Anyone mind tossing up links to orgonite or Ickey forums? (PM if violate TOU...)
geoengineering chemtrails soil ph and orgonite
- Thread starter cyat
- Start date
Chemtrails a myth - NO. Happening now.....
"ORIGIN OF THE DISCLOSURE
The invention described herein was made in the performance of work under a NASA contract and is subject to the provisions of section 303 of the National Aeronautics and Space Act of 1958, Public Law 85-568 (72 Stat. 435; 42 USC 2457).
SPECIFICATION
This invention relates generally to a chemical release system and relates in particular to a system for releasing barium in the vapor phase so that it can be ionized by solar radiation and also be excited to emit resonance radiation in the visible range. The ionized luminous cloud of barium then becomes a visible indication of magnetic and electric characteristics in space and allows determination of these properties over relatively large areas of space at a given time compared to rocket borne or orbiting instruments. For example, a geomagnetic field line could be illuminated by the present invention from pole-to-pole.
Presently, barium release systems are used to create ion clouds in the upper atmosphere for the study of geophysical properties of the atmosphere. These known systems utilize a solid chemical system using a thermite mixture of barium and copper oxide as the heat-producing reaction and an excess of barium to be vaporized. This system is launched by a suitable rocket and, at a predetermined time, the ingredients are ignited and released from a canister through a burst diaphragm and nozzle. The resulting barium cloud gives a brilliant color that can be observed and studied from earth to give indications of wind currents and the like. This known system of barium release has proved effective but is inherently of low efficiency in producing barium vapor yielding, in practice, only from 2 to 4 percent of the total chemical weight when actually up to 48 percent is available. In addition, the barium-copper oxide mixture is a fire hazard when mixing and pressing into the canister and must be done under inert atmospheric conditions which proves timeconsuming and costly in operation. Also, little, if any, ionization takes place in this known system due to the initial heat generating reaction.
It is therefore an object of the present invention to provide a new and novel barium release system for atmospheric and space studies.
Another object of the present invention is a system for releasing barium in the vapor phase so that it can be ionized by solar radiation and excited to emit resonance radiation in the visible range.
Another object of the present invention is a novel chemical mixture for releasing a good yield of free atoms and barium ions.
A further object of the present invention is a binary liquid hypergolic chemical release system in which barium is formed as a vapor at the time of release.
The foregoing and other objects are attained in one aspect of the present invention by providing a liquid fuel, in which barium salts are dissolved, and a high energy oxidizer which spontaneously ignites the fuel on contact. The barium release is accomplished by impinging fuel and oxidizer jets in an open-ended combuation chamber which expels the reaction product gases or plasma and which includes the desired barium neutral atoms (Ba.degree.) and barium ions (Ba.sup.+) as individual species.
A more complete appreciation of the invention and many of the attendant advantages thereof will be readily apparent as the same becomes better understood by reference to the following detailed description when considered in connection with the accompanying drawings wherein:
FIG. 1 is a schematic representation of the fuel and oxidizer tanks connected to an open-ended combustion chamber in a launch rocket for release of barium according to the present invention; and
FIG. 2 is a plot of triangular coordinates which defines the barium nitrate-barium chloride-hydrazine mixtures of the present invention.
Referring now to the drawings and more particularly to FIG. 1, there is shown a segment of a suitable carrier vehicle 10, such for example a rocket motor. Vehicle 10 is employed to carry fuel tank 11, insulated oxidizer tank 13 and combustion chamber 15, along with the necessary instrumentation, from earth into the upper atmosphere or into interplanetary space. Fuel tank 11 is in fluid connection with combustion chamber 15 and oxidizer tank 13 is in fluid connection with combustion chamber 15 by way of respective conduits 17 and 19. A pair of valves 21 and 23 are disposed within the respective conduits 17 and 19. Valves 21 and 23 are adapted to be selectively and simultaneously opened by a suitable battery-powered timing mechanism, radio signal, or the like, to release the pressurized fuel and oxidizer from tanks 11 and 13. The fuel and oxidizer then flow through conduits 17 and 19 and impinge upon each other through a centrally positioned manifold and suitable jets (not shown) in combustion chamber 15 where spontaneous ignition occurs. The reaction products are then expelled through the open ends of combustion chamber 15 as plasma which includes the desired barium neutral atoms and barium ions as individual species.
The fuel utilized in fuel tank 11 is either hydrazine (N.sub.2 H.sub.4) or liquid ammonia (NH.sub.3) while the oxidizer employed is selected from the group consisting of liquid fluorine (F.sub.2), chlorine trifluoride (ClF.sub.3) and oxygen difluoride (OF.sub.2). When using hydrazine as the fuel, barium may be dissolved therein as barium chloride, BaCl.sub.2, or barium nitrate, Ba(NO.sub.3).sub.2, or a combination of the two. When using liquid ammonia as the fuel, barium metal may be dissolved therein. The combination found to produce the highest intensity of Ba.degree. and Ba.sup.+ resonance radiation in ground based tests involved a fuel of 16 percent Ba(NO.sub.3).sub.2, 17 percent BaCl.sub.2 and 67 percent N.sub.2 H.sub.4 ; and as the oxidizer, the cryogenic liquid fluorine F.sub.2 and in which an oxidizer to fuel weight ratio was 1.32.
Other combinations of ingredients tested are set forth in Table I below:
TABLE I ______________________________________ System Optimum O/F Percent Ionization Calculated ______________________________________ 16.7% BaCl.sub.2 - 83.3% N.sub.2 H.sub.4 /ClF.sub.3 2.36 68.0 26% BaCl.sub.2 - 74% N.sub.2 H.sub.4 /ClF.sub.3 2.08 70.0 50% Ba(NO.sub.3).sub.2 - 50% NH.sub.3 /ClF.sub.3 1.52 - 42.9% Ba(NO.sub.3).sub.2 - 57.1% N.sub.2 H.sub.4 /ClF.sub.3 1.19 50.0 16.7% BaCl.sub.2 - 83.3% N.sub.2 H.sub.4 /F.sub.2 1.95 68.8 26% BaCl.sub.2 - 74% N.sub.2 H.sub.4 /F.sub.2 1.71 70.6 21% BaCl.sub.2 - 9% Ba(NO.sub.3).sub.2 - 70% N.sub.2 H.sub.4 /F.sub.2 1.57 68.5 17% BaCl.sub.2 - 16% Ba(NO.sub.3).sub.2 - 67% N.sub.2 H.sub.4 /F.sub.2 1.31 68.1 13% BaCl.sub.2 - 21.5% Ba(NO.sub.3).sub.2 - 65.5% N.sub.2 H.sub.4 /F.sub.2 1.34 63.7 9% BaCl.sub.2 - 30% Ba(NO.sub.3).sub.2 - 61% N.sub.2 H.sub.4 /F.sub.2 1.04 63.7 42.9% Ba(NO.sub.3).sub.2 - 57.1% N.sub.2 H.sub.4 /F.sub.2 0.976 43.0 42.9% Ba(NO.sub.3).sub.2 - 57.1% N.sub.2 H.sub.4 /OF.sub.2 0.694 46.9 26% BaCL.sub.2 - 74% N.sub.2 H.sub.4 /OF.sub.2 1.22 52.8 ______________________________________
The conditions under which each of the combinations listed in Table I were tested were ambient and the percentage ionization was calculated by equations set forth in NASA Contract Report CR-1415 published in August 1969.
