noi siamo noi

Since momentum is not conserved, it follows that energy isn't conserved either.

John Larkin Highland Tech Glen Canyon Design Center Lunatic Fringe Electronics

no

mass decrease when PNN velocity increase

Actually, Special Relativity says that inertial mass appears to increase as relative velocity approaches the speed of light.

Granting Laureti's experimental acumen, he presumably managed to measure something different.

rotfl

relativity is from newtonian physics BASED (no action reaction violation)

On a 4-day trip to Mars, presumably you'd accelerate for two days and decelerate for two.

What would be the g-forces?

John Larkin Highland Tech Glen Canyon Design Center Lunatic Fringe Electronics

G-forces don’t apply when your spaceship is powered by unicorn farts.

Cheers

Phil Hobbs

Yuk. That sounds stinky.

I wonder what Mars smells like.

AI Overview What Does Mars Smell Like? : r/space Mars likely smells like a mix of sulfur, metallic dust, and rusty iron, with a slightly acrid, gassy, and chalky scent, similar to rotten eggs mixed with hot metal or burnt toast, because of the abundant sulfur, iron, and chlorine compounds in its fine, dusty soil and thin carbon dioxide atmosphere. Astronauts who've handled Martian soil samples report it smells like spent gunpowder or hot metal, but the pervasive smell on the planet would be dominated by sulfur.

John Larkin Highland Tech Glen Canyon Design Center Lunatic Fringe Electronics

Nah, my startup pals say they’re like grape bubblegum.

Cheers

Phil Hobbs

But it makes testable predictions which conform to real measurements.

I don't talk about relativity when I talk about PNN. You do it to avoid any experimental verification of PNN. See the elementary pendulum test in... for action reaction violation. Alternatively, to do nothing as usual since PNN violates conservation of momentum, you immediately state the preemptive thing that conservation of momentum cannot be violated. That is, always no experimental verification. It seems you are terrified that your Newtonian and relativistic wall might be circumvented. Another way to avoid any experimental action is to say: extraordinary events require extraordinary evidence, but you don't want to do or see it. Or you say take the PNN to the peer reviewers knowing full well that peer reviewers censor everything that is outside the paradigms, and worse, peer reviewers don't do experimental verifications of what is outside the paradigms.

A comical example of avoiding any momentum-conserving censorship is the tactic used by Genergo https://genergo.space/ who don't claim to violate momentum... but that their propulsion without reaction mass ejection is zero propellant :-) But Genergo, unlike us, found the money to conduct reactionless tests in orbit. I predict the usual: that you will tell us anything to avoid having to do any tests on the PNN yourself :-)

An important announcement like this really should have been held back until the beginning of April.

You're terrified of repeating any PNN experiment that might violate the Newtonian dogmas of the religion you believe in. The result is that with your missile dogmas you will never colonize anything as has been the case for over half a century :-)

In message snipped-for-privacy@4ax.com, john larkin snipped-for-privacy@glen--canyon.com writes

Why does it need astronauts to do that ?

Brian

Which you do in air, rather than under vacuum.

I haven't said anything of the sort. What I have said is that your experiments have potential confounds, and your responses don't address them.

I'd be delighted if it were, but what you have told us doesn't encourage me to throw out a bunch of theories which have been being tested since the scientific method was formalised a few hundred years ago.

I've done a little peer reviewing for journals and got a handful of my own papers through the process. Referees make all kinds of mistakes, but slavish devotion to orthodoxy isn't one I've run into.

Their tactic is much the same as yours - they make an implausible claim and don't support with anything that looks like credible evidence.

You can test your gear under vacuum on the ground. I've worked on electron microscopes which had quite large vacuum chambers to hold the objects being looked at. The lubrication required by the moving parts in the imaging chamber limited the vacuum to chemical vacuum levels - about 10^-4 torr. The electron emitter space had to be pumped down to a physical vacuum - about 10^-7 torr.

One of my acquaintances builds cube-sats, which can be put into low earth orbit relatively cheaply.

That's a lot less than your $24 million.

That's obviously google AI stupidity. Nobody has been to Mars and no samples have been returned.

But it's probably stinky. And deadly.

John Larkin Highland Tech Glen Canyon Design Center Lunatic Fringe Electronics

John's not entirely correct. There are meteorites that have fallen to earth that seem to have been kicked off Mars. While they were falling through the earth's atmosphere that would have gotten hot enough to make sure that they were neither stinky or deadly.

Samples have been examined by the Mars rovers, but not in any great detail.

"Seem to" !

The theory is good for selling museum tickets.

John Larkin Highland Tech Glen Canyon Design Center Lunatic Fringe Electronics

Ask to Genergo. Asps is nont Genergo

https://genergo.space/wp-content/uploads/2025/12/Press-Release-GenerGo-post-Bremen_EN_2.pdf