Switch to PNN to save Hubble telescope

[pnn calmagorod]

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

https://patentscope.wipo.int/search/en/detail.jsf?docId=WO2022264177&_cid=P22-LBYWS8-05338-1

https://www.propulsion-revolution.com/


We have an operative PNN thruster

[Sylvia Else]

No you don't. You're either deluded or lying.

Sylvia.

[pnn calmagorod]

With the space shuttle it ended badly. With Artemis it will be worse

[Doctor Who]

On Fri, 30 Dec 2022 09:20:40 +1100, Sylvia Else <syl...@email.invalid>
wrote:

What a troll !

[Snidely]

pnn calmagorod formulated the question :

Actually, the Space Shuttle's missions with and to Hubble all ended
well.

/dps

--
And the Raiders and the Broncos have life now in the West. I thought
they were both nearly dead if not quite really most sincerely dead. --
Mike Salfino, fivethirtyeight.com

[pnn calmagorod]

explain us such mistery : why no space shuttle will go to save the astronauts here
https://hackaday.com/2022/12/19/damaged-soyuz-may-leave-crew-without-a-ride-home/ .... but "probably" space x

[Doctor Who]

On Fri, 30 Dec 2022 09:20:40 +1100, Sylvia Else <syl...@email.invalid>
wrote:

prove it.

[pnn calmagorod]

Il giorno giovedì 29 dicembre 2022 alle 23:20:42 UTC+1 Sylvia Else ha scritto:

jes Sylvia Rotfl ....We are selling UAP/UFO without your and NASA permission 😊
https://www.propulsion-revolution.com/

[Snidely]

pnn calmagorod presented the following explanation :

No mystery. The Space Shuttle is retired. And since your PNN doesn't
seem suitable for powering a launch system, where thrust/weight must be
greater than 1 for the whole system, I don't see you beating the Soyuz
or Dragon capsules to the rescue.

/dps

--
Maybe C282Y is simply one of the hangers-on, a groupie following a
future guitar god of the human genome: an allele with undiscovered
virtuosity, currently soloing in obscurity in Mom's garage.
Bradley Wertheim, theAtlantic.com, Jan 10 2013

[Doctor Who]

On Fri, 30 Dec 2022 09:20:40 +1100, Sylvia Else <syl...@email.invalid>
wrote:

Even after the patent publication your donkey's head remains a
donkey's head.

[pnn calmagorod]

it is impossible to communicate with you. I have said several times that violating the principle of action and reaction also changes the second principle of dynamics in a way that I never imagined. Thrust increases over time for the same UHF power supplied. As I have seen this for years in different experimental situations I now think it is true. Keep believing in missiles and you'll never colonize anything

[Otto J. Makela]

Doctor Who <d...@tardis.org> wrote:

> Sylvia Else <syl...@email.invalid> wrote:
>> On 30-Dec-22 8:47 am, pnn calmagorod wrote:
>>> We have an operative PNN thruster
>> No you don't. You're either deluded or lying.
>

> prove it.

Sorry, it's the one who makes the claims that has to prove them,
not everyone else to disapprove them.
--
/* * * Otto J. Makela <o...@iki.fi> * * * * * * * * * */
/* Phone: +358 40 765 5772, ICBM: N 60 10' E 24 55' */
/* Mail: Mechelininkatu 26 B 27, FI-00100 Helsinki */
/* * * Computers Rule 01001111 01001011 * * * * * * */

[Doctor Who]

On Sat, 31 Dec 2022 14:16:33 +0200, o...@iki.fi (Otto J. Makela) wrote:

>Doctor Who <d...@tardis.org> wrote:
>
>> Sylvia Else <syl...@email.invalid> wrote:
>>> On 30-Dec-22 8:47 am, pnn calmagorod wrote:
>>>> We have an operative PNN thruster
>>> No you don't. You're either deluded or lying.
>>
>> prove it.
>
>Sorry, it's the one who makes the claims that has to prove them,
>not everyone else to disapprove them.

ah, you said there was no patent application, we have proven that you
are a troll.

And, we have proven our PNN Theory with a working prototype.

Happy New Year

[Snidely]

pnn calmagorod asserted that:

I am waiting to see your launch vehicle.

/dps

--
"Maintaining a really good conspiracy requires far more intelligent
application, by a large number of people, than the world can readily
supply."

Sam Plusnet

[pnn calmagorod]

do you have a 10 Kw kilopower for rent?

E.Laureti

[Doctor Who]

On Sat, 31 Dec 2022 14:16:33 +0200, o...@iki.fi (Otto J. Makela) wrote:

>Doctor Who <d...@tardis.org> wrote:
>
>> Sylvia Else <syl...@email.invalid> wrote:
>>> On 30-Dec-22 8:47 am, pnn calmagorod wrote:
>>>> We have an operative PNN thruster
>>> No you don't. You're either deluded or lying.
>>
>> prove it.
>
>Sorry, it's the one who makes the claims that has to prove them,
>not everyone else to disapprove them.

she made the claim that we haven't a working prototype, prove it.

[Snidely]

Saturday, pnn calmagorod observed:

Not for your thrust to weight needs.

/dps

--
I have always been glad we weren't killed that night. I do not know
any particular reason, but I have always been glad.
_Roughing It_, Mark Twain

[Doctor Who]

On Mon, 02 Jan 2023 00:35:34 -0800, Snidely <snide...@gmail.com>
wrote:

so shut up!

[Otto J. Makela]

She disputed your claim that you have an operative device — what you
have is a prototype which shows some promise in laboratory conditions.

As I said earlier, this is the step where NASA reviewed the Robert
Shawyer EmDrive, and for a moment even thought it worked. Unfortunately
it was afterwards pretty conclusively shown that the "thrust" produced
was a thermal effect, as the suspicion is also in this case.

[Doctor Who]

On Tue, 03 Jan 2023 09:18:26 +0200, o...@iki.fi (Otto J. Makela) wrote:

>Doctor Who <d...@tardis.org> wrote:
>
>> On Sat, 31 Dec 2022 14:16:33 +0200, o...@iki.fi (Otto J. Makela) wrote:
>>> Doctor Who <d...@tardis.org> wrote:
>>>> Sylvia Else <syl...@email.invalid> wrote:
>>>>> On 30-Dec-22 8:47 am, pnn calmagorod wrote:
>>>>>> We have an operative PNN thruster
>>>>> No you don't. You're either deluded or lying.
>>>> prove it.
>>> Sorry, it's the one who makes the claims that has to prove them,
>>> not everyone else to disapprove them.
>>
>> she made the claim that we haven't a working prototype, prove it.
>
>She disputed your claim that you have an operative device — what you
>have is a prototype which shows some promise in laboratory conditions.
>
>As I said earlier, this is the step where NASA reviewed the Robert
>Shawyer EmDrive, and for a moment even thought it worked. Unfortunately
>it was afterwards pretty conclusively shown that the "thrust" produced
>was a thermal effect, as the suspicion is also in this case.

bla bla bla

you know where you can put your "suspicions".

washing the donkey's head is a waste of time, water and soap!

[Doctor Who]

On Tue, 03 Jan 2023 09:18:26 +0200, o...@iki.fi (Otto J. Makela) wrote:

>Doctor Who <d...@tardis.org> wrote:
>
>> On Sat, 31 Dec 2022 14:16:33 +0200, o...@iki.fi (Otto J. Makela) wrote:
>>> Doctor Who <d...@tardis.org> wrote:
>>>> Sylvia Else <syl...@email.invalid> wrote:
>>>>> On 30-Dec-22 8:47 am, pnn calmagorod wrote:
>>>>>> We have an operative PNN thruster
>>>>> No you don't. You're either deluded or lying.
>>>> prove it.
>>> Sorry, it's the one who makes the claims that has to prove them,
>>> not everyone else to disapprove them.
>>
>> she made the claim that we haven't a working prototype, prove it.
>
>She disputed your claim that you have an operative device — what you
>have is a prototype which shows some promise in laboratory conditions.
>
>As I said earlier, this is the step where NASA reviewed the Robert
>Shawyer EmDrive, and for a moment even thought it worked. Unfortunately
>it was afterwards pretty conclusively shown that the "thrust" produced
>was a thermal effect, as the suspicion is also in this case.

such suspicions arise in the mind who don't know physics well.