The chemical supplier and manufacturers stated purity for the various chemicals employed are set forth in Table II below: ______________________________________ Chemical Supplier Purity ______________________________________ N.sub.2 H.sub.4 Olin Mathieson Chemical Technical Grade Company, Lake Charles, 97-98% N.sub.2 H.sub.4 Louisiana (2-3% H.sub.2 O) NH.sub.3 Air Products and Chemicals Technical Grade Allentown, Pa. BaCl.sub.2 J. T. Baker & Co. Reagent Grade Phillipsburg, N.J. Ba(NO.sub.3).sub.2 J. T. Baker & Co. Reagent Grade Phillipsburg, N.J. F.sub.2 Air Products & Chemicals 98% Allentown, Pa. ClF.sub.3 Allied Chemical Co. 99.5% Baton Rouge, La. OF.sub.2 Allied Chemical Co. 98% Baton Rouge, La. ______________________________________
A solubility study of various mixtures containing Ba(NO.sub.3).sub.2, BaCl.sub.2 and N.sub.2 H.sub.4 was made at room temperature and is shown in the triangular plot of FIG. 2. Seven solutions that were used in the tests enumerated in Table I are indicated by reference letters in FIG. 2 as follows:
a. 16.7% BaCl.sub.2 - 83.3% N.sub.2 H.sub.4 b. 26% BaCl.sub.2 - 74% N.sub.2 H.sub.4 c. 21% BaCl.sub.2 - 9% Ba(NO.sub.3).sub.2 - 70% N.sub.2 H.sub.4 d. 17% BaCl.sub.2 - 16% Ba(NO.sub.3).sub.2 - 67% N.sub.2 H.sub.4 e. 13% BaCl.sub.2 -21.5% Ba(NO.sub.3).sub.2 -65.5% N.sub.2 H.sub.4 f. 9% BaCl.sub.2 - 30% Ba(NO.sub.3).sub.2 - 61% N.sub.2 H.sub.4 g. 42.9% Ba(NO.sub.3).sub.2 - 57.1% N.sub.2 H.sub.4
A mixture below the Saturation Line, that is toward the Ba(NO.sub.3).sub.2 or BaCl.sub.2 corners contained a solid and a solution phase whereas the salts were in complete solution above the saturation line.
All fuel mixtures or systems described were easily handled except the 50 percent Ba(NO.sub.3).sub.2 -50 percent NH.sub.3 system. This system caused clogging of the feed valves due to precipitation of the Ba(NO.sub.3).sub.2. In addition the light values obtained using this system was relatively low.
In testing of each of the fuel mixtures set forth in Table I the Ba.degree. light was greater than the Ba.sup.+ light for a given oxidizer/fuel ratio in each of the mixtures. The maximum light occurred in all systems at a point located between the stoichiometric O/F and 3 percent less than the stoichiometric O/F. The stoichiometric O/F is defined as being equivalent to the oxidizer to fuel weight ratio in a balanced equation assuming the salt is converted to free Ba, F to HF, Cl to HCl and O to H.sub.2 O. For example, one system tested had an O/F ratio of 142 grams oxidizer per 100 grams fuel or 1.42/1.00. If the barium is assumed to be converted to BaF.sub.2 then the stoichiometric O/F is 1.47. Since the greatest light output in all cases occurred with O/F less than stoichiometric it is apparent that little of the Ba was combined as BaF.sub.2 or BaCl.sub.2. This was confirmed by spectrographic analysis.
In Table II the various systems are listed in decreasing light output or relative light intensity as measured by phototubes in millivolts, thereby indicating the relative barium yield.
TABLE III __________________________________________________________________________ SYSTEM MAXIMUM RELATIVE (percent weight for fuel) INTENSITY, millivolts Ba.degree. 5535 A Ba.sup.+ 4554 A __________________________________________________________________________ 17% BaCl.sub.2 -16% Ba(NO.sub.3).sub.2 -67% N.sub.2 H.sub.4 /F.sub.2 27600 11800 13% BaCl.sub.2 -21.5% Ba(NO.sub.3).sub.2 -65.5% N.sub.2 H.sub.4 /F.sub.2 23600 8340 21% BaCl.sub.2 -9% Ba(NO.sub.3).sub.2 -70% N.sub.2 H.sub.4 /F.sub.2 20600 9100 9% BaCl.sub.2 -30% Ba(NO.sub.3).sub.2 -61% N.sub.2 H.sub.4 /F.sub.2 16600 5970 26% BaCl.sub.2 -74% N.sub.2 H.sub.4 /F.sub.2 16600 6520 26% BaCl.sub.2 -74% N.sub.2 H.sub.4 /OF.sub.2 11800 2100 16.7% BaCl.sub.2 -83.3% N.sub.2 H.sub.4 /F.sub.2 9100 3350 42.9% Ba(NO.sub.3).sub.2 -57.1% N.sub.2 H.sub.4 /F.sub.2 9000 1800 42.9% Ba(NO.sub.3).sub.2 -57.1% N.sub.2 H.sub.4 /OF.sub.2 7300 1330 42.9% Ba(NO.sub.3).sub.2 -57.1% N.sub.2 H.sub.4 /ClF.sub.3 663 94 50% Ba(NO.sub.3).sub.2 -50% NH.sub.3 /ClF.sub.3 221 44 __________________________________________________________________________
From the above information, it is readily seen that the 17 percent BaCl.sub.2 -16 percent Ba(NO.sub.3).sub.2 -67 percent N.sub.2 H.sub.4 /F.sub.2 system gave the greatest amount of light intensity of the 4554 A Ba.sup.+ and 5535 A Ba.degree. spectral lines. Ambient tests showed that the optimum oxidizer to fuel ratio of this system was 1.32 to 1.00. This system containing 8.52 weight percent barium was estimated to be 68.1 percent ionized. Also since this system had the largest relative light intensity it would be expected to give the greatest amount of Ba.degree. and Ba.sup.+ and would appear to be the optimum system for a barium payload. In all systems tested it was found that the relative light reached a maximum at the O/F corresponding to the stoichiometric equation yielding barium as one of the reaction products and that the relative light output was sensitive to the O/F. Moving to either side of the optimum O/F caused a sharp decrease in relative light.
In vacuum tests the ignition of each system tested was smooth and like the ambient tests, took place in the combustion chamber. The rapid expansion in vacuum caused a decreased atom and ion density in the luminous flame which caused the light intensity to be about 1/37 to 1/50 the intensity measured in ambient tests. The percentage ionization was approximately the same for vacuum and ambient tests.
The operation of the invention is now believed apparent. Initially, fuel tank 11 is charged with the fuel containing the desired quantity of dissolved barium salt and pressurized with helium. The fuel tank pressure may be in the range of 6.89 to 20.06 .times. 10.sup.5 Newton/meter.sup.2. Oxidizer tank 13 is also charged with the appropriate oxidizer and pressurized. Cryogenic oxidizers such as OF.sub.2 and F.sub.2 are condensed from gases in the closed oxidizer tank which must be maintained enclosed in a liquid nitrogen bath. The oxidizer feed valve 23 and conduit 19 must also be maintained at liquid nitrogen temperature with a liquid nitrogen jacket when employing a cryogenic oxidizer.
The noncryogenic oxidizer, ClF.sub.3, may be pressurized into the closed oxidizer tank 13 from a supply bottle with super dry nitrogen.
Combustion chamber 15 is formed of stainless steel, aluminum, or the like F.sub.2 compatible metals and is internally partitioned by the manifold, not shown. The conduits 17 and 19 terminate in a manifold having injector orifices (not shown) mounted 90.degree. to each other within each end of chamber 15 and sized for pressure drops of 5.24 to 10.2 .times. 10.sup.5 Newton/meter.sup.2 across the orifice. Fuel and oxidizer flows are in the range of 2.05 to 6.82 Kg/sec each. The entire system is carried into the upper atmosphere or interplanetary space by rocket vehicle 10 where, in response to a suitable signal, timing mechanism or the like, valves 21 and 23 may be selectively opened and closed and the pressurized liquid fuel and oxidizer will flow through conduits 17 and 19 into combination unit 15. When the hypergolic liquids impinge upon each other, they spontaneously ignite to expel reaction product gases or plasma including the highly luminous barium neutral atoms and barium ions as individual species. All of the barium reaching the combustion chamber is vaporized and released through the opposite ends thereof so that a high yield efficiency is obtained. The resulting high flame temperature, approximately 4,000.degree.K., and some as yet not determined chemical activation, produces a relatively large amount of barium ions in the flame which is a highly desirable condition. It has been estimated from spectroscopic measurements that the degree of ionization may be as high as 75 percent in the released plasma in comparison to being on the order of 1 percent for the previously used Ba-CuO solid system which depends almost entirely on solar photoionization, a time-dependent phenomena which further reduces the usable barium yield of this known system.
