Ancient India had aeroplanes, nuclear weapons, says chief of India's premier history body

[Skull and Bones]

So now you know why people of other nationalities make fun of some Indian comments.

We make fun of everybody.

 

[Skull and Bones]

Yes I believe. May not be Nukes exactly but may be other very devastating weapon.

A devastating weapon doesn't have to be technologically superior, in the seize of Carthage, Romans catapulted dead, rotting and infected animals into the city. It worked pretty fine, there are even early examples of bio hazard weapons.

 

[Luca1]

We even had a death star and our own yoda training thousands of jedi knights for protection of universe.
The vimanas were their means of transportation

And the sad thing is that some Indians would believe you and when they become ministers, they will make that claim. I sorry to tell you this. While there are nut cases everywhere, India seem to produce more and in a more delusional state. You will have a tough job convincing them of otherwise.

 

[HariPrasad]

A devastating weapon doesn't have to be technologically superior, in the seize of Carthage, Romans catapulted dead, rotting and infected animals into the city. It worked pretty fine, there are even early examples of bio hazard weapons.

I am not talking about epidemic.

 

[he-man]

So now you know why people of other nationalities make fun of some Indian comments.

Do u see us endorsing vimanas here??

 

[he-man]

And the sad thing is that some Indians would believe you and when they become ministers, they will make that claim. I sorry to tell you this. While there are nut cases everywhere, India seem to produce more and in a more delusional state. You will have a tough job convincing them of otherwise.

We have 1.4 billion population so naturally the sheer number of nutcases will be at least 4-5 times that of USA.

 

[syedali73]

A devastating weapon doesn't have to be technologically superior, in the seize of Carthage, Romans catapulted dead, rotting and infected animals into the city. It worked pretty fine, there are even early examples of bio hazard weapons.

Yes, and it is because 'technological superiority' is a relative term. Technically superior to who? those who are weaker. Egyptian chariots did their magic in certain battles, but not in others where enemies were familiar with Egyptian tactics and had developed superior counter-tactics.

 

[HariPrasad]

Why with shastra no planes are build, even if there was/is a single reference of plane being build, why didnt that field grow further like all other fields and made more?? have people gone stupid or those people got wiped out like dinosaurs???

These are basic logical questions.

You need to learn all the terminology used in the book. Over the period of time, that knowledge might have lost. Do you know Hitler used to make Plane fuel out of coal in second world war. Now a days nobody know how to do that. People wonder how Germans might have done that? This incident is just 8 decades old.

 

[Luca1]

You need to learn all the terminology used in the book. Over the period of time, that knowledge might have lost. Do you know Hitler used to make Plane fuel out of coal in second world war. Now a days nobody know how to do that. People wonder how Germans might have done that? This incident is just 8 decades old.

It's because Hitler was in lack of gasoline so he resort to coal. It's just a time of need, not technical marvel that people would want to achieve.

 

[Skull and Bones]

I am not talking about epidemic.

Care to explain what you mean?

 

[syedali73]

You need to learn all the terminology used in the book. Over the period of time, that knowledge might have lost. Do you know Hitler used to make Plane fuel out of coal in second world war. Now a days nobody know how to do that. People wonder how Germans might have done that? This incident is just 8 decades old.

Never heard of German's using coal-derived fuel in their airplanes but researchers have succeeded in deriving one few years ago.

Cleaner Jet Fuel from Coal

A new process could allow Air Force jets to run exclusively on domestically produced biomass and coal.
By Kevin Bullis on January 25, 2010

The Air Force is testing a jet fuel made from coal and plant biomass that could replace petroleum-based fuel and emit less carbon-dioxide compared to using conventional jet fuels. The fuel is made with a process developed by Accelergy, based in Houston, using technology licensed from ExxonMobil Research and Engineering Company and the Energy and Environmental Research Center at the University of North Dakota.

Other recently tested experimental biofuels for jets have required that the aircraft still use at least 50 percent petroleum-based product to meet performance requirements, particularly for the most advanced military jets. But the Accelergy process produces fuels that closely resemble petroleum-based fuels, making it possible to do away with petroleum altogether. Because of this, the new process could help the Air Force meet its goal of using domestic, lower-carbon fuels for half of its fuel needs by 2016. Although the first products will be jet fuels, the process can also be adapted to produce gasoline and diesel.

The fuel has passed through an initial round of testing, including lab-scale engine tests, and is on track to be flight-tested in 18 months, says Rocco Fiato, vice president of business development at Accelergy.

Turning coal into liquid fuels is nothing new, but such processes have been inefficient and produced large amounts of CO2 emissions. Accelergy’s approach is different because it uses “direct liquefaction,” which is similar to the process used to refine petroleum. It involves treating the coal with hydrogen in the presence of a catalyst. Conventional technology for converting coal to liquid fuels breaks the coal down into synthesis gas, which is mostly carbon monoxide with a little bit of hydrogen; the hydrogen and carbon are then recombined to produce liquid hydrocarbons, a process that releases carbon dioxide. Because the Accelergy process skips the need to gasify all of the coal–which consumes a lot of energy–before recombining the hydrogen and carbon, it’s more efficient and produces less carbon dioxide. “We don’t destroy the molecule in coal. Instead we massage it, inject hydrogen into it, and rearrange it to form the desired hydrocarbons,” says Timothy Vail, Accelergy’s president and CEO.

