Is Space Travel Impossible Using Rocketry?

Is-Space-Travel-Impossible-Using-Rocketry-main-4-postAn Editorial by Ray Palmer (May, 1959)

Recently Kruschev made another of his long speeches (this one took 6 ½ hours), but to me, there was one short sentence in it that is positively fascinating in its implications. He said that Russia “is ready and willing to stop rocket and nuclear experiment for all time”.

As for nuclear testing, we can understand why further experiment is unnecessary—the weapons already developed are fearsome beyond all possible necessity, and also are completely unusable without total destruction of civilization. But when rocket development is something that they are ready and willing to stop for all time then we are alerted to the apparent confirmation of our announcement some time ago that the Russians had found something out about space that changes the space travel picture completely. We can, if we wish, read into this innocent sentence the admission by the Soviets that space travel is impossible, and that therefore they are ready and willing to abandon rocketry. In fact, so convinced are they of the impossibility that they specify “for all time”.

There are those of our readers who will instantly take us up on this statement, and point to the Russian rocket which they placed “in orbit” around the sun. To forestall these readers, we’ll go into our thinking on this subject, which is not new thinking at all, but dates (with us) back to 1945! We have held, and in fact wrote an article which was published in Nowadays, a national newspaper supplement magazine (now defunct), in 1947 or 1948, that postulated our belief, based on years of research, that space travel was actually impossible, because of something to do with electro-magnetic fields. At the time we wrote this, it was considered “heresy” by science readers, because we were then editor of several of the world’s leading science fiction magazines, Amazing Stories and Fantastic Adventures.

It all has to do with a theory of matter, and its formation. We held (and the theory has since been generally accepted in theory by many prominent physicists) that matter is formed by a sort of “vortex” process in which a “whirlpool” is set up in the ether, which takes the finely dispersed matter with which all space is filled (also confirmed now by both Russian and American rocket tests), and drives it to its center, where it “condenses” from its subatomic suspension in the ether to its atomic and molecular material form. It is thus that all spatial bodies are formed.

These vortices, called by Einstein “electro-magnetic fields”, are larger than the worlds they create, and to define it more understandably by expressing a formula we have arrived at privately, extend one or more diameters, but not exceeding seven diameters, from the body contained therein. Thus, if we take the Earth as an example, we would find that the electro-magnetic field would have as its outer limits a range of from 8,000 miles to 56,000 miles from the center of the Earth. Likewise, with the Moon, the field would extend from 2,100 miles to 14,700 mile maximum distance from its center.

Outside these limits we would have “outer space”. In the case of the Earth and the Moon, there is a distortion of the field due to proximity, so that between them there is a sort of “tide” which causes them to overlap. Thus, it is possible to remain inside the electro-magnetic field influence all the way to the Moon and past it for a distance of 14,000 miles. Actually the figures must be lower than the maximums given, because these bodies are not perfect magnets, not being wholly composed of iron or related magnetic-property substances. The vortice would, by its in-flowing currents, which are identical with the patterns we see around the poles of magnets when we allow them to influence iron filings, magnetize the Earth and the Moon, making rather inferior magnets out of them, but magnets nonetheless.

It is significant that the Russian solar-orbit rocket was lost from all detection, including visual as well as radar and radio detection, at a relatively short distance beyond the Moon. Although the Russians launched a giant rocket, perfectly capable of containing batteries sufficient to last for months of signaling capable of being received here on Earth, and in fact did so with their other Sputniks, here we have the radio going dead in a few days time, and all contact lost with the rocket. Its “orbit” is one we are asked to accept on the basis of “mathematical calculations” alone, and not actual evidence. The truth of the matter is that the Russian “solar-orbit rocket” was lost from all ken of man not far beyond the Moon. This in spite of the statement by our own scientists that modern radar techniques can detect a body as large as a “spaceship” billions and billions of miles out into space, and specifically, out beyond the orbit of Pluto. We have “bounced” radar signals off the sun, yet we cannot detect Russia’s solar-orbit rocket a mere million miles away! Why? Because it isn’t there to detect any more? Because, once outside the formative (and maintaining) electro-magnetic influence, beyond its outer limit, the rocket reverted to the primal state of all matter in outer space, finely dispersed sub-atomic particles such as fill all space?

All this is theory, of course. Much of it, we are prepared to prove, is quite acceptable to many leading scientists. Just lately an attack (triggered by results of rocket tests) has been made on Einstein’s theory of gravity, in which “six erroneous concepts” have been discovered. As some of you will remember, Einstein’s last theory held that both his theories of gravity and magnetism were not entities at all, but merely separate manifestations of still another entity, his electro-magnetic field theory which we have just utilized in our thinking about Kruschev’s mysterious statement. It does not make sense that Kruschev would make a statement so far away from reality with such positive words. Why say “for all time” in connection with rockets? The words do not belong in the sentence by any vagary of connotation that can be reasonably substantiated by any other means than the one basis we have just advanced.

One last point we wish to make in our remarks stimulated by Kruschev’s speech is this: How much of the truth are we being told about bumbling castles of scientific knowledge (astronomy and physics in particular), which is coming to us as a result of our rocket probes into space?