Thus, it is readily apparent that the present invention provides an inherently more efficient process of producing barium clouds wherein the degree of ionization in the released plasma is much greater. The selectively opening and closing of valves 21 and 23 gives the possibility of a payload with multiple releases permitted due to the start and stop capabilities of the liquid system. Also, the liquid system of the present invention gives the possibility of controlling rates so that a trailtype release can be obtained as well as a point-source type. In addition, the liquid system of the present invention effects the formation of barium atoms and ions at the time of combustion and expansion at high temperatures and results in little opportunity for the barium to condense during release.
There are obviously many variations and modifications to the present invention that will be readily apparent to those skilled in the art without departing from the spirit or scope of the disclosure or from the scope of the claims."
That is US patent 3813875.
"BACKGROUND
The present invention relates to method and apparatus for contrail generation and the like.
An earlier known method in use for contrail generation involves oil smoke trails produced by injecting liquid oil directly into the hot jet exhaust of an aircraft target vehicle. The oil vaporizes and recondenses being the aircraft producing a brilliant white trail. Oil smoke trail production requires a minimum of equipment; and, the material is low in cost and readily available. However, oil smoke requires a heat source to vaporize the liquid oil and not all aircraft target vehicles, notably towed targets, have such a heat source. Also, at altitudes above about 25,000 feet oil smoke visibility degrades rapidly.
SUMMARY
The present invention is for a powder generator requiring no heat source to emit a "contrail" with sufficient visibility to aid in visual acquisition of an aircraft target vehicle and the like. The term "contrail" was adopted for convenience in identifying the visible powder trail of this invention. Aircraft target vehicles are used to simulate aerial threats for missile tests and often fly at altitudes between 5,000 and 20,000 feet at speeds of 300 and 400 knots or more. The present invention is also suitable for use in other aircraft vehicles to generate contrails or reflective screens for any desired purpose.
The powder contail generator is normally carried on an aircraft in a pod containing a ram air tube and powder feed hopper. Powder particles, surface treated to minimize interparticle cohesive forces are fed from the hopper to a deagglomerator and then to the ram air tube for dispensing as separate single particles to produce a contrail having maximum visibility for a given weight material.
Other object, advantages and novel features of the invention will become apparent from the following detailed description of the invention when considered in conjunction with the accompanying drawing.
DESCRIPTION OF DRAWING
FIG. 1 is a schematic sectional side-view of a powder contrail generator of the present invention.
DESCRIPTION OF PREFERRED EMBODIMENT
The powder contail generator in pod 10, shown in FIG. 1, is provided with a powder feed hopper 12 positioned in the center section of the pod and which feeds a powder 13 to a deagglomerator 14 by means of screw conveyors 16 across the bottom of the hopper. The deagglomerator 14 produces two stages of action. In the first stage of deagglomeration, a shaft 18 having projecting radial rods 19 in compartment 20 is rotated by an air motor 21, or other suitable drive means. The shaft 18 is rotated at about 10,000 rpm, for example. As powder 13 descends through the first stage compartment 20 of the deagglomeration chamber, the hammering action of rotating rods 19 serves to aerate and precondition the powder before the second stage of deagglomeration takes place in the jet mill section 22. In the jet mill 22, a plurality of radial jets 24 (e.g., six 0.050 inch diamter radial jets) direct nitrogen gas (at e.g., 120 psig) inward to provide energy for further deagglomeration of the powder. The N.sub.2, or other suitable gas, is provided from storage tanks 25 and 26, for example, in the pod.
The jet mill 22 operates in a similar manner to commercial fluid energy mills except that there is no provision for recirculation of oversize particles. Tests with the deagglomerator show that at a feed rate of approximately 11/2 lb/min, treated titanium dioxide powder pigment is effectively dispersed as single particles with very few agglomerates evident.
The nitrogen gas stored in cylinder tanks 25 and 26 is charged to 1800 psig, for example. Two stages of pressure reduction, for example, by pressure reduction valves 28 and 29, bring the final delivery pressure at the radial jets 24 and to the air motor 21 to approximately 120 psig. A solenoid valve 30 on the 120 psig line is connected in parallel with the electric motor 32 which operates the powder feeder screws 16 for simultaneous starting and running of the powder feed, the air motor and the jet mill deagglomerator.
Air enters ram air tube 34 at its entrance 35 and the exhaust from the jet mill deagglomerator passes directly into the ram air tube. At the deagglomerator exhaust 36 into ram air tube 34, an upstream deflector baffle 38 produces a venturi effect which minimizes back pressure on the powder feed system. The powder is then jetted from the exhaust end 40 of the ram air tube to produce a contrail. A pressure equalization tube, not shown, can be used to connect the top of the closed hopper 12 to the deagglomeration chamber 14. A butterfly valve could be provided at the powder hopper outlet 39 to completely isolate and seal off the powder supply when not in use. Powder 13 could then be stored in hopper 12 for several weeks, without danger of picking up excessive moisture, and still be adequately dispensed.
Preparation of the light scatter powder 13 is of a critical importance to production of a powder "contrail" having maximum visibility for a given weight of material. It is essential that the pigment powder particles be dispensed as separate single particles rather than as agglomerates of two or more particles. The powder treatment produces the most easily dispersed powder through the use of surface treatments which minimize interparticle cohesive forces.
Titanium dioxide pigment was selected as the primary light scattering material because of its highly efficient light scattering ability and commercially available pigment grades. Titanium dioxide pigment (e.g., DuPont R--931) with a median particle size of about 0.3.mu. has a high bulk density and is not readily aerosolizable as a submicron cloud without the consumption of a large amount of deagglomeration energy. In order to reduce the energy requirement for deagglomeration, the TiO.sub.2 powder is specially treated with a hydrophobic colloidal silica which coats and separates the individual TiO.sub.2 pigment particles. The extremely fine particulate nature (0.007.mu. primary particle size) of Cobot S--101 Silanox grade, for example, of colloidal silica minimizes the amount needed to coat and separate the TiO.sub.2 particles, and the hydrophobic surface minimizes the affinity of the powder for absorbtion of moisture from the atmosphere. Adsorbed moisture in powders causes liquid bridges at interparticle contacts and it then becomes necessary to overcome the adsorbed-liquid surface tension forces as well as the weaker Van der Waals' forces before the particles can be separated.
The Silanox treated titanium dioxide pigment is further protected from the deleterious effects of adsorbed moisture by incorporation of silica gel. The silica gel preferentially adsorbs water vapor that the powder may be exposed to after drying and before use. The silica gel used is a powder product, such as Syloid 65 from the W. R Grace and Co., Davison Chemical Division, and has an average particle size about 4.5.mu. and a large capacity for moisture at low humidities.
A typical powder composition used is shown in Table 1. This formulation was blended intimately with a Patterson-Kelley Co. twin shell dry LB-model LB--2161 with intensifier. Batches of 1500 g were blended for 15 min. each and packaged in 5-lb cans. The bulk density of the blended powder is 0.22 g/cc. Since deagglomeration is facilitated by having the powder bone dry, the powder should be predried before sealing the cans. In view of long periods (e.g., about 4 months) between powder preparation and use it is found preferable to spread the powder in a thin layer in an open container and place in a 400.degree.F over two days before planned usage. The powder is removed and placed in the hopper about 2 hours before use.
