PIRL Recruitment

Yo guys, i have my own forum now c: (though i will still post my theories on here). http://pirl.forumotion.com/

Honestly, i do not know alot about photo-voltaic cells. I couldn't write that paper even if i wanted to. And i dont use the fact that im 17 as an excuse, and i apologize if i did make it seem like that.

emoallen3433 wrote:no, i work in particle physics lol.

Spaceships consist of particles - as do solar panels.
And even though I say this with trepidation:
Photons are particles. They are not waves.
*ducks the expected disagreement*

Your excuse is that you are 17.
My excuse is that I live in a squatter camp in a dark poverty-ridden corner of Africa -
and I'm far to beurocratophobic to deal with journals and publishers.

But the notion of simply reflecting photon-particles onto the solar panels
of spaceships, is so darn obvious - that its hilarious nobody has used it before.



Published article here:

reflect light onto solar-panel.

5 word article worth $1billion at least.

oh karma!

I think the practice of renormalization in QCD is a good thing. Correct me if im wrong, but renormalization is used to treat infinites in calculations. I am no expert though, as i have no certification. I am just really good at what i do.

emoallen3433 wrote:is it bad that im 17, and am on par with many great particle physicists?

What is your opinion of the practice of renormalisation in the mathematical treatment of quantum chromodynamics? I'm currently writing a paper on the subject and would appreciate some more input from experts.

I have been working in warp theory, and i am working on making a class in particle physics. Also, ive done an anti-matter reactor and i have done a little bit of work with electromagnetic propulsion systems for spacecraft(mass drivers).

emoallen3433 wrote:You would have to prove that your at least smart enough to keep up with me (not calling anyone stupid).

Don't you have to like do something for me to keep up with? (And posting an image of some calculus formula without even saying anything about it, does NOT count!)

You would have to prove that your atleast smart enough to keep up with me(not calling anyone stupid).

What does one even do to join?

So no one wants to join?

is it bad that im 17, and am on par with many great particle physicists?

no, i work in particle physics lol.

So are you going to publish an article on how to boost the
effect of solar panels on spacecraft?

And ordinary solar panels too...

Yeah you do.

Well, like most Scotsmen, I reckon there are 'true logical positivists'
and those who bandy the title around as if it were a shilellagh.

...

But I have considered that massive mirrors, positioned on the Earth itself,
could focus the Sun's light onto spacecraft and their solar panels
more efficiently and cost-effectively than giant magnifying glasses in orbits would.

But even normal solar panels, if surrounded by reflective metal will boost
their power cheaply. Seen lots of solar panels. None are surrounded by
shiny steal petals.

Hey,
do I qualify for PIRL yet?

Anybody capable of pursuing a logical train of thought should regard it as a badge of honour to be trashed in a physics forum. The underpinning ideology of physics, inasmuch as physics has such a thing, is logical positivism, a chilling doctrine which denies the role of human reason in the conduct of human affairs. For every sweeping generalisation there are always some significant exceptions but in the main most physicists wouldn't know their epistemological arses from their ontological elbows so they would rather redefine reason than consider the possibility that their models are not describing the real universe.

Jon. Your work on the many-body problem of gravitational motion can never be accepted within the priesthood of physics because it runs counter to the canonical doctrine of spacetime. Newtonian physics is inescapably a timeless representation of reality as a cadaver on a slab. Instead of modelling reality it models a holographic image of it, which means that spacetime is intrinsically teleological. It cannot possibly be salvaged as an explanatory paradigm for our universe so your non-Newtonian approach to gravity is an existential threat to everything that physics stands for. Minkowski led this non-science into a conceptual cul-de-sac and the model-building protocols of academia have ensured that for over a century there can be no way out. Much will be written about the history of 20th century physics and almost all of it will reflect very poorly on the philosophers of science who were asleep at the wheel while the maths geeks were floundering about in their confusion. Model-building simply leads to escalating absurdity if the metaphysical foundations of the model itself are bogus.

Emoallen3433, you will not be trashed here, nor will anyone try to humiliate you. You are free to speak as you wish. I do not run mean minded forums. I run forums for the free minded and the nice spirited, which I do believe go hand in hand. I also saw that forum that treated you that poorly, and that cannot ever happen here. They would not be banned, but I would tell them what I think of such low minded towards others actions. Without the wrong admins and mods to put up with that crap (and even contribute to it) they will either shrink away or grow up and be decent.

Thanks c:

Ok.

Yes, I googled you and saw how bad that forum mistreated you.
Most of the people on the internet are disaffected youths (of various ages)
with terribly low self-esteem. I got banned for life once for merely posting
my solution to the many-body problem. Their reason was that it was on
a privately owned website. The so-called 'physics forum' did not even
begin to assess the math or computer software.
Rest assured, this forum is for adults.
Our hostess has the highest E.Q. on the planet.

They put my post in the trash can :c

Im skeptical about posting. The last forum i tried was full of jerks.

Well here is an obvious idea for NASA:

Why not build GIANT magnifying glasses in space to focus sunlight onto
the solar panels of their various spacecraft?

It means that the amount of energy they can use is increased almost infinitely,
the spacecraft does not need to carry fuel with it,
and such a method can fuel starships to reach centauri in a few decades.

Its so simple.
Hardly costs that much.
They can be made of plastic and filled with water
which means the construction is dirt cheap.

I keep hearing of how little energy the sun's light
normally sends to solar panels.

I even did some internet research a few years ago
and other people have published such ideas before
I thought of it.

So what gives?

Know anybody at NASA, guys?

emoallen3433 wrote:Joining dosen't really entail anything. We are a volunteer organization. You just get to work on theories(i.e. warp theory, etc. etc.)

But you have to have a way to work on these theories. You can have that on this forum and you really do not have to do anything all that special. Just present your theories. There are good minds here and helpful minds too. WE have heretecs and unique thinkers here, and we have an open atmosphere for this. WE have philosophers and we will grow. Dream along with the Dreamers, and you will Dream new Dreams.

Joining dosen't really entail anything. We are a volunteer organization. You just get to work on theories(i.e. warp theory, etc. etc.)