⭕ God told Moses on Mt. Sinai to use Pi 3.14 π as the cornerstone to build the Wilderness Tabernacle in 1440 BC. In 94 AD Josephus the historian wrongly described it as rectangular-shaped. Exodus 25-26-27 blueprints build a circular-shaped hendecagon outer courtyard. What is superior, the bible or confirmed secular/ecumenical history? 330 Exodus 26:8 eleven curtains each 30 cubits long 15 Exodus 26:12 one curtain is folded in half to 15 cubits long - 1 Exodus 26:13 curtain hang over/seams add to 1 cubit long = 314 3.14 = 314 circumference/100 diameter ≈ π ratio (100 cubit court per Exodus 27:9-18) ................. Is this discovery like the Dead Sea Scrolls or even Martin Luther's 95 Theses? How did we miss this for 1900 years and does it even matter anymore? Pi is 3 or 3.14... very small difference. .................. History of finding π: -(1900-1680 BC) Babylonian 3.125 for π -(1650 BC) Egyptians gave the approximate value of π 3.1605 -(1440 BC) Moses recorded Pi in the Exodus blueprints 3.141592653... Exodus 26:13 ≈ Pi -(500 BC) India's Aryabhata approximation was 62,832/20,000, or 3.141 -(429-501 BC) Zu Chongzhi a Chinese mathematician 3.1415926 - 3.1415927 -(250 BC) Archimedes from Syracuse showed between 3.1408 and 3.1429 ................. More than a thousand years removed Josephus did NOT know Exodus 26:13 approximated Pi. He was describing the Temple's structure and NOT, and NOT the Tabernacle from Exodus 25-26-27. See? Pi is coded in your DNA. Consider King Josiah & the Prophetess Huldah rediscovering the forgotten scriptures, right? Will Pharaoh let this go? Almost 3500 years ago "Exodus 26:13 ≈ Pi" was lost on Mt. Nebo when Moses died. How will religious and non-religious acknowledge this systemic seed-changing paradigm shift? We going back in time in real-time to change history to line up the Word as it should've been. Moses recorded Pi 1000 years before Archimedes from Syracuse's Pi. Everyone including myself rejects this text/arithmetic until studied personally. Please use consistent hermeneutics along with the scientific method for our non-religious friends. After confirmation please repent then rejoice. Please remember this is God's big tent. Exodus 26:13 ≈ Pi ⭕ כְּכֹ֗ל אֲשֶׁ֤ר אֲנִי֙

this AI host is strange and, yes, I can tell it's an AI by the HANDS

😅

@@michaelhumphreys9302 really. and sentence structure. it's true. isn't my insistent sincerity reassuring? /s

Good one my man

Legend has it that mathematicians once tried to calculate the number of channels Simon has but found that numbers don't go that high

The shear number of times this thumbnail will get uploaded in one week

He does it by recording for 27 hours per day 7.13 days a week.

Because he's smart enough to set up a business model where he doesn't actually do any of the work. He just comes in and bees to showman he got so many other people working behind him he can produce a lot of things

It's terribly loud sometimes. He has some fixation recently about adding loud music in the background 😂😂😂

yes it is

Indeed

Good to hear it is not just me getting old and cranky. Hope he reads this and instructs his editors.

Can confirm. There's some places in North America so arid that we have to agitate the ground to puddle up the water because the ground can't absorb it

Which is why you can have flash floods in the driest of places

That doesn’t change the point. Everywhere is special and everyone has the cutest dog and smartest kid

Just maybe it doesn't want to get wet unlike yourself. Lol

@@kevinbeazy And all the children are above average.

Get rid of the background music!

Agreed! Do not mind the music, but it is a bit loud.

It's a nightmare in my headphones!!!

yea the background music is pretty loud. after all these years they still suck at sound lol. I'm so glad i use the bring back the down vote button extension :P

The problem here is that it’s cello and pretty low in the spectrum hence having to be turned up and become obtrusive.

No, your example is not the same. The glass depends on the bullet traveling so fast that it deforms upon impact, causing it's surface area to increase, which is what stops it penetrating, whereas with your example the knife never changes, and simply struggles because the outer layer of the pepper is both hard _and_ flexible, making it difficult to actually apply enough pressure to the outer skin for the blade edge to do it's thing. This can easily be overcome by using a horizontal, downward slicing motion instead of "cutting" by pressing down perpendicularly to the surface that the pepper is on. Using a curved blade instead of a straight one makes this much easier as the curvature causes the effect as long as you hold the blade at even a slight angle. The pepper's skin does have the same combination of properties as the bullet proof glass in a way, so you are right in a way, but they use them differently to achieve different effects. A closer analogy involving bullets to the way the pepper's skin works would be bullet proof vests. Also, regarding cutting, the difficulty in cutting veggies with skin like peppers is why knife sharpening and making channels will often cut veggies to prove the sharpness of their blades, because a well sharpened blade should _not_ struggle at all when cutting something like peppers. I hand sharpen my knives as a hobby, so I can prove this firsthand. If your knife struggles, then it has been dulled, or more likely burled (bent sideways and the rolled over on itself) at the edge.

He uni!

Knew this comment would be here somewhere. :)

​@@AnnaNicole.What happened before?

@@mementomori29231 Same physics title, but wrong video, lol. Honest mix up for someone who records and uploads as many videos as Simon does!

Ah so that's why it got delisted. I was excited for the video when I got the first notification but was very confused when I couldn't find the video lol

“Are you sure you installed it right?” *bang!* “Do I have to answer that?”

Not anymore. 2 layers is fine now.

@@kevinbeazy even with GCP (Glass-clad polycarbonate) you are only going to get a UL level of up to 3 with a 2 layer design. It can stop small calibers like .223 or 5.56 but a larger caliber rifle will punch right through a 2 layer GCP like paper. If you want level 4+ protection you'll need more than 2 layers, even with the thicker 2.5 inch layers. Can you make a stronger 2 layer design? Yes, but each layer is going to be so thick, it would be smarter and weigh less to just add more layers. I don't doubt it exists, but a 2 layer is never going to be more practical than 5

I had a kit in the 90s called Squand 😊

I don't know the specifics of the emdrive, but there was another one that would use micro second pulses through a pile, that in theory exerts a force, but is too short to experience the counteractive recoil, essential like a rowboat. Last time I heard it had positive results, but the amount of thrust was just barely measurable. Still haven't heard if anyone tried to replicate it.

Which mythbusters somehow got to work. The physics of why it worked still breaks my brain.

@@robsquared2 Mythbusters? The thrust it gave in one test was so minimal it was probably just the heat radiating off it giving the illusion of thrust. Especially given the power input it needs.

​@@streetguru9350It wasn't just heat, and heat wouldn't give that much inertia. The experiment has been repeated numerous times by others. The air is transferring its inertia to the sail as it bounces off. That counteracts the force from the fan moving the air to begin with. But the air then bounces back, and under Newton's Third Law, it imparts a force on the sail. The result is that the boat gets a net increase in inertia, moving it in the direction of the fan's airflow.cIt is far less efficient than taking down the sail and pointing the fan backwards, but it does work. (There are other nuances surrounding interactions between the reflected air and the new air from the fan, as well as air not reflected straight back, but that gets beyond what works in a YT comment.)

@@robsquared2it is simple thrust vectoring. the same principle as the thrust reversers on a commercial airplane. the fan draws in air from all directions and then through the mechanism of the sail, blows it towards the back of the boat, giving the boat a net forward thrust.

The results are really weird, though, because actually set up in ways that should produce no thrust (including removing the microwave emitter and replacing it with a big resistor) still produced the same thrust. Flipping it around