Asps PNN (Propulsione Non Newtoniana) tests which in our opinion violates action reaction principle

    This site uses cookies. By continuing to browse this site, you are agreeing to our Cookie Policy.

    • Rapporto di Ricerca della PNN approvato dal Patent Office Europeo



      Un malloppo di ricerca di circa 10 pagineSUUfficio dell'Ufficio Brevetto Europeo D

      è giunto in Sede Asps attraverso il CEO nostro Consulente di brevetti PNN

      Tralascio MOLTI e molti dettagli elencati dall'EPO europeo per evitarecopiati della rivoluzionaria PNN.



      asps.it/Rapporto_di_Ricerca.jpg


      issuewire.com/propulsion-of-pn…for-mars-1726481484923918



      In pratica le10 Rivendicazioni PNN sono classificate come:

      NOVITA'

      ATTIVITA' INVENTIVA

      APPLICAZIONE INDUSTRALE
    • Il giorno mercoledì 25 maggio 2022 alle 15:38:39 UTC+2 GiOvAnNi ha scritto:
      > On Tuesday, May 24, 2022 at 12:53:59 PM UTC+2, pnn calmagorod wrote:
      > > siccome su Research Gate è già incappato
      > >
      > > nel 2020 !!! in
      > >
      > > asps.it/impnn4.png :)
      > >
      > > gli deve essere preso un ictus sui substrati quantici e i campi e.m. tripolari rotfl frattali :-)))
      > >
      > > Tre uomini in fuga : kaiseretti,/cesaretti con motori cojonici al seguito plus , Buldrini and Tajmar :)
      > Il bello dei post del Laureti e' che ad un osservatore disattento (vulg.: i suoi adoratori che usano turpiloquio e lingua felpata a seconda dei casi) >sembrano argomenti nuovi e mai toccati.
      >
      > Nello specifico del povero Martin,


      ma quanto mi dispiacie dell'ictus by pnn ..... te lo salvo così : sono contentissimo che Tajmar NON CAPISCA UN CAZZO NEPPURE DELLA FORZA DI LORENTZ :-))))


      >che chissa' come sara' contento di essere nominato in tale consesso di cervelli, gia' avevo scritto che un disegno fatto a mano caricato su un sito >del menga non puo' certo essere preso come base per un tentativo di replica.


      Dai Tajmar non capisce un cazzo di PNN ... però non tutti sono come Tajmar ( penso all'EPO) :)


      cmq... cmq... Tajmar non deve replicare l'astronave PNN ... ma solo l'esistenza della forza di Lorentz tra circuiti aperti .... anche questo è difficile .... ci vuole il sottovuoto :) . SOTTOVUOTO! anche per la forza di Lorentz di circa 200 anni fa!!!
      .... come cazzo avrà fatto Lorentz illo tempore a far passare la sua F=i*l*B (semplificando!) per circuiti chiusi senza il sottovuoto e i prroooottt review... e le genuflessioni universitarie è un vero mistero ... :)
      Come cacchio ha fatto a prendere il nobel per questa forza!!!
      ... o no forse il nobel glielo hanno dato per lavori di uncinetto senza sottovuoto :-)))
      Come stracazzo faranno in tutti i lab di fisica del modo di didattica della fisica dove dette forze sono applicate a innumerevoli trappole elettromeccaniche senza mettere sottovuoto prof e studenti!!! :)


      > Figurarsi se un'universita' prende in considerazione quella roba li' per studiare la tecnologia... Tanto piu' quando la parte teorica e' gia' cosi' -come dire?-
      >fallace che prendersi la briga di replicare alcunche'


      e si è fallace it.wikipedia.org/wiki/Forza_di_Lorentz ... dove ops ... ops un elettrone o carica è pure un CIRCUITO APERTO!!!

      >e' totalmente fuori luogo. Posso solo dedurre che il nobel al Lorentz è PER VOI fallace
      :)
      insisti e insisti kaiseretti che qui chi abbocca lo trovi :)


      >
      > Ripeto per l'ultima volta (conscio che gli adulatori di santoni risponderanno con un insulto):
      > SE il setup sperimentale e' cosi' cannato da poter ESSO STESSO essere la "causa" della "spinta" "misurata"
      > ALLORA non ha alcun senso rifare l'esperimento, ALMENO in quelle medesime condizioni cannate.



      posso dire che catzo stai dicendo it.wikipedia.org/wiki/Forza_di_Lorentz

      tu mi dice che su wiki l'esempio è fallace ... dunque il tuo trapano non funziona .... per non passare a esempi scostumati col vibratore ... che scommetto probabilmente mai hanno testato sottovuoto :-)))

      >
      > Per essere piu' chiari: un "lavoro" come quello di Laureti, se presentato ad una qualsiasi rivista scientifica che non si chiami "Nova Astronautica" (:-)) >non passerebbe nemmeno la review del portinaio.


