June 29, 2022

Physics is so abstract that incompetents prevailed and shoved out real scientists. There hasn't been an iota of correct physics produced since Newton's laws were correctly produced in 1687.

Physics is unique in the degree of refinement of a fraud-based power structure. That result was possible due to the obscurity, complexity and power that come together around the knowledge-based nature of an element of science. The end-point explains the meaning of that claim. The end-point is unlimited, unhinged fraud to a point of insulting human rationality and the human state of existence.

Consider the claim of a helicopter on Mars. Mars only has 1% as much atmosphere as Earth. That means a helicopter is an impossibility on Mars. Yet physicists will go to elaborate lengths to manufacture fake film footage for the public.

The imagery is not credible. It shows a blurry, jumpy motion for a few short seconds. Why not something more real? Because someone in a laboratory had to pixel out the surrounding environment to overlay a helicopter on a soil-type background. A lot of man-hours are required to do that for numerous frames to get motion.

If that process sounds too preposterous for science-based activity, the simple and unquestionable math of gravity wave measurements is beyond dispute. The ridiculousness of measuring motion at 100 million times smaller than the vibration of atoms is like measuring one inch with a ruler that vibrates 1.6 thousand miles at the frequency of infrared light.

What that says is that physicists are not trying to convince anyone with scientific knowledge; instead they are breaking down the scientific logic as a method of blocking any criticism. Science criticism would have to say the claim of gravity wave measurements is total fraud, while the word fraud is not allowed in science or journalism. Scientists who significantly criticize get shoved out of science.

Why then would physicists discredit their endless accomplishments in space with a fake helicopter? Only because there haven't been any accomplishments in space, while the arrogance has become unlimited.

If there really were rovers on Mars, the reality of the subject would be developed instead of contriving fraud. So we need to take a harder look at the reality of space accomplishments.

The results of the Mars rovers are not presented in a credible manner. Why not show some real impressive results, at least in terms of something happening. Only a few images are shown, which could more easily be produced in a Hollywood sandbox. Billions of dollars were spent for wheel tracks in dust?

Here's why: First, there is not enough energy in hydrogen and oxygen to be doing anything significant in space. Supposedly, the small projects are so light that they don't take much energy. Not really. The problem with energy in space is that the energy itself has to be lifted up in too large of a quantity. The energy won't lift itself up well enough.

That problem is only the starting point; and there is no doubt that the space shuttle did get into near-Earth orbit; but look at the amount of energy it took: a huge tank of liquid fuel which dwarfed the space shuttle plus two solid fuel rockets on the sides. And near-Earth orbit is nothing compared to getting out of orbit and into deeper space.

Even the energy problem is not the ultimate demise of space projects. The most serious demise is that there is no way to navigate in space. How does a spacecraft determine its orientation—meaning the direction it is pointed? There is no method. A gyroscope does that for small earthly purposes; but the error rate multiplies insurmountably by the time the atmosphere is exited. And a gyroscope is extremely crude with very little information. The new-fangled accelerometers provide a lot of information, but they are so new they haven't yet been applied to space missions, and even with that information, the error problem goes off the graphs a few miles up.

A gyroscope needs to be re-energized every five minutes. While being re-energized, a motor acts upon it destroying its precision. Even if a gyroscope had perfect precision, there is no way to know before launch what that precision needs to be at twelve places past the decimal point. That's why cruise missiles use satellite guidance with the crudeness of inertial guidance systems during their few hundred miles, not the 100 million miles of spacecraft to Mars.

All long voyages, on the ocean or in space, must look for external reference points. On the oceans, the north star was used. That would be too crude in space, and there is no way to locate the north star in space. Ocean navigators used an astrolabe to find degrees of height above the horizon. There is no horizon to align on in space.

You might think a spacecraft would look for known star patterns. That won't work for many reasons. It would take artificial intelligence, which has not yet been applied to space missions; and the patterns would not be recognizable in space due to different backgrounds and depth of fields. In other words, with telescopes, so many stars show up that the patterns disappear in a haze of clutter.

When astronomers locate something with telescopes, they spend years adjusting the telescopes with fine-tuned angles referenced to standardized points and angles. None of that is possible for spacecraft.

Yet spacecraft need almost unlimited perfection in determining their orientation and position in a void before they can determine how to get to their destination. Supposedly, "mid-course corrections" are made. Mid-course corrections are not possible, because the needed information cannot be acquired.

And that is why there is not ten cents worth of information being made available to the public for decades of supposed space explorations. The claimed results haven't been happening.

You wouldn't think physicists would be such liars. Gravity wave measurements prove mathematically that physicists are unlimited liars, as does relativity in a more obscure way.

So the question here is the social significance. The first point is that physicists cannot ad and subtract. They base their entire profession of mathematics so complex that no one else can understand it. Physicists cannot understand it. It's entirely contrived.

Around the periphery of physics there is some complex math by wizards of mathematics. But that math does not do the things physicists claim to be doing. The real math applies to the engineering only, not the science.

The science of physics does not reduce to mathematics. The first reason is because physicists are trying to evaluate nonsense based upon errors in scientific principles. There hasn't been an iota of correct physics produced since Newton's laws were correctly produced in 1687. Science errors do not produce real math.

Then the attempts physicists make with their scientific analysis are so rudimentary that they cut across endless laws of nature involved in the interactions of complexities. In other words, physicists try to reduce their analysis to single points which they isolate from surrounding influences, while there are no such effects isolated from surrounding influences in nature.

The result is a power structure of conspirators refined to a religion in complete disconnect from everything else in society beyond the funding. Such an extreme power structure and conspiracy gets more and more lacking in credibility day by day.

For incompetent power mongers, glamorized fraud in physics provides a nice model to be followed. To the social order, power mongers turning social structures into fraud creates unsolvable problems and puts fascists in control of our lives.