1

Flat Earth Q&A / Re: Questions about microgravity

« on: May 22, 2011, 01:55:43 PM »

Apparently we have gotten nowhere.  The endpoint has come to the suggestion that the conspiracy is larger than the entire higher education community and by extension every university in the world.  Further, the initial starting point of "microgravity" has not been answered, or it just a part of the greater conspiracy.  There hasn't been a single post that has any understanding of science (other than Zeteticism) or by extension the university-peer-review system. 

I submit that there is no end to this debate satisfactory to either side.  It has been great civil discourse, but alas, I have real science to attend to.

Thank you,

CA_Crystal

P.S. You can continue the discussion without me, I may return time to time if needed.

2

Flat Earth Q&A / Re: Questions about microgravity

« on: May 22, 2011, 12:37:37 PM »

Quite simple. NASA is offering them credits.

Where did they go to school to learn exactly what I am teaching them to know what is important or not important?  When did NASA's control get to them? 

They've been trained since birth. You can use my phosphorus method to get the truth out of them.

Seriously? So they have no free will? And how would they have gotten into the lab, do they just train everyone on the chance that 1 out of about 100 undergraduate applicants get a temporary position in the lab? And the grad students by chance get accepted into our program (1/1000) and then take rotations in several labs, then get accepted into a lab (1/40). Is it really that wide spread? And how are they trained? We've now hit orders of magnitude larger than the 40-600 people in on it.  My colleagues and I can keep track of approximately 10-30 lab assistants compared to the hundreds of thousands of people that must be in every major college and university across, not only the United States, but every university in the world to have the man/woman power to do as you have said.

3

Flat Earth Q&A / Re: Questions about microgravity

« on: May 22, 2011, 08:21:34 AM »

University campuses are literally swarming with Conspiracy moles who are completely under NASA's control.  It is not at all difficult for the space agencies to exert their evil influence all throughout the academic establishment.  Only the stern annals of zetetic science (the true scientific community) are immune to such imposters, thanks to our exacting standards of truth and honesty.

Literally swarming with conspiracy moles. Seriously, have you ever been on a University campus? (Probably not because they are not a "true scientific community") Take for example our lab. We do not have post docs, we have three graduate students, and six undergraduates.   Which of these people are the "mole"? Where did they go to school to learn exactly what I am teaching them to know what is important or not important?  When did NASA's control get to them? 

to quote the FAQ:
Q: "How are the world governments organized to carry out this conspiracy?"

A: Only those governments with space agencies that have actually been to space and produced round pictures of the Earth need be in on the Conspiracy.  And even in those cases only a limited number of people within those governments need necessarily be involved.  For the most part, even those in the highest positions of these governments are probably unaware of the Conspiracy.

So these are just mindless drones in my lab doing great science otherwise, but are secretly supplying a space agency with information, such that at some undetermined time would suggest that I use microgravity to solve a problem?

Did they receive a letter plying them with millions of dollars to go against the science they learned from great teachers to go to NASA (or I guess their contractors) and now learn all the "real science"?  Do you expect these people to really keep this conspiracy alive? This goes way beyond less than a couple hundred people in on it.  I would have to second guess my selection of help in the lab, especially since I try to get students that are inquisitive, ask questions, have at least a sense of good morals, and are hard workers.  I would hate to be misinformed my entire life. Along that same vein, why has NASA not come to me bearing gifts?  I would love to work for this great agency, then I would have all the evidence at my disposal.  Further, since the shuttle missions are winding down, I wonder what great disaster will befall me if I exposed them.

For science!

4

Flat Earth Q&A / Re: Questions about microgravity

« on: May 22, 2011, 06:02:38 AM »

Hmm yes, NASA is very resourceful and full of exceptional trickeries.  I would not be surprised if NASA has snuck into your laboratory on many occasions in order to clandestinely steal information about these proteins.  They will stop at nothing to deceive other scientists about the existence of gravity or the shape of the Earth.  If I were you, I would change your locks so this does not keep happening.