      Ma si .... non si capisce un cazzo :-)) .... dimmi che ecatzo capiscono quei diffusori di menzogne su it.wikipedia.org/wiki/Forza_di_Lorentz

      > Un po' come qualsiasi paper di Andrea Rossi sulla fusione fredda, se presentato ad una "rivista" che non sia il Journal of Nuclear Physics (ed en passant notiamo come il JoNP sia stato inventato da Rossi, un po' come NA e' stata inventata da Laureti).


      riecco la mescola della PNN con rossi per confortare la tricazzola tripolare e.m. frattale relativistica ULTRASICURA del VEM drive in cui Tajmar s'è speso (o meglio ha speso i pippi della università di Dresda) e ha inghiottito a prescindere :)

      > Ma aspettiamo fiduciosi, noi scettici, dopo che l'EPO ha accettato il brevetto sulla PNN, certificandone cosi' la bonta' in termini di produzione di >spinta: oggi non vola, domani forse, dopodomani e' gia' Marte.


      C'è una unica certezza finora i tuoi propulsori cojonici non hanno volato e voleranno mai da soli partendo da terra :) .... e questo accade da prima della PNN :)

      E.Laureti


      PS: Però spiegaci come Lrentz è stato nobelizzato senza camere a vuoto e senza l'orchestra di inetti saccenti lekkakuli come voi tajmarizzati dalle impressini visive



      >
      > --
      > GiOvAnNi


      PS PS : Guai a voi scribi e farisei ipocriti.....
    • Cesaretti and Tajmar soon on Research Gate and elsewhere when ready



      In a more voluminous PNN Paper than the following

      [Poor gothalist mugged also in the part of main donkeys with a bang with the PNN ]

      In my shameless defense and of the PNN I used the same procedure that the Nobel H. Lorentz used to take him experimentally with his "Lorentz Force" his nobel …….

      that for the greatest bad luck of Tajmar and Cesaretti (and the gothalists) did not use NEITHER THE VACUUM CHAMBER, NOR THE TORSIONAL SCALE of the Dresden University.

      Which describes exactly their conceit and nonsense of charlatans that excludes from scientific truth those who do not experiment with their equipment.

      Except that ops ..ops someone has made certain experiments before them and has also been ennobled with "hand-made" drawings ... which have bypassed all the "goalkeepers" of Dresden University

      asps.it/peruccaeligio.jpg

      Where the 1949 text by Perucca duly reports for the HISTORY of physics and not for what Cesaretti pretends

      Charlatans nonsense would exclude from truth those who experiment with similar and better equipment (those of PNN (electronic scales)) than those of Lorentz described here.

      asps.it/peruccaeligio.jpg

      If not that ops ..ops someone, for their bad luck he made them before them and was also ennobled with "handmade" designs

      In fact, Cesaretti "...." bray in a few threads ago (it will be with the link!)



      "Specifically about poor Martin, who who knows how happy he will be to be nominated in such a forum of brains, I had already written that a hand-made drawing uploaded to a website of the menga certainly cannot be taken as a basis for an attempt of reply. "



      Here are thousands of drawings made "well" by hand asps.it/peruccaeligio.jpg before the two snacks were born and made by those who DISCOVER something about electromagnetism

      (everything we use today !!!!)

      and NOT made with CAD ………… where they…. Tajmar and friends of a snack at Cesaretti, in practice with their saccenza do not discover UNFORTUNATELY

      plus an "ECaTZO" !!!

      to put it to Rossi….

      But this is inessential for the purpose of the deception that is at the basis of looking good ... ... naturally vacuum-packed



      E. Laureti
    • .................
      At the end per la serie “Zappe sui piedi” In fact Alain Fournier (June 3 2022) says :) If Newton's third law didn't apply to Lorentz force in any significant way, then CERN's particle accelerator would run into serious trouble.

      Mi dispiace Mr. Fournier qualcuno ha commesso l’errore di dirlo :)

      PNN (violating III newton principle ) violates momentum conservation in the sum rule such as in COLLIDERS

      Gothalist International are busy inventing some new bullshit that seems likely to save the comic trumpets ... or Sylvia from complete paranoia :)



      .... or rather escape as the knowledgeable gothalists do (Serni, Cesaretti)

      .................
      or alternatively to hang up the usual desperate tape .... that the pnn does not fly :)