Table 1 ______________________________________ CONTRAIL POWDER FORMULATION Ingredient % by Weight ______________________________________ TiO.sub.2 (e.g., DuPont R-931) 85 median particle size 0.3.mu. Colloidal Silica (e.g., Cabot S-101 Silanox) 10 primary particle size 0.007.mu. Silica gel (e.g., Syloid 65) 5 average particle size 4.5.mu. ______________________________________
Other type powder compositions can also be used with the apparatus described herein. For example, various powder particles which reflect electromagnetic radiation can be dispensed as a chaff or the like from the contrail generator.
Obviously many modifications and variations of the present invention are possible in the light of the above teachings. It is therefore to be understood that within the scope of the appended claims the invention may be practiced otherwise than as specifically described."
And that is US patent 3899144. Seems the voices of the left are onto something.
"ORIGIN OF THE DISCLOSURE
The invention described herein was made in the performance of work under a NASA contract and is subject to the provisions of section 303 of the National Aeronautics and Space Act of 1958, Public Law 85-568 (72 Stat. 435; 42 USC 2457).
SPECIFICATION
This invention relates generally to a chemical release system and relates in particular to a system for releasing barium in the vapor phase so that it can be ionized by solar radiation and also be excited to emit resonance radiation in the visible range. The ionized luminous cloud of barium then becomes a visible indication of magnetic and electric characteristics in space and allows determination of these properties over relatively large areas of space at a given time compared to rocket borne or orbiting instruments. For example, a geomagnetic field line could be illuminated by the present invention from pole-to-pole.
Presently, barium release systems are used to create ion clouds in the upper atmosphere for the study of geophysical properties of the atmosphere. These known systems utilize a solid chemical system using a thermite mixture of barium and copper oxide as the heat-producing reaction and an excess of barium to be vaporized. This system is launched by a suitable rocket and, at a predetermined time, the ingredients are ignited and released from a canister through a burst diaphragm and nozzle. The resulting barium cloud gives a brilliant color that can be observed and studied from earth to give indications of wind currents and the like. This known system of barium release has proved effective but is inherently of low efficiency in producing barium vapor yielding, in practice, only from 2 to 4 percent of the total chemical weight when actually up to 48 percent is available. In addition, the barium-copper oxide mixture is a fire hazard when mixing and pressing into the canister and must be done under inert atmospheric conditions which proves timeconsuming and costly in operation. Also, little, if any, ionization takes place in this known system due to the initial heat generating reaction.
It is therefore an object of the present invention to provide a new and novel barium release system for atmospheric and space studies.
Another object of the present invention is a system for releasing barium in the vapor phase so that it can be ionized by solar radiation and excited to emit resonance radiation in the visible range.
Another object of the present invention is a novel chemical mixture for releasing a good yield of free atoms and barium ions.
A further object of the present invention is a binary liquid hypergolic chemical release system in which barium is formed as a vapor at the time of release.
The foregoing and other objects are attained in one aspect of the present invention by providing a liquid fuel, in which barium salts are dissolved, and a high energy oxidizer which spontaneously ignites the fuel on contact. The barium release is accomplished by impinging fuel and oxidizer jets in an open-ended combuation chamber which expels the reaction product gases or plasma and which includes the desired barium neutral atoms (Ba.degree.) and barium ions (Ba.sup.+) as individual species.
A more complete appreciation of the invention and many of the attendant advantages thereof will be readily apparent as the same becomes better understood by reference to the following detailed description when considered in connection with the accompanying drawings wherein:
FIG. 1 is a schematic representation of the fuel and oxidizer tanks connected to an open-ended combustion chamber in a launch rocket for release of barium according to the present invention; and
FIG. 2 is a plot of triangular coordinates which defines the barium nitrate-barium chloride-hydrazine mixtures of the present invention.
Referring now to the drawings and more particularly to FIG. 1, there is shown a segment of a suitable carrier vehicle 10, such for example a rocket motor. Vehicle 10 is employed to carry fuel tank 11, insulated oxidizer tank 13 and combustion chamber 15, along with the necessary instrumentation, from earth into the upper atmosphere or into interplanetary space. Fuel tank 11 is in fluid connection with combustion chamber 15 and oxidizer tank 13 is in fluid connection with combustion chamber 15 by way of respective conduits 17 and 19. A pair of valves 21 and 23 are disposed within the respective conduits 17 and 19. Valves 21 and 23 are adapted to be selectively and simultaneously opened by a suitable battery-powered timing mechanism, radio signal, or the like, to release the pressurized fuel and oxidizer from tanks 11 and 13. The fuel and oxidizer then flow through conduits 17 and 19 and impinge upon each other through a centrally positioned manifold and suitable jets (not shown) in combustion chamber 15 where spontaneous ignition occurs. The reaction products are then expelled through the open ends of combustion chamber 15 as plasma which includes the desired barium neutral atoms and barium ions as individual species.
The fuel utilized in fuel tank 11 is either hydrazine (N.sub.2 H.sub.4) or liquid ammonia (NH.sub.3) while the oxidizer employed is selected from the group consisting of liquid fluorine (F.sub.2), chlorine trifluoride (ClF.sub.3) and oxygen difluoride (OF.sub.2). When using hydrazine as the fuel, barium may be dissolved therein as barium chloride, BaCl.sub.2, or barium nitrate, Ba(NO.sub.3).sub.2, or a combination of the two. When using liquid ammonia as the fuel, barium metal may be dissolved therein. The combination found to produce the highest intensity of Ba.degree. and Ba.sup.+ resonance radiation in ground based tests involved a fuel of 16 percent Ba(NO.sub.3).sub.2, 17 percent BaCl.sub.2 and 67 percent N.sub.2 H.sub.4 ; and as the oxidizer, the cryogenic liquid fluorine F.sub.2 and in which an oxidizer to fuel weight ratio was 1.32.
Other combinations of ingredients tested are set forth in Table I below:
TABLE I ______________________________________ System Optimum O/F Percent Ionization Calculated ______________________________________ 16.7% BaCl.sub.2 - 83.3% N.sub.2 H.sub.4 /ClF.sub.3 2.36 68.0 26% BaCl.sub.2 - 74% N.sub.2 H.sub.4 /ClF.sub.3 2.08 70.0 50% Ba(NO.sub.3).sub.2 - 50% NH.sub.3 /ClF.sub.3 1.52 - 42.9% Ba(NO.sub.3).sub.2 - 57.1% N.sub.2 H.sub.4 /ClF.sub.3 1.19 50.0 16.7% BaCl.sub.2 - 83.3% N.sub.2 H.sub.4 /F.sub.2 1.95 68.8 26% BaCl.sub.2 - 74% N.sub.2 H.sub.4 /F.sub.2 1.71 70.6 21% BaCl.sub.2 - 9% Ba(NO.sub.3).sub.2 - 70% N.sub.2 H.sub.4 /F.sub.2 1.57 68.5 17% BaCl.sub.2 - 16% Ba(NO.sub.3).sub.2 - 67% N.sub.2 H.sub.4 /F.sub.2 1.31 68.1 13% BaCl.sub.2 - 21.5% Ba(NO.sub.3).sub.2 - 65.5% N.sub.2 H.sub.4 /F.sub.2 1.34 63.7 9% BaCl.sub.2 - 30% Ba(NO.sub.3).sub.2 - 61% N.sub.2 H.sub.4 /F.sub.2 1.04 63.7 42.9% Ba(NO.sub.3).sub.2 - 57.1% N.sub.2 H.sub.4 /F.sub.2 0.976 43.0 42.9% Ba(NO.sub.3).sub.2 - 57.1% N.sub.2 H.sub.4 /OF.sub.2 0.694 46.9 26% BaCL.sub.2 - 74% N.sub.2 H.sub.4 /OF.sub.2 1.22 52.8 ______________________________________
The conditions under which each of the combinations listed in Table I were tested were ambient and the percentage ionization was calculated by equations set forth in NASA Contract Report CR-1415 published in August 1969.
The chemical supplier and manufacturers stated purity for the various chemicals employed are set forth in Table II below: ______________________________________ Chemical Supplier Purity ______________________________________ N.sub.2 H.sub.4 Olin Mathieson Chemical Technical Grade Company, Lake Charles, 97-98% N.sub.2 H.sub.4 Louisiana (2-3% H.sub.2 O) NH.sub.3 Air Products and Chemicals Technical Grade Allentown, Pa. BaCl.sub.2 J. T. Baker & Co. Reagent Grade Phillipsburg, N.J. Ba(NO.sub.3).sub.2 J. T. Baker & Co. Reagent Grade Phillipsburg, N.J. F.sub.2 Air Products & Chemicals 98% Allentown, Pa. ClF.sub.3 Allied Chemical Co. 99.5% Baton Rouge, La. OF.sub.2 Allied Chemical Co. 98% Baton Rouge, La. ______________________________________
A solubility study of various mixtures containing Ba(NO.sub.3).sub.2, BaCl.sub.2 and N.sub.2 H.sub.4 was made at room temperature and is shown in the triangular plot of FIG. 2. Seven solutions that were used in the tests enumerated in Table I are indicated by reference letters in FIG. 2 as follows:
a. 16.7% BaCl.sub.2 - 83.3% N.sub.2 H.sub.4 b. 26% BaCl.sub.2 - 74% N.sub.2 H.sub.4 c. 21% BaCl.sub.2 - 9% Ba(NO.sub.3).sub.2 - 70% N.sub.2 H.sub.4 d. 17% BaCl.sub.2 - 16% Ba(NO.sub.3).sub.2 - 67% N.sub.2 H.sub.4 e. 13% BaCl.sub.2 -21.5% Ba(NO.sub.3).sub.2 -65.5% N.sub.2 H.sub.4 f. 9% BaCl.sub.2 - 30% Ba(NO.sub.3).sub.2 - 61% N.sub.2 H.sub.4 g. 42.9% Ba(NO.sub.3).sub.2 - 57.1% N.sub.2 H.sub.4
A mixture below the Saturation Line, that is toward the Ba(NO.sub.3).sub.2 or BaCl.sub.2 corners contained a solid and a solution phase whereas the salts were in complete solution above the saturation line.
All fuel mixtures or systems described were easily handled except the 50 percent Ba(NO.sub.3).sub.2 -50 percent NH.sub.3 system. This system caused clogging of the feed valves due to precipitation of the Ba(NO.sub.3).sub.2. In addition the light values obtained using this system was relatively low.
In testing of each of the fuel mixtures set forth in Table I the Ba.degree. light was greater than the Ba.sup.+ light for a given oxidizer/fuel ratio in each of the mixtures. The maximum light occurred in all systems at a point located between the stoichiometric O/F and 3 percent less than the stoichiometric O/F. The stoichiometric O/F is defined as being equivalent to the oxidizer to fuel weight ratio in a balanced equation assuming the salt is converted to free Ba, F to HF, Cl to HCl and O to H.sub.2 O. For example, one system tested had an O/F ratio of 142 grams oxidizer per 100 grams fuel or 1.42/1.00. If the barium is assumed to be converted to BaF.sub.2 then the stoichiometric O/F is 1.47. Since the greatest light output in all cases occurred with O/F less than stoichiometric it is apparent that little of the Ba was combined as BaF.sub.2 or BaCl.sub.2. This was confirmed by spectrographic analysis.
In Table II the various systems are listed in decreasing light output or relative light intensity as measured by phototubes in millivolts, thereby indicating the relative barium yield.
TABLE III __________________________________________________________________________ SYSTEM MAXIMUM RELATIVE (percent weight for fuel) INTENSITY, millivolts Ba.degree. 5535 A Ba.sup.+ 4554 A __________________________________________________________________________ 17% BaCl.sub.2 -16% Ba(NO.sub.3).sub.2 -67% N.sub.2 H.sub.4 /F.sub.2 27600 11800 13% BaCl.sub.2 -21.5% Ba(NO.sub.3).sub.2 -65.5% N.sub.2 H.sub.4 /F.sub.2 23600 8340 21% BaCl.sub.2 -9% Ba(NO.sub.3).sub.2 -70% N.sub.2 H.sub.4 /F.sub.2 20600 9100 9% BaCl.sub.2 -30% Ba(NO.sub.3).sub.2 -61% N.sub.2 H.sub.4 /F.sub.2 16600 5970 26% BaCl.sub.2 -74% N.sub.2 H.sub.4 /F.sub.2 16600 6520 26% BaCl.sub.2 -74% N.sub.2 H.sub.4 /OF.sub.2 11800 2100 16.7% BaCl.sub.2 -83.3% N.sub.2 H.sub.4 /F.sub.2 9100 3350 42.9% Ba(NO.sub.3).sub.2 -57.1% N.sub.2 H.sub.4 /F.sub.2 9000 1800 42.9% Ba(NO.sub.3).sub.2 -57.1% N.sub.2 H.sub.4 /OF.sub.2 7300 1330 42.9% Ba(NO.sub.3).sub.2 -57.1% N.sub.2 H.sub.4 /ClF.sub.3 663 94 50% Ba(NO.sub.3).sub.2 -50% NH.sub.3 /ClF.sub.3 221 44 __________________________________________________________________________
From the above information, it is readily seen that the 17 percent BaCl.sub.2 -16 percent Ba(NO.sub.3).sub.2 -67 percent N.sub.2 H.sub.4 /F.sub.2 system gave the greatest amount of light intensity of the 4554 A Ba.sup.+ and 5535 A Ba.degree. spectral lines. Ambient tests showed that the optimum oxidizer to fuel ratio of this system was 1.32 to 1.00. This system containing 8.52 weight percent barium was estimated to be 68.1 percent ionized. Also since this system had the largest relative light intensity it would be expected to give the greatest amount of Ba.degree. and Ba.sup.+ and would appear to be the optimum system for a barium payload. In all systems tested it was found that the relative light reached a maximum at the O/F corresponding to the stoichiometric equation yielding barium as one of the reaction products and that the relative light output was sensitive to the O/F. Moving to either side of the optimum O/F caused a sharp decrease in relative light.
In vacuum tests the ignition of each system tested was smooth and like the ambient tests, took place in the combustion chamber. The rapid expansion in vacuum caused a decreased atom and ion density in the luminous flame which caused the light intensity to be about 1/37 to 1/50 the intensity measured in ambient tests. The percentage ionization was approximately the same for vacuum and ambient tests.
The operation of the invention is now believed apparent. Initially, fuel tank 11 is charged with the fuel containing the desired quantity of dissolved barium salt and pressurized with helium. The fuel tank pressure may be in the range of 6.89 to 20.06 .times. 10.sup.5 Newton/meter.sup.2. Oxidizer tank 13 is also charged with the appropriate oxidizer and pressurized. Cryogenic oxidizers such as OF.sub.2 and F.sub.2 are condensed from gases in the closed oxidizer tank which must be maintained enclosed in a liquid nitrogen bath. The oxidizer feed valve 23 and conduit 19 must also be maintained at liquid nitrogen temperature with a liquid nitrogen jacket when employing a cryogenic oxidizer.
The noncryogenic oxidizer, ClF.sub.3, may be pressurized into the closed oxidizer tank 13 from a supply bottle with super dry nitrogen.
Combustion chamber 15 is formed of stainless steel, aluminum, or the like F.sub.2 compatible metals and is internally partitioned by the manifold, not shown. The conduits 17 and 19 terminate in a manifold having injector orifices (not shown) mounted 90.degree. to each other within each end of chamber 15 and sized for pressure drops of 5.24 to 10.2 .times. 10.sup.5 Newton/meter.sup.2 across the orifice. Fuel and oxidizer flows are in the range of 2.05 to 6.82 Kg/sec each. The entire system is carried into the upper atmosphere or interplanetary space by rocket vehicle 10 where, in response to a suitable signal, timing mechanism or the like, valves 21 and 23 may be selectively opened and closed and the pressurized liquid fuel and oxidizer will flow through conduits 17 and 19 into combination unit 15. When the hypergolic liquids impinge upon each other, they spontaneously ignite to expel reaction product gases or plasma including the highly luminous barium neutral atoms and barium ions as individual species. All of the barium reaching the combustion chamber is vaporized and released through the opposite ends thereof so that a high yield efficiency is obtained. The resulting high flame temperature, approximately 4,000.degree.K., and some as yet not determined chemical activation, produces a relatively large amount of barium ions in the flame which is a highly desirable condition. It has been estimated from spectroscopic measurements that the degree of ionization may be as high as 75 percent in the released plasma in comparison to being on the order of 1 percent for the previously used Ba-CuO solid system which depends almost entirely on solar photoionization, a time-dependent phenomena which further reduces the usable barium yield of this known system.
Thus, it is readily apparent that the present invention provides an inherently more efficient process of producing barium clouds wherein the degree of ionization in the released plasma is much greater. The selectively opening and closing of valves 21 and 23 gives the possibility of a payload with multiple releases permitted due to the start and stop capabilities of the liquid system. Also, the liquid system of the present invention gives the possibility of controlling rates so that a trailtype release can be obtained as well as a point-source type. In addition, the liquid system of the present invention effects the formation of barium atoms and ions at the time of combustion and expansion at high temperatures and results in little opportunity for the barium to condense during release.
There are obviously many variations and modifications to the present invention that will be readily apparent to those skilled in the art without departing from the spirit or scope of the disclosure or from the scope of the claims."
That is US patent 3813875.
"BACKGROUND
The present invention relates to method and apparatus for contrail generation and the like.
An earlier known method in use for contrail generation involves oil smoke trails produced by injecting liquid oil directly into the hot jet exhaust of an aircraft target vehicle. The oil vaporizes and recondenses being the aircraft producing a brilliant white trail. Oil smoke trail production requires a minimum of equipment; and, the material is low in cost and readily available. However, oil smoke requires a heat source to vaporize the liquid oil and not all aircraft target vehicles, notably towed targets, have such a heat source. Also, at altitudes above about 25,000 feet oil smoke visibility degrades rapidly.
SUMMARY
The present invention is for a powder generator requiring no heat source to emit a "contrail" with sufficient visibility to aid in visual acquisition of an aircraft target vehicle and the like. The term "contrail" was adopted for convenience in identifying the visible powder trail of this invention. Aircraft target vehicles are used to simulate aerial threats for missile tests and often fly at altitudes between 5,000 and 20,000 feet at speeds of 300 and 400 knots or more. The present invention is also suitable for use in other aircraft vehicles to generate contrails or reflective screens for any desired purpose.
The powder contail generator is normally carried on an aircraft in a pod containing a ram air tube and powder feed hopper. Powder particles, surface treated to minimize interparticle cohesive forces are fed from the hopper to a deagglomerator and then to the ram air tube for dispensing as separate single particles to produce a contrail having maximum visibility for a given weight material.
Other object, advantages and novel features of the invention will become apparent from the following detailed description of the invention when considered in conjunction with the accompanying drawing.
DESCRIPTION OF DRAWING
FIG. 1 is a schematic sectional side-view of a powder contrail generator of the present invention.
DESCRIPTION OF PREFERRED EMBODIMENT
The powder contail generator in pod 10, shown in FIG. 1, is provided with a powder feed hopper 12 positioned in the center section of the pod and which feeds a powder 13 to a deagglomerator 14 by means of screw conveyors 16 across the bottom of the hopper. The deagglomerator 14 produces two stages of action. In the first stage of deagglomeration, a shaft 18 having projecting radial rods 19 in compartment 20 is rotated by an air motor 21, or other suitable drive means. The shaft 18 is rotated at about 10,000 rpm, for example. As powder 13 descends through the first stage compartment 20 of the deagglomeration chamber, the hammering action of rotating rods 19 serves to aerate and precondition the powder before the second stage of deagglomeration takes place in the jet mill section 22. In the jet mill 22, a plurality of radial jets 24 (e.g., six 0.050 inch diamter radial jets) direct nitrogen gas (at e.g., 120 psig) inward to provide energy for further deagglomeration of the powder. The N.sub.2, or other suitable gas, is provided from storage tanks 25 and 26, for example, in the pod.
The jet mill 22 operates in a similar manner to commercial fluid energy mills except that there is no provision for recirculation of oversize particles. Tests with the deagglomerator show that at a feed rate of approximately 11/2 lb/min, treated titanium dioxide powder pigment is effectively dispersed as single particles with very few agglomerates evident.
The nitrogen gas stored in cylinder tanks 25 and 26 is charged to 1800 psig, for example. Two stages of pressure reduction, for example, by pressure reduction valves 28 and 29, bring the final delivery pressure at the radial jets 24 and to the air motor 21 to approximately 120 psig. A solenoid valve 30 on the 120 psig line is connected in parallel with the electric motor 32 which operates the powder feeder screws 16 for simultaneous starting and running of the powder feed, the air motor and the jet mill deagglomerator.
Air enters ram air tube 34 at its entrance 35 and the exhaust from the jet mill deagglomerator passes directly into the ram air tube. At the deagglomerator exhaust 36 into ram air tube 34, an upstream deflector baffle 38 produces a venturi effect which minimizes back pressure on the powder feed system. The powder is then jetted from the exhaust end 40 of the ram air tube to produce a contrail. A pressure equalization tube, not shown, can be used to connect the top of the closed hopper 12 to the deagglomeration chamber 14. A butterfly valve could be provided at the powder hopper outlet 39 to completely isolate and seal off the powder supply when not in use. Powder 13 could then be stored in hopper 12 for several weeks, without danger of picking up excessive moisture, and still be adequately dispensed.
Preparation of the light scatter powder 13 is of a critical importance to production of a powder "contrail" having maximum visibility for a given weight of material. It is essential that the pigment powder particles be dispensed as separate single particles rather than as agglomerates of two or more particles. The powder treatment produces the most easily dispersed powder through the use of surface treatments which minimize interparticle cohesive forces.
Titanium dioxide pigment was selected as the primary light scattering material because of its highly efficient light scattering ability and commercially available pigment grades. Titanium dioxide pigment (e.g., DuPont R--931) with a median particle size of about 0.3.mu. has a high bulk density and is not readily aerosolizable as a submicron cloud without the consumption of a large amount of deagglomeration energy. In order to reduce the energy requirement for deagglomeration, the TiO.sub.2 powder is specially treated with a hydrophobic colloidal silica which coats and separates the individual TiO.sub.2 pigment particles. The extremely fine particulate nature (0.007.mu. primary particle size) of Cobot S--101 Silanox grade, for example, of colloidal silica minimizes the amount needed to coat and separate the TiO.sub.2 particles, and the hydrophobic surface minimizes the affinity of the powder for absorbtion of moisture from the atmosphere. Adsorbed moisture in powders causes liquid bridges at interparticle contacts and it then becomes necessary to overcome the adsorbed-liquid surface tension forces as well as the weaker Van der Waals' forces before the particles can be separated.
The Silanox treated titanium dioxide pigment is further protected from the deleterious effects of adsorbed moisture by incorporation of silica gel. The silica gel preferentially adsorbs water vapor that the powder may be exposed to after drying and before use. The silica gel used is a powder product, such as Syloid 65 from the W. R Grace and Co., Davison Chemical Division, and has an average particle size about 4.5.mu. and a large capacity for moisture at low humidities.
A typical powder composition used is shown in Table 1. This formulation was blended intimately with a Patterson-Kelley Co. twin shell dry LB-model LB--2161 with intensifier. Batches of 1500 g were blended for 15 min. each and packaged in 5-lb cans. The bulk density of the blended powder is 0.22 g/cc. Since deagglomeration is facilitated by having the powder bone dry, the powder should be predried before sealing the cans. In view of long periods (e.g., about 4 months) between powder preparation and use it is found preferable to spread the powder in a thin layer in an open container and place in a 400.degree.F over two days before planned usage. The powder is removed and placed in the hopper about 2 hours before use.
Table 1 ______________________________________ CONTRAIL POWDER FORMULATION Ingredient % by Weight ______________________________________ TiO.sub.2 (e.g., DuPont R-931) 85 median particle size 0.3.mu. Colloidal Silica (e.g., Cabot S-101 Silanox) 10 primary particle size 0.007.mu. Silica gel (e.g., Syloid 65) 5 average particle size 4.5.mu. ______________________________________
Other type powder compositions can also be used with the apparatus described herein. For example, various powder particles which reflect electromagnetic radiation can be dispensed as a chaff or the like from the contrail generator.
Obviously many modifications and variations of the present invention are possible in the light of the above teachings. It is therefore to be understood that within the scope of the appended claims the invention may be practiced otherwise than as specifically described."
And that is US patent 3899144. Seems the voices of the left are onto something.
.I am at an extremely high altitude with virtually no pollution, and naturally clear wide open skies.This allows me to see very well what is happening in the sky.There is also a small airport and lots of commercial planes flying.What I notice very clearly is that most planes have no visible exhaust.Some planes have exhaust that dissapears after a couple hundred feet.Now the other phenomenon is planes which criss- cross the sky leaving behind a thick trail that does not dissapear at all but fans out creating the look of clouds, some shaped square.By the afternoon this completely covers the sky.This is done relentlessly and people tend to just accept them as clouds ,or a new cloud.Here's a link to a short video displaying the difference between/chem and contrails.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=je8u6F7Xq10
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=je8u6F7Xq10
Thanks for the link.
The chembuster(s) were used metal shavings, dual-terminated quartz crystals and six copper tubes equidistant on a radial pattern. Is that the chembuster you are referring to?
...
The chembuster(s) were used metal shavings, dual-terminated quartz crystals and six copper tubes equidistant on a radial pattern. Is that the chembuster you are referring to?
...
I've never denied the fact that chemtrails are possible. It is possible that planes are spraying something other than the tracking chemicals listed in the patent application. The technology to do such a thing does exist. Technology to do a lot of things exists, but the fact that it exists is in no way applicable as proof that it is actually happening. The patent application talks about using barium as a sort of wind tunnel smoke (because as engineers who do wind tunnel testing will tell you, wind is invisible) to help track air currents. It does not talk about it being a delivery system for anything other than a reliable creator of contrails to be used to track air currents.
I'm just asking for proof, documentaries full of hearsay and anecdotes don't provide anything verifiable.
The discussion of DE, and vitamin C on the other hand, do indeed provide proof of their function, and have been proven to work in some of the ways you've mentioned, as a dietary supplement, both substances provide many verifiable benefits. Hell, I made a rose hip jam for the winter just to keep my vitamin c levels up.
If there are this many planes doing the spraying, it's almost impossible that someone wouldn't have noticed, and provided physical evidence of the event, something other than a few clouds of water vapor which hang around for while, something that you'll notice even regular clouds do, when there is sufficient humidity to permit it. Where are the photos of the nozzles on the plane, of the tanks of these substances mounted, or being added or removed, refilled or changed?
How many people would have the opportunity to do so? How many people would have to be in on the conspiracy, how many people would have to be fine with substances being sprayed on their families and their own residences?
These are some of the questions which remain unanswered, and the burden of proof remains on you, as you are the one making extraordinary claims.
I'm just asking for proof, documentaries full of hearsay and anecdotes don't provide anything verifiable.
The discussion of DE, and vitamin C on the other hand, do indeed provide proof of their function, and have been proven to work in some of the ways you've mentioned, as a dietary supplement, both substances provide many verifiable benefits. Hell, I made a rose hip jam for the winter just to keep my vitamin c levels up.
If there are this many planes doing the spraying, it's almost impossible that someone wouldn't have noticed, and provided physical evidence of the event, something other than a few clouds of water vapor which hang around for while, something that you'll notice even regular clouds do, when there is sufficient humidity to permit it. Where are the photos of the nozzles on the plane, of the tanks of these substances mounted, or being added or removed, refilled or changed?
How many people would have the opportunity to do so? How many people would have to be in on the conspiracy, how many people would have to be fine with substances being sprayed on their families and their own residences?
These are some of the questions which remain unanswered, and the burden of proof remains on you, as you are the one making extraordinary claims.
Sadly, when we are being very clear, there is no such thing as proof. Just accumulated data points. Sometimes those data points have a high correlation with our models, and we can make relevant (sometimes utilitarian) predictions based on them. But collected data with high correlation is not a guarantee of future events.
The practicality of our lifespan demands that we lower our standards of 'proof'... from observation over eternity to something more human and utilitarian to our daily lives.
It has been noticed. I noticed it. But my observations are just 'anecdotal' and for you do not constitute 'proof'.
When lead was added to gasoline, there was no need for nozzles or separate tanks to pump lead into the air. And when it was common practice, the public did not take note as they were unaware of the consequences.
Civilians do not have access to our military planes. If there was a need for a more conspicuous application method, is it impossible that specific planes with specific pilots with specific security-clearance/mental-states would be used. And that the application of such metals was for the 'greater good' or 'national defense'?
Scroll up to post #67 and take a gander... but I guess rejecting the 'proof' photographs these days only requires a photoshop reference.
Consider the fact that I can set my standard of proof in such a manner that I can't prove that I exist (even Descartes, "I think therefor I am," fails under his own investigatory standards) . But that doesn't pay my internet bill, and without that I can't have ontological 'discussions' with strangers on the internet... so I choose to lower my standard of proof... grant that I exist... and continue to post in this thread.
Ultimately, we all must take responsibility for our own lives and worldview. (Or not, I suppose.) I believe that there is an education component that is involved in being a responsible human, that is, you may not know what is going on, but you ought to do your best to figure it out.
Following that approach to life, I have encountered many disturbing things. One of them was chemtrails. My observations were consistent with many accounts that I found, and these accounts were consistent with my developing model of the power structure of this planet. My global-political model--the one that includes chemtrails--allows me to make utilitarian predictions on future trends. So I don't need any more proof. My own eyes, my own mind, and global consistency is sufficient for me to accept these data points as statistically relevant, and continue on with my life.
From my perspective, 'figuring it out' is a process of construction. It is fine to use a deconstructive mythology to test your understanding, but if but if you don't intend to construct something new from the rubble, I'm not sure you've done any kind of service to yourself or others.
It is much easier to tear down than to build.
there are no 'proof photographs'.
If a jet is flying through air at altitude with a low humidity, the moist air from the jet engine might produce a slight, short-lived contrail. These short-lived contrails are a sign that the weather will be fair. A thick, long-lasting contrail indicates humid air high in the atmosphere, and can be an early sign of a storm.
How long a contrail remains intact, depends on the humidity structure and winds of the upper troposphere. If the atmosphere is near saturation, the contrail may exist for quite some time. On the other hand, if the atmosphere is dry then as the contrail mixes with the environment it dissipates.
If a jet is flying through air at altitude with a low humidity, the moist air from the jet engine might produce a slight, short-lived contrail. These short-lived contrails are a sign that the weather will be fair. A thick, long-lasting contrail indicates humid air high in the atmosphere, and can be an early sign of a storm.
How long a contrail remains intact, depends on the humidity structure and winds of the upper troposphere. If the atmosphere is near saturation, the contrail may exist for quite some time. On the other hand, if the atmosphere is dry then as the contrail mixes with the environment it dissipates.
Um... unless it's a chemtrail. Some common characteristics, but very different behaviors.
If you choose not to believe that I exist, I cannot dissuade you.
Maybe I'm a monkey at a keyboard getting lucky.
Maybe I'm a split of your persona, logging on with a different account just to frustrate you towards some kind of internal spiritual evolution. Or devolution.
Or maybe I exist independently as much as you do.
And maybe I am almost as clever as you are, and understand your descriptions and accounts of the relationship between condensate and humidity, and tell you that I've seen a very different phenomenon.
And then you'd have to decide if it's possible that there's something more in the world than benevolent mist.
There are scientists, good scientists, that do not disbelieve in god just because they haven't found him in their models of reality. Hell, there are good scientists that have found god in their equations.
When your definition of proof excludes the possibility of the existence of chemtrails (or anything else), is it any wonder that you can't find evidence to prove their existence?
If you choose not to believe that I exist, I cannot dissuade you.
Maybe I'm a monkey at a keyboard getting lucky.
Maybe I'm a split of your persona, logging on with a different account just to frustrate you towards some kind of internal spiritual evolution. Or devolution.
Or maybe I exist independently as much as you do.
And maybe I am almost as clever as you are, and understand your descriptions and accounts of the relationship between condensate and humidity, and tell you that I've seen a very different phenomenon.
And then you'd have to decide if it's possible that there's something more in the world than benevolent mist.
There are scientists, good scientists, that do not disbelieve in god just because they haven't found him in their models of reality. Hell, there are good scientists that have found god in their equations.
When your definition of proof excludes the possibility of the existence of chemtrails (or anything else), is it any wonder that you can't find evidence to prove their existence?
um... contrails have widely various behaviors depending on what permutation of the combination of several atmospheric conditions they are formed in.
what is so different about the phenomena you have seen, that it cannot be explained by variations in atmospheric conditions?
Verifiable accumulated data points.
None of what I ask for requires a lifetime.
It has been observed that there are contrails that last longer than others.
Lead was an essential part of gasoline to prevent early combustion. With one hand you tell me the NASA patent application is proof of a delivery system (it's an external nozzle), with the other you tell me it's mixed into the diesel fuel.
Still an awful lot of people to keep quiet. As wikileaks proves, it's by no means easy to do either. One upset person, one simple action, and we could have plenty of proof.
I see contrails.
Questions of existentiality have 0 to do with what there is, or isn't in trails of water vapor left behind planes. It also has 0 to do with what normal people require in terms of proof, especially when the claims are so extraordinary.
Sure, but believing something just because it seems credible is how most religions got so big, how most scammers make their money, and how most politicians fleece their voters. If that's the way you want to go about things, feel free.. I have a higher standard.
Or earn you an honorary tinfoil beanie..
I've constructed a very good understanding of how many gullible people are out there (the whole vaccines=autism crap being a prime example).
It's much easier to quote platitudes than it is to examine one's beliefs for spurious or unsupported information.
E
elmanito
UN Bans Chemtrails
http://foodfreedom.wordpress.com/2010/10/28/un-votes-to-ban-chemtrails/
Weatherman - Chemtrails Caused By Military
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=7GuHzp5ft98
Namaste
http://foodfreedom.wordpress.com/2010/10/28/un-votes-to-ban-chemtrails/
Weatherman - Chemtrails Caused By Military
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=7GuHzp5ft98
Namaste
Faith is by definition unprovable, and can exist perfectly alongside science. It is not a replacement for science, and no scientist would ever claim that.
My definition of proof excludes accepting at face value the fact that you see contrails as men in black spraying mind control chemicals. I need proof that the explanation given by people who know a damn sight more about atmospheric conditions is somehow invalid. Proof like a photo of the nozzles used to spray, or samples of the contrail proving there are substances other than water vapor and burnt diesel fuel in them.
This post is a little jumbled. Sorry.
Greatful and ixnay, maybe you guys are nice.
Maybe I'm not.
Maybe you could describe my approach to life as conspiratorial. Not dishonest, but deliberate. I know what I've been able to achieve in my life with minimal associates and limited resources in pursuit of my personal agenda. I also know that few people know how I've achieved what little I have.
How much of a grower's life is based on creating image and misdirection for the sake of security?
Anyway, maybe you guys see the world through the eyes of a nice guy, and see all the nice things people do.
I see the world through the eyes of a strategical tactician, and see all the things that a such a mentality can produce.
SUBJECT CHANGE: From my perspective, I don't think you've done your part to read my recent posts with a eye towards understanding my--or anyone who has observed the effects of chemtrails--position. It seems to me that you've read them only to discount them. To award me an
I've seen shitty things in the world. I've seen mediocre minds create chaos through their 'position of authority'.
The use of dissipating toxic chemicals to further an agenda has historical precedent.
If you want to believe in a benevolent government who holds the interest of the downtrodden close to their hearts, that is a choice you can make.
I see meanness, shortsightedness, and self-interest at the grocery store.
I see governments that are far worse.
---
But maybe that says more about my inward psyche than outward reality.
---
All that said, I am not entirely foolish... and some of what I write here may have merit.
Multiple planes flying in patterns (in a rather remote part of the world en route to nowhere). 'Trails' forming a grid. Rather than dissipating over time (as one might expect with a fixed quantity of vapor exhaust per combustion cycle) the trails expanding, conjoining and thickening (as one might expect in a seeding event where particulate are used as points for condensation).
Greatful and ixnay, maybe you guys are nice.
Maybe I'm not.
Maybe you could describe my approach to life as conspiratorial. Not dishonest, but deliberate. I know what I've been able to achieve in my life with minimal associates and limited resources in pursuit of my personal agenda. I also know that few people know how I've achieved what little I have.
How much of a grower's life is based on creating image and misdirection for the sake of security?
Anyway, maybe you guys see the world through the eyes of a nice guy, and see all the nice things people do.
I see the world through the eyes of a strategical tactician, and see all the things that a such a mentality can produce.
SUBJECT CHANGE: From my perspective, I don't think you've done your part to read my recent posts with a eye towards understanding my--or anyone who has observed the effects of chemtrails--position. It seems to me that you've read them only to discount them. To award me an
is not to understand me, but to throw me aside.
I've seen shitty things in the world. I've seen mediocre minds create chaos through their 'position of authority'.
The use of dissipating toxic chemicals to further an agenda has historical precedent.
If you want to believe in a benevolent government who holds the interest of the downtrodden close to their hearts, that is a choice you can make.
I see meanness, shortsightedness, and self-interest at the grocery store.
I see governments that are far worse.
---
But maybe that says more about my inward psyche than outward reality.
---
All that said, I am not entirely foolish... and some of what I write here may have merit.
Certainly, some of what you write may have merit, and some of it does.
I'm not saying your cynical view is incorrect, or that your propositions for why something like this could be done, or would be done.
I'm saying that to accept a theory which is outside normal ranges of credibility (and for most people airplanes secretly spraying chemicals on US citizens falls right smack in the middle of this) you need to provide more evidence than the fact that people suck, and government sucks worse.
BTW, grower's security and deniability relies upon the minimum number of possible people knowing about the operation, something a spraying operation can't possibly have, for reasons I've already demonstrated.
I'm not saying your cynical view is incorrect, or that your propositions for why something like this could be done, or would be done.
I'm saying that to accept a theory which is outside normal ranges of credibility (and for most people airplanes secretly spraying chemicals on US citizens falls right smack in the middle of this) you need to provide more evidence than the fact that people suck, and government sucks worse.
BTW, grower's security and deniability relies upon the minimum number of possible people knowing about the operation, something a spraying operation can't possibly have, for reasons I've already demonstrated.
Funny. You aren't remotely convinced by my 'demonstrations' and I am not at all convinced by yours.
Seems like our impasse is massive.
Any way to turn this discussion productive or proactive?
Can't use photographs like the one above.
Can't use the readily available (i.e. quick google) information on precipitate samples and analysis of those samples, as the people involved in the chemtrail phenomenon are not credible...
The idea that the deployment methodology might be as simple as the regional use jet-fuel-'additives' has been rejected (why again?)...
Maybe a video of a barium nozzle in action be sufficient, or do you need to see one for yourself? Here's where I should link to one... but the first page of google only shows enema bags, and I don't think that'll convince you...
So you tell me: what is your criteria for evidence?