The hydrogen for Accelergy’s process comes from two sources–coal and biomass. Accelergy gasifies a portion of the coal they use–about 25 percent of it–as well as cellulosic biomass, from sources such as plant stems and seed husks, to produce syngas. The company then treats the syngas with steam. In this reaction, carbon monoxide reacts with water to form hydrogen and carbon dioxide. Using biomass reduces the net carbon-dioxide emissions, since the biomass absorbed CO2 from the atmosphere as the original plants grew.

Cleaner Jet Fuel from Coal | MIT Technology Review

 

[HariPrasad]

It's because Hitler was in lack of gasoline so he resort to coal. It's just a time of need, not technical marvel that people would want to achieve.

People want to achieve it today. People who have an abundance of coal want to make gasoline out of that but that knowledge is lost.

 

[applesauce]

You need to learn all the terminology used in the book. Over the period of time, that knowledge might have lost. Do you know Hitler used to make Plane fuel out of coal in second world war. Now a days nobody know how to do that. People wonder how Germans might have done that? This incident is just 8 decades old.

just because you don't know how something works does not mean no one does.
and making liquid fuel from coal is not some lost secret, people do not wonder, we simply don't do it because there are better alternatives.

we also dont make radioactive, glow in the dark, watches anymore, but that dont mean we dont know how to make it.

and for the record, about claims of ancient indian nukes/super weapons/planes...
just three words. LAUGH OUT LOUD

 

[HariPrasad]

Never heard of German's using coal-derived fuel in their airplanes but researchers have succeeded in deriving one few years ago.

Cleaner Jet Fuel from Coal

A new process could allow Air Force jets to run exclusively on domestically produced biomass and coal.
By Kevin Bullis on January 25, 2010

The Air Force is testing a jet fuel made from coal and plant biomass that could replace petroleum-based fuel and emit less carbon-dioxide compared to using conventional jet fuels. The fuel is made with a process developed by Accelergy, based in Houston, using technology licensed from ExxonMobil Research and Engineering Company and the Energy and Environmental Research Center at the University of North Dakota.

Other recently tested experimental biofuels for jets have required that the aircraft still use at least 50 percent petroleum-based product to meet performance requirements, particularly for the most advanced military jets. But the Accelergy process produces fuels that closely resemble petroleum-based fuels, making it possible to do away with petroleum altogether. Because of this, the new process could help the Air Force meet its goal of using domestic, lower-carbon fuels for half of its fuel needs by 2016. Although the first products will be jet fuels, the process can also be adapted to produce gasoline and diesel.

The fuel has passed through an initial round of testing, including lab-scale engine tests, and is on track to be flight-tested in 18 months, says Rocco Fiato, vice president of business development at Accelergy.

Turning coal into liquid fuels is nothing new, but such processes have been inefficient and produced large amounts of CO2 emissions. Accelergy’s approach is different because it uses “direct liquefaction,” which is similar to the process used to refine petroleum. It involves treating the coal with hydrogen in the presence of a catalyst. Conventional technology for converting coal to liquid fuels breaks the coal down into synthesis gas, which is mostly carbon monoxide with a little bit of hydrogen; the hydrogen and carbon are then recombined to produce liquid hydrocarbons, a process that releases carbon dioxide. Because the Accelergy process skips the need to gasify all of the coal–which consumes a lot of energy–before recombining the hydrogen and carbon, it’s more efficient and produces less carbon dioxide. “We don’t destroy the molecule in coal. Instead we massage it, inject hydrogen into it, and rearrange it to form the desired hydrocarbons,” says Timothy Vail, Accelergy’s president and CEO.

The hydrogen for Accelergy’s process comes from two sources–coal and biomass. Accelergy gasifies a portion of the coal they use–about 25 percent of it–as well as cellulosic biomass, from sources such as plant stems and seed husks, to produce syngas. The company then treats the syngas with steam. In this reaction, carbon monoxide reacts with water to form hydrogen and carbon dioxide. Using biomass reduces the net carbon-dioxide emissions, since the biomass absorbed CO2 from the atmosphere as the original plants grew.

Cleaner Jet Fuel from Coal | MIT Technology Review

Exactly. Researchers were working on that. They seem to have got a break through. Many country were busy in getting the old document of Second WW which may shed the light on this technology.

 

[SpArK]

You need to learn all the terminology used in the book. Over the period of time, that knowledge might have lost. Do you know Hitler used to make Plane fuel out of coal in second world war. Now a days nobody know how to do that. People wonder how Germans might have done that? This incident is just 8 decades old.

Knowledge is not lost... a basic drawing must be in old transcripts... that doesnt mean they made any prototypes or they have actually done it.... just like flower showers from heaven above.