      After all, the rockets show that they were invented by Hitler: suitable only for killing themselves on earth or over short distances (war in ukraine) .... if you expand the scenario to the Moon or to Mars you can only use them to play with robots ..... controlling the enslaved media .... otherwise they notice it

      and Rotfl

      Comment by Doctor Who ASPS Researcher ““Silvia, rimembri ancora quel tempo della tua vita mortale…” :)

      e lallo

      And at the end quello che nessuno vuol verificare : l’esistenza di forze di Lorentz tra circuiti aperti in UHF

      Infatti data la parte teorica

      .......... from asps.it
    • A Revolutionary Propulsion for Space Exploration: Propulsion without reaction mass ejection


      As temporal and experimental facts incontrovertibly demonstrate rocket astronautics has been unable to place permanent outposts on the Moon since Apollo 11 or more than half a century ago. With the Artemis Project, NASA tries to redo what it did over 50 years ago and from how the tests are going unfortunately it is not certain that it will succeed.

      This video clip shows a reactionless mini prototype that propels without losing mass www.asps.it/qct05_ENG.mp4

      Furthermore, the fact that they have been carrying robots to Mars for decades demonstrates that rockets cannot carry humans or the enormous amount of materials that could ensure subsistence in a permanent outpost and protect against inevitable unforeseen events. Such "colonization" with missiles fails neither on Mars nor on the Moon which is much closer.



      The reactionless PNN (Non-Newtonian Propulsion) is electromagnetic and NOT based on the highly polluting fuel chemistry that drives rockets.

      Our demonstrative PNN prototypes want to show that it is possible to change the paradigm in the real and not fake (because impossible) conquest of space.

      In this video clip www.asps.it/PNN488.mp4 the prototype PNN F432 www.asps.it/F432dettagli.jpg is mounted on a ballistic pendulum.

      F432 is powered by an external UHF amplifier connected to a fixed network. The reactionless thrust is demonstrated by an index (based on the prototype) illuminated by a laser; index that moves when the prototype is electrically powered by the amplifier

      In our experimental sites we can see the demonstration of what we say.


      For those familiar with the industry, Tsiolkovsky's formula for rockets limits the possibilities of chemical propulsion in placing human outposts on other celestial bodies in both time and cost. So, the only thing we can now change in Tsiolkovsky's formula is the ratio of the masses of the aircraft. The rocket must be built in such a way that this relationship has a given meaning, otherwise it will simply not achieve its goal. Something can be done by adding some ingenious solutions to the design, but in general this will have little effect on the result: the chemistry of the fuel and the gravity of the celestial bodies cannot be changed… .. From: “The cruelty of Tsiolkovsky's formula” https: //geekitbase.info/content/73616. It is because of these intrinsic limitations of rockets that there are still no human colonies either on the Moon or on Mars.

      All the details of the PNN in www.asps.it/Paper16.pdf

    • ELECTROMAGNETIC PROPULSION SYSTEM FOR SPACECRAFT MOVEMENT WITHOUT THE EMISSION OF REACTION MASS


      Good morning,
      I follow up on the previous communications to inform you that the Italian PNN (by E.Laureti) patent application has been published.
      You can find the publication at the following link: uibm.gov.it/bancadati/Number_search/type_url?type=wpn
      You will have to insert, in the field in the center of the page, the n. 102021000015986.

      The publication of the international patent application can be found at the following link: patentscope.wipo.int/search/en…7&_cid=P22-LBYWS8-05338-1



      As soon as possible more details in propulsion-revolution.com/


      --
      PATENTS CONSULTANCY FIRM CIONCOLONI S.r.l.
      Lawyer Andrea Valente Cioncoloni
      Phone +39 06 44 66 128
      Fax +39 06 44 66 166
      studioconsulenzabrevetti.it
    • I answer to all.

      NASA and ESA have the precondition that reactionless propulsion (i.e. our PNN) does not work since neither the Dean Drive (which you insist on) nor the Emdrive nor anything else does.

      So they don't even examine PNN as a hypothesis.

      In addition I add that the missile industry would be destroyed if the PNN worked. As Italian aerospace agencies have told me, this would cause millions of unemployed people and the closure of many aerospace industries (especially the American ones).



      Faced with this, all the few who have seen PNN work have seen that the PNN push exists and works.

      So in order not to pass for crazy we can only show the experimental evidence to be believed.

      Experimental tests were carried out, both with a ballistic pendulum and with a battery operated prototype with remote control on an arm balance of this typehttp://www.asps.it/kerup3.png



      But it gets worse, so PNN is repulsive to rocket science you believe in (including solar sails which are comical to us):

      PNN violates not only the principle of action and reaction, but and this is the main HORROR , which is NOT to be believed, it also violates the second principle of dynamics!



      With a fixed power output of 250 Watt at 432 Mhz, the thrust increases over time, so for the PNN it is also necessary to rewrite the second law of dynamics and Newton's principle of inertia.