Let’s go back to the Russians for another “killer”. As we all know (the astronomers keep telling us), life on Mars and Venus and other planets is impossible, except for lichens because of the lack of atmosphere, and particularly of oxygen. They know this because they have an instrument called a spectroscope which analyzes the light coming from the body in question, and the lines of the elements in the atmosphere show up on the spectrograph. They use the same method to determine the elements present in any particular sample of material, by heating it until it gives off light, and then analyzing with the spectroscope. Well, the Russians decided to include a spectrographic mechanism in one of their rockets, and aimed it back at the Earth. What do you think it told them? Yes, you’re right—no oxygen! Life on Earth is impossible except perhaps for a few lichens. As far as human beings are concerned, there is no oxygen to support such life!

Here again we have one of my pet theories, which has occupied my mind for more then twenty years. Once we felt sure that space was not empty, but rather filled with subliminal substance, we postulated that these substances must be universal, that is, cover the entire elemental range. Thus, since they are not reasonably equally distributed, there must be some sort of separation, and that in certain areas certain elements would predominate. Now, if we observe Venus with a spectroscope, and the element methane is the major constituent of the area of space in which our solar system presently floats (which may well be large enough to cover a period of hundreds of years, necessitating observations made hundreds of years apart) we will find that Venus has an atmosphere largely methane, and lacking oxygen. We will conclude that Venus cannot support human life. We have always felt that such spectroscopic evidence was subject to too many unknown factors, and could not possibly give us a correct analysis of atmospheric conditions on another planet. According to our theory, no atmosphere would be detectable on the Moon, because all such atmosphere would be propelled out of the intervening space by the electro-magnetic field, thus leaving it comparatively empty of (for example) oxygen. We felt that the Moon could have an atmosphere, and our instruments would not show it. Today we know that the Moon does indeed have an atmosphere, however “thin” it may be.

Now the Russians have proved our theory correct. We can say, and say it with complete reason on our side, that for all we know, ALL the planets, including the Moon, are inhabited by human beings or some similar form of life. There is no longer any demonstrable evidence that the atmosphere of Mars and Venus and other planets is not quite like ours, and perfectly capable of supporting life.

Intrigued by this new evidence provided us by the Russians, and intrigued also by the complete lack of news about the moon from astronomers in the big observatories in the last ten years, we decided to find out what we could about the Moon, and present it in FLYING SAUCERS [magazine]. What we found was completely astounding! We are presenting it to you this issue just as we found it [see it in Part II here]. It is all true. It is flabbergasting. And it relegates the whole science of astronomy and its practitioners today to the status of astrologers, and makes of them just dabbling theorist just like the rest of us! During the past fifty years, they have been completely undone in their textbooks theorizing by facts which they choose now to ignore.

Let’s ask that they throw out their old books, and write new ones, giving us all the embarrassing contrary facts they’ve accumulated since. We’re quite eager to publish a “new astronomy” book, and will guarantee to do it, under the byline of any astronomer with enough fortitude to admit the fictional nature of his “science”. All this learned stuff about space is proving to be poppy-cock. Particularly the stuff about [little or no] life on other worlds. True, there is a great body of astronomy which is quite important, and quite accurate, as it consists of observations, of photos, of calculations, of centuries of painstaking work, all properly put down in books and records, without drawing any fixed conclusions, and this vast array of research we freely state is true science. With all this work behind them, it seems that they can honestly face the loss of luster to their “popular astronomy” theories, and “take it back” without being laughed at.

The way things stand now, we are almost inclined to believe that John Carter was an actual Virginian, and that he did make that strange flight, stark naked, across the void to the red planet Mars, and find himself on the dead sea bottoms of Barsoom, amidst the fearsome Tharks, the four-armed green men, with their bloody broadswords! It is more likely to be true than what the astronomers have been telling us with their silly “spectroscopic analyses”!

Kruschev is willing to give up rocket experiment “for all time”. Is it because he knows something that is not yet common knowledge? The progress of rocket science bids fair to be an intensely interesting subject to follow. FLYING SAUCERS is quite excited about the prospect, and its editors freely predict that the adventure of reporting it will be positively fascinating. Already the “rockets red glare” has been exceeded by the glowing necks and faces of the astronomers who, before rockets, were safe in their comfortable rocking chairs of theory. As teachers they had no critics, because there was no “devil’s advocate”. The rocket men can now say to the astronomers: “Vas you dere, Sharlie?”

STANLEY KUBRICK ADMITS APOLLO MOON LANDING WAS A STAGED THEATRICAL PRODUCTION

For: STANLEY KUBRICK – THE LAST INTERVIEW (FULL VERSION) – See here.

NASA ADMITS WE’VE NEVER LEFT FURTHER THAN LOWER EARTH ORBIT

DARK SIDE OF THE MOON: STANLEY KUBRICK AND THE FAKE MOON LANDINGS

Print Friendly

Posted in Life On Other Worlds, Other Topicswith comments disabled.