This made me laugh out loud.
They would need to break through our University card locks and our monthly changing number lock, further, they would have to evade CCTV, which is also monitored. They would also need to read through months of lab notebooks and determine what worked (probably 10 percent of experiments actually work as expected).  So you're saying they would need to have a team of scientists for every other team of scientists, just on the slight possibility that one experiment doesn't work enough to have a lab member think "oh, maybe if we could use microgravity (or any other as to yet unrevealed NASA technology), my experiment (that hasn't worked in 6-8 months) would possibly work".

I am pretty sure what I described goes well above the NASA conspiracy described elsewhere. 
Maybe I should work for NASA, sounds like fun. Oh wait, that would mean less contributions to science.

5

Flat Earth Q&A / Re: Questions about microgravity

« on: May 21, 2011, 05:41:04 PM »

14-21 Tesla is REALLY Powerful, and about the limit of "magnetic forces," at least on Earth.

Boy would I have fun with those! Do you know what kind of power these magnets would require by any chance?

No idea the power, no so good on the maths of Physics, but these things run at very very low volts and extremely high amperes. Basically, if you accidentally touched the power cord for these things... probably instant death.

6

Flat Earth Q&A / Re: Questions about microgravity

« on: May 20, 2011, 08:15:06 PM »

For that mouse and water droplet experiment: I checked out that paper, which has a video as a supplemental material.  Those water droplets were not "stationary" but moving all over the place. Further, the bore size of that magnet was way too small for the box we sent off.  As was stated in those pop-sci articles, the amount of energy required to levitate the water and mouse was exceptional.  Granted, eventually we could make this viable, but the original paper I cited was from 6 years ago, my project as outlined above occurred about a year and a half ago.  There have been few advances in the meantime. 

Of course, I'm sure you'll say NASA has only "revealed" the mouse sized apparatus and have more powerful or better behaving levitation chambers.  Which I would then point out should already be produced for use by my crystallography colleagues, which would allow much faster turnover, since microgravity growth has a high success rate.  I would have already been informed through the CCP4 Bulletin Board I subscribe and post.

7

Flat Earth Q&A / Re: Questions about microgravity

« on: May 20, 2011, 07:11:56 PM »

Well, actually, beyond my thoughts about ether, I can think of two other possibilities:

a) They could do it the way they filmed Apollo 13, via the 'vomit comet'
or
b) A very strong magnetic force can simulate anti-gravity. This has been tested on lab rats, and they found no side effects.

Back to the first post: These were up for 3 months, the "vomit comet" only provides weightlessness (microgravity) for 25 seconds out of 65 seconds of flight.

How strong of a magnetic force are we talking about here? http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/National_High_Magnetic_Field_Laboratory That research facility has some of the largest magnets and they cannot "Simulate" anti-gravity.  Incidentally, we use similar NMR machines to solve proteins in solution.  14-21 Tesla is REALLY Powerful, and about the limit of "magnetic forces," at least on Earth.

8

Flat Earth Q&A / Re: Questions about microgravity

« on: May 20, 2011, 05:42:03 PM »

Yes, my question is whether or not he has actually done any of this, not whether he claims he did. Please be sure to read all the words in a post, not just the ones containing stuff you can be snarky about. It'll go a long way and, perhaps, make you look a bit less stupid on certain occasions. We do have a little problem with vast amounts of people claiming they're sailor astronomer scientists who sail around CERN while observing the Moon using their high-tech telescopes. You already know (but have so conveniently ignored) that, though.

No offence, CA_Crystal. I'm not calling you a liar. It's just that many people who have been here awhile have grown skeptical.

You can doubt me all you want, but I can only give testament to what I have done and what I know.  See above if you would like to learn more about crystallography, and ask me questions if you want to know more.

9

Flat Earth Q&A / Re: Questions about microgravity

« on: May 20, 2011, 12:36:00 PM »

Just so we can make sure your claims are on the up-and-up, may we see your research?

I guess part of what I'm having trouble believing (unless I'm misunderstanding this, and forgive me if that is the case) is that you "tried thousands of conditions to grow protein crystals on Earth" that did not work, and then simply sent them to NASA and poof, mission accomplished.  Did you have reason to think it would be possible to grow the protein crystals on Earth, or did you already know it was impossible?