      Basically all 3 of Newton's laws are violated!



      This is the EXPERIMENTAL graph in which the thrust of the PNN grows over time asps.it/trustgra1.jpg



      This is observed on any balance that any counterparty wants to use and we leave others the freedom to try it wherever they like.

      Anyone who wants to give a conventional explanation eventually finds themselves admitting that inside our F432BA prototype there is either Peter Pan or Santa's reindeer

      We are so sure that we are NOT wrong that we PAY anyone who proves us wrong, that is, WE ARE WRONG!



      But there is a problem the lithium batteries are discharged after about 2 minutes of operation for which a kilopower type nuclear reactor would be needed which we do not have. But it is not over yet: the dynamics or rather the electrodynamics of the PNN violates both the conservation of momentum and the conservation of energy of Newtonian mechanics for which also the conservation of energy must be rewritten.

      By rewriting it, the conservation of energy also contradicts the theory of relativity.

      To conserve energy, the mass of the PNN system must decrease with increasing velocity in exactly the opposite of the theory of relativity.

      The problem of the PNN is that the thrust, as I said, increases over time, practically contradicting all the terrestrial physics with which rockets are built

      PNN is an UFO for Earth physics and comical mass-losing rockets. PNN does not lose mass like rockets.

      Not even 1/100th of Artemis 1's mass returned from Artemis's trip around the Moon.



      We have obtained an international patent of that

      patentscope.wipo.int/search/en…7&_cid=P22-LBYWS8-05338-1

      And everything will be better displayed in our ecommerce site propulsion-revolution.com/

      when it will be operational and all translated into English in all parts.

      We will sell prototypes of the F432BA type after experimental demonstration so as not to be taken for scammers.

      Greetings

      Dr. E.Laureti(PNN Ceo)
    • PNN International Expedition on Mars (PIEM)

      2022-12-17 14:27

      Switch to PNN to colonize the Moon and Mars



      For the purpose of a PNN Mars expedition a group should initially be formed as follows .

      (Subject to Registration) by PNN Explorers.





      Why this initiative? Because a front which diverts funding from failed rocketry to boost the PNN must be formed! . We also need detailed knowledge of the habitats of the International Space Station and Kilopower type nuclear reactors and solar panels (info that the PNN Explorers will have to provide). For example, the life support system of the ISS should be taken up for the Martian bases. Unfortunately, the organization has a cost.



      Why PNN Explorers? Because Core 1 of the PNN Explorers will be able to see directly in one of our laboratories the experimental test which demonstrates that propulsion without reaction mass ejection is a reality! Rocket propulsion with its inevitable loss of mass was the main reason that caused the failure of Mars ONE and also the lack of colonization of the Moon for half a century. Direct viewing of the test has a cost in terms of experimental preparation and it is not done to put on a show but to research and convince motivated people. In general:





      • We need to upgrade what is available with a PNN prototype more powerful than F432BA and fitted with a nuclear reactor or solar panels as the primary electrical power source and its C&C (Command and Control) as we certainly not reach Earth orbit with a Baofeng
      • In perspective, the Martian bases will have to be constantly supplied with continuous PNN voyages from Earth, which is impossible for rocketry
      • The PNN Martian bases must be built where there is water!
      • Where we will go: Korolev Crater!
      • There we will dig tunnels in the walls of ice: the ice will give us protection from cosmic radiation, as well as supplies of water and air. We will also dig environments for greenhouses where to grow plants for nourishment. Constant supplies from Earth will take care of the rest.



      Why do we do this? Because rocketry has largely proven slow and ineffective for long-range initiatives and this has led to a decades-long state of inaction. Despite this, astronautics is reluctant to abandon the status quo of rocket propulsion. PNN was born to overcome all of this.



      In the Korolev crater there is already a beautiful wall of ice where one can dig one or more tunnels to shield astronauts from cosmic radiation.



      And the future PNN spacecraft for Mars will be contained in a cube of water for protective purposes on the journey from Earth to Mars and vice versa since the PNN can carry any quantity of materials if equipped with an adequate number of nuclear reactors.

      Mars is colonized only by carrying the thousands of tons that rockets cannot carry because they are physically NOT suitable.

      Adequate quantities of terrestrial materials are needed to build outposts to live in, start mining activities, build greenhouses to grow plants for food and mainly start building industries on Mars!



      The thermal dissipation of the Kilopower will be excellent for keeping the protection water and the drinking water at the right temperature and controlled according to the needs.

      What is the use of water for protective purposes?

      First of all not to be browned and irradiated by cosmic radiation on the journey to Mars and during the exploration of the surface while remaining protected by the Korolev glacier



      propulsion-revolution.com/en/b…edition-on-mars-(piem)_en