PNN TO COLONIZE OTHER WORLDS
Or the comedians rocket fans know that with their bulky mass losing spaceships (since Von Braun) they will never colonize / industrialize anything in space or they don't know .....
a) in the first case there is unfortunately material from conspiracy or possibly guilty physical dementia .....
b) in the second case, unfortunately, total physical dementia.
!!
NASA has already banged the horns with the Space Shuttle forcibly scrapped after disasters that were not supposed to happen given the American haste to do space exploration well. Unfortunately, the Shuttle was a trap that had to be more or less usable as an airliner while the media, with enormous waste of media chatter, spread lies about its "safety" at full throttle.
For more than half a century now it has been proven that only disposable products work well with missiles from experience and safety. Which they still do in supplying the ISS International Station at a distance of about 1/1000 (from the Moon) of the distance from the Earth.
Basically everything that does not allow you to colonize anything when you go to do the accounts OF THE MASS of what you need to STAY on the Moon where the distances are greater and the difficulties in managing and throwing bulky fuel cans increase enormously.
www.asps.it/3tromboni.jpg
No one has deepened the link between the loss of mass and the possibility of colonizing (industrializing) space.
You cannot colonize anything if you lose more than 99% of the mass in disposable bins of your spaceship to get to and from the Moon (Saturn 5).
Since the Apollo project, every President of the United States has promised that we would soon return to the moon with a permanent base. This stable return theater has been going on for half a century now.
Now in extolling this enterprise with the Moon it's up to Musk and you forget the snack buddies like him
So everything that is said about PNN is based on the existence of Lorentz forces between "open" circuits in which alternating current flows. Now the Lorentz forces that exist in every commonly used electromagnetic device THAT ONLY USES CLOSED CIRCUITS.
I summarize:
1) I did not invent the Lorentz forces between closed circuits, just as I did not invent the Lorentz forces between open circuits
2) To understand that such pure forces exist between open circuits, this elementary observation of the charge (OPEN CIRCUIT!) Deflected in a magnetic field is sufficient online.scuola.zanichelli.it/am…nif_CapE4_Par6_Amaldi.pdf Event treated in thousands of links and I repeat I did not invent myself!
3) Only with regard to point 2) shows that with OPEN CIRCUITS it is possible to violate Newton's principle of action and reaction. Here is what was written by an opponent of the PNN by a professor of the Normal School of Physics in Pisa Elio Fabri who then changed his opinion:
Example of E. Fabri's mathematical proof of violation of Newton's III in electrodynamics:
sagredo.eu/varie/terzopr-em.pdf.
I gathered other examples of this violation in other links asps.it/setupdip.htm asps.it/pnndatabase.htm
4) IF someone like you or others still does not believe in the violability of Newton's III, he must repeat this simple experiment in a UHF powered V-dipole asps.it/impnn4.png
In which the existence of Lorentz forces between open circuits is demonstrated
5) No one who was shown this V dipole configuration asps.it/impnn2.png said it was physically wrong
6) A road show was held on October 31st 2020 and the participants saw PNN asps.it/PNN488.mp4 push of the PNN F432 prototype asps.it/kh2.jpg
7) In a videoconference demonstration at APEC altpropulsion.com/events/apec-…opulsion-superconductors/ PNN was illustrated and no one advanced the possibility of physical errors (see our links on asps.it)
The state of the art of the PNN is in this experimental chart asps.it/trustgra1.jpg where the state of the art of the certified PNN is in the circle at the bottom left.
9) If you say that the thrust is low you are right but since with the violation of the principle of action and reaction there is also that of Newton's second principle ... the thrust PNN as from asps.it/trustgra1.jpg grows to time to grow… UNTIL TAKE OFF. But with the “time” factor there are other problems that require not only time and money but also dozens of engineers…. And unfortunately also a nuclear reactor to have "long" electrical power.
The conclusion is only one if you want to colonize the Moon and Mars…. Forget the rockets and switch to PNN
Or the comedians rocket fans know that with their bulky mass losing spaceships (since Von Braun) they will never colonize / industrialize anything in space or they don't know .....
a) in the first case there is unfortunately material from conspiracy or possibly guilty physical dementia .....
b) in the second case, unfortunately, total physical dementia.
!!NASA has already banged the horns with the Space Shuttle forcibly scrapped after disasters that were not supposed to happen given the American haste to do space exploration well. Unfortunately, the Shuttle was a trap that had to be more or less usable as an airliner while the media, with enormous waste of media chatter, spread lies about its "safety" at full throttle.
For more than half a century now it has been proven that only disposable products work well with missiles from experience and safety. Which they still do in supplying the ISS International Station at a distance of about 1/1000 (from the Moon) of the distance from the Earth.
Basically everything that does not allow you to colonize anything when you go to do the accounts OF THE MASS of what you need to STAY on the Moon where the distances are greater and the difficulties in managing and throwing bulky fuel cans increase enormously.
www.asps.it/3tromboni.jpg
No one has deepened the link between the loss of mass and the possibility of colonizing (industrializing) space.
You cannot colonize anything if you lose more than 99% of the mass in disposable bins of your spaceship to get to and from the Moon (Saturn 5).
Since the Apollo project, every President of the United States has promised that we would soon return to the moon with a permanent base. This stable return theater has been going on for half a century now.
Now in extolling this enterprise with the Moon it's up to Musk and you forget the snack buddies like him
So everything that is said about PNN is based on the existence of Lorentz forces between "open" circuits in which alternating current flows. Now the Lorentz forces that exist in every commonly used electromagnetic device THAT ONLY USES CLOSED CIRCUITS.
I summarize:
1) I did not invent the Lorentz forces between closed circuits, just as I did not invent the Lorentz forces between open circuits
2) To understand that such pure forces exist between open circuits, this elementary observation of the charge (OPEN CIRCUIT!) Deflected in a magnetic field is sufficient online.scuola.zanichelli.it/am…nif_CapE4_Par6_Amaldi.pdf Event treated in thousands of links and I repeat I did not invent myself!
3) Only with regard to point 2) shows that with OPEN CIRCUITS it is possible to violate Newton's principle of action and reaction. Here is what was written by an opponent of the PNN by a professor of the Normal School of Physics in Pisa Elio Fabri who then changed his opinion:
Example of E. Fabri's mathematical proof of violation of Newton's III in electrodynamics:
sagredo.eu/varie/terzopr-em.pdf.
I gathered other examples of this violation in other links asps.it/setupdip.htm asps.it/pnndatabase.htm
4) IF someone like you or others still does not believe in the violability of Newton's III, he must repeat this simple experiment in a UHF powered V-dipole asps.it/impnn4.png
In which the existence of Lorentz forces between open circuits is demonstrated
5) No one who was shown this V dipole configuration asps.it/impnn2.png said it was physically wrong
6) A road show was held on October 31st 2020 and the participants saw PNN asps.it/PNN488.mp4 push of the PNN F432 prototype asps.it/kh2.jpg
7) In a videoconference demonstration at APEC altpropulsion.com/events/apec-…opulsion-superconductors/ PNN was illustrated and no one advanced the possibility of physical errors (see our links on asps.it)
The state of the art of the PNN is in this experimental chart asps.it/trustgra1.jpg where the state of the art of the certified PNN is in the circle at the bottom left.9) If you say that the thrust is low you are right but since with the violation of the principle of action and reaction there is also that of Newton's second principle ... the thrust PNN as from asps.it/trustgra1.jpg grows to time to grow… UNTIL TAKE OFF. But with the “time” factor there are other problems that require not only time and money but also dozens of engineers…. And unfortunately also a nuclear reactor to have "long" electrical power.
The conclusion is only one if you want to colonize the Moon and Mars…. Forget the rockets and switch to PNN