I would rather not reveal my own research as this handle is one I use on other sites, however I can link to another paper where there was vast improvement in crystals in microgravity versus those grown on Earth. (http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC1952429/)  Their earth crystal morphologies were needles and hollow brick-like crystals.  The microgravity allowed the crystal to seed in the center and grow outwards in 3-dimensions, forming a highly ordered crystals.  There would be no other way for this to occur on earth.

Note in the paper, Crystal Screen HT kit (Hampton Research), is a 12X8 (96 wells) condition crystal screen, there are about 20-30 of these on the market and therefore account for thousands of individual conditions.  Further, "variety of polyethylene glycols (PEGs)" also means several hundred more conditions (6 different PEG varieties at 24 different concentrations layered on top of 10-15 different pH and salt gradients). 

It was through collaboration with this group that we undertook their methods.  Figure 1 tells the story nicely.  Their project was only "promoted" by a space agency, and was all independent research up until they sent the padded box to the launch site.

As an answer to trig, the space agency hasn't "told" us anything other than they have the rockets to go into orbit.
The thought came to my colleage as a thought experiment: "these crystals are hollow and not good for data, what would help these crystals to grow? Microgravity may help this crystallization process as seeding would occur not on a surface, but suspended in air.  Lets figure out how to send our samples into space"

Hope that is a sufficient explanation and example.

10

Flat Earth Q&A / Re: Questions about microgravity

« on: May 19, 2011, 04:22:37 PM »

Wait, have you actually done any of this?

Yes.  I constructed a protein sequence.  I tried thousands of conditions to grow protein crystals on Earth. These did not work. I then purchased a box suitable for containing the protein. This box was brought to a shuttle launch.  It then returned to Earth 3 months later.  Crystals had grown only in those conditions experiencing microgravity.  I took these crystals, mounted them on a X-ray beam-line and obtained data.  The data was then converted into electron density, and then a protein structure model was built into this density. I then used this model to perform several rounds of refinement.  I now have the structure of a protein I did not have before.

11

Flat Earth Q&A / Re: Questions about microgravity

« on: May 19, 2011, 01:57:46 PM »

I am sorry to tell you this, CA_Crystal, but your crystals are not being taken where you think they are. Whoever is taking your crystals is merely pretending to send them to space, when in reality they are replacing them with different crystals (the ones which they claim were produced in space). I expect they are charging you an arm and a leg for this ridiculous service of "sending things to space"; this is precisely the sort of ruse which the globularist conspiracy uses to make money.  You are being duped by a nefarious and fraudulent organisation.  You should demand an explanation, and possibly your money back.

Then I would like to know how they produce such a quality crystal with my protein that I made in my own lab.

The crystals I receive back are then analyzed using X-ray crystallography, and would only work if it was the same exact protein that I started with. Therefore, NASA would have to be in on it from the beginning, the beginning being before I even thought to send this protein into space.  They would also have to know exactly protein sequence I used, they would need to know the conditions I used to get the protein, and they would also need to know the exact concentration of my protein to make it work. 

The amount of time needed to do all of the above and "magically" crystallize my protein (when I have exhausted all other means) would be much greater than the 3 months my protein is experiencing what I called microgravity. (It typically takes 4-6 months to even get a great protein yield!).

12

Flat Earth Q&A / Re: Do you, as a Flat Earth believer, believe in gravity?

« on: May 19, 2011, 10:06:26 AM »

Not with the help of gravity.  If these drugs were discovered by gravity-believers, it was in spite of, not because of, their belief in thge fictional force of gravity.

These drugs were discovered by people who believe in micro-gravity.  I am sorry you believe otherwise. Loved the discussion, I'm out.

13

Flat Earth Q&A / Re: Do you, as a Flat Earth believer, believe in gravity?

« on: May 18, 2011, 08:21:17 PM »

But there is so much science done under microgravity, not all was sponsored by "NASA" or other space agencies.  You are further stating that all this research is bunk and any results gained from these observances are false to some degree.

Some of these observances have aided in developing new HIV drugs and further understanding respiratory syncytial virus (RSV) and various metabolic diseases.

14

Flat Earth Q&A / Re: Do you, as a Flat Earth believer, believe in gravity?

« on: May 18, 2011, 05:52:03 PM »

A1:  A power unknown force is accelerating the universe at 9.81m/s/s.  Consider when you are in your car and you start accelerating, or on an elevator;  you feel a pull either backwards or down/up.  This pull is indistinguishable from gravity.  THis is what causes gravitational pull.  Dark energy in Bishop and McINtyres models pushes fuels the UA and this is basically the same idea.

A3:  In my model  an infinite plane (the earth) produces a gravitational pull that is finite.  The mathematical basis for this was posted above.  Basically, when one does the math one sees that an infinite massive plane would have its horizontal gravitational pulls cancelled out.  This just leaves the vertical ones.  When one sums up the vertical ones, it turns out to be a finite value (although it does not diminish with altitude.  THis is what that math above explains.
[/quote]

Then what is microgravity? As I go up a mountain or up in a shuttle, g decreases? I posted in another thread about this but it has gone through all the normal "Gravity does not exist, Gravitons haven't been found, it's all a hoax" stuff as this thread.

15

Flat Earth Q&A / Re: Questions about microgravity

« on: May 18, 2011, 10:03:27 AM »

But how did the crystals grow? They cannot grow in an advertising agency on Earth, due to gravity.

The conspiracy (NASA) probably has found some method to grow crystals that they have not released to public for obvious reasons. The rocket you saw flying away carried the sample to the NASA base where they grew the crystals.

Well, it wasn't NASA, as they have nothing to do with the crystal growing.  You buy two boxes from a company, package your samples in each. I put one on a shelf in my lab.  I take the other one to a rocket launch, it goes onto the shuttle along with a whole bunch of other experiments.  It rockets off and three months later the shuttle lands, I am handed my box that has not been tampered with.  Inside are my samples with nice crystals.  I open the box from my shelf and it does not have crystals. These crystals do not grow under any conditions where gravity occurs: on Earth, in a rocket, on the shelf; only due to microgravity.

I guess I have the standard answers: Ether, Gravitrons, or I am being hoodwinked.

16

Flat Earth Q&A / Re: Questions about microgravity

« on: May 18, 2011, 08:33:05 AM »

But how did the crystals grow? They cannot grow in an advertising agency on Earth, due to gravity.

17

Flat Earth Q&A / Re: Questions about microgravity

« on: May 18, 2011, 08:15:24 AM »

To try and bring it back to the topic...

If I send my samples in a box to a space agency, and I watch it go onto the rocket and I see the rocket launch into the sky...

Where is that rocket going? How does my sample experience micro gravity after launching at 3 times the speed of g?  Could I save money by buying some ether or harness gravitrons myself?

18

Flat Earth Q&A / Re: Questions about microgravity

« on: May 17, 2011, 03:53:07 PM »

Well, in my (in progress) model, the is gravity, but it's not as powerful.

How so? In the overall model, the entire visible universe is accelerating at g (9.8m/s²).  The question is: how does microgravity work if there is no sustained space flight.  Just answering with "it's not as powerful" just confirms that there is microgravity.  I hope this is clearer.

19

Flat Earth Q&A / Questions about microgravity

« on: May 17, 2011, 03:11:29 PM »

First time poster here and a protein crystallographer by trade.  I have read the FAQ and various threads about gravity on a Flat Earth. I have further seen threads about the space agency conspiracy where it is believed that we do not have sustained space flight.  I am wondering how microgravity works given these conditions.

I ask because crystallography is a difficult process where a protein in solution crystalizes into an ordered structure under the right conditions.  For example, crystals may not form a ordered structure in the lab on Earth, however I am able to package the crystal, send it on a rocket into space for a week (crystals typically take longer than 5 days to form) and when the flight returns, crystals have formed.  This is apparently due to microgravity, which would only occur in sustained spaceflight.

TL;DR: How does microgravity work on FE for extended periods of time?

Here is one of many papers where microgravity was used... this experiment lasted 3 months in microgravity! Crystals grew in this microgravity whereas crystals grown on Earth did not form well. http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC1952429/figure/fig1/