I can't report everything now. Also if you want the issue to me is in these terms FORMAL:
 
If one day the official physics will recognize that the displacement current and its magnetic field does not exist I'll say that what is described at 
www.calmagorod.org
 (read: PNN CAPACITORS THRUSTER) IS WRONG.
If they won't recognize its nonexistence, should read that Maxwell's equations must be rewritten, I'll always say that what is in the site is the PNN thrust procedure.
 
Since Calmagorod is online no orthodox physicist told me that the above description is wrong, because if they did they should say that Maxwell's equations are wrong!
 
I know in experimental way that the displacement current is an hallucination that is massacring electrodynamics since centuries and makes derail the real physical perception of the electrodynamic field. PNN is another thing and it works just because through it I managed to avoid Maxwell's interpretive and experimental disasters (Maxwell was a mathematician, not a physicist) regarding the real propagation procedure of the electrodynamic field.
 
E notare bestiole che
 
rfmwguy likes this (come altro)  :-)
 
 
 
 
####### 
avete voluto rompere il kazzo con le scommesse bene bene ve le farò entrare dal naso e uscire dal kulo  (e viceversa)  
https://groups.google.com/forum/?hl=IT#!topic/it.discussioni.misteri/Prs3voLsmN4
 
 
Le bestie ateo scientiste e delinquenti seriali in rete sottoelencati si contorcono e rosicano fuori misura 
 
http://www.asps.it/kittesenkula.htm
 
http://www.asps.it/aqualung2012.htm
 
http://www.asps.it/aqualung.htm
 
http://www.asps.it/saknussemm.htm
 
http://www.asps.it/sak2013.htm
 
http://www.asps.it/saknussem2014.htm
 
http://www.asps.it/centromix2013.htm
 
http://www.asps.it/centromix2013tris.htm
 
http://www.asps.it/pietropaolo2014.htm
 
http://www.asps.it/pietropaolo2016.htm
 
http://www.asps.it/verme.htm
 
http://www.asps.it/bhismavermescappa.htm
 
http://www.asps.it/bhisma2013.htm
 
e poi  Kitt'E Se 'nKula è il rettile ipocrita Bhisma :-) 
http://www.asps.it/kitculi2016.htm
 
ormai pure in lapide  
www.asps.it/kitte.htm
 
 Chissà cosa li separa  dal suicidio e da una vita di rosikanza che non serve a un kazzo 
Ora  dal 2017 la pnn cambierà la faccia della terra e i delinquenti seriali anonimi di usenet 
www.asps.it/gotha.htm
    non potranno farci nulla ... se non assistere al successo della pnn 
La loro tortura e punizione sarà infatti assistere  al cambiamento by pnn dell'astronautica a trombetta senza poter far nulla :-) Comunque il principio di azione e reazione dice che i suddetti pagheranno un prezzo nel 2017 per le feci che spargono.
Recentemente sono impazzite di rabbia per questo
http://forum.nasaspaceflight.com/index.php?topic=40170.0
 
 
------------------------ 
Ho discusso in passato con pietropaolo quando si chiamava bekketto 
Ma poi è finita perché non si può ragionare con un espulso dall'asps che non capisce un kazzo e 
non sa risolvere  neppure una equazione differenziale  
http://www.asps.it/albriccone.htm
 
Ora fa parte dell' RTR (Reparto Trombette Reatino) sezione TScB (Triremi Spaziali con Bekketto)
La PNN cambierà la faccia e la FECCIA 
www.asps.it/gotha.htm
 della Terra.
 
 

 Leggete bene mentecatti col botto
 
O togliti quel riflesso dal monitor, nini lol
 
-- 
... e il pensier libero, è la mia fé!

 O togliti quel riflesso dal monitor, nini lol
 
ROTFL !! Da come sgambetta e si agita, sembrerebbe nervosetto :D
 


 e c'è un altro siluro sargassen :-)
 
ma dopo dopo dopo sarà più divertente


 
 
 
-- 

 
 
sei ancora in tempo 
 
http://www.dignitas.ch/index.php?lang=it
 


 
 
Per il generatore di inerzie a rendere:
 
Hai una firma cosě chilonetrica che č impossibile risponderti e si
 č costretti a replicare ai post piů corto. 
In pratica con quel trattato in inglese ti sei solo cagato dentro
 le mutande non avendo fatto altro che cercare di aggrapparti ad
 uno specchio
Complimenti!
 
-- 

  e c'è un altro siluro
 
non credo sia necessario, ti sei già abbondantemente auto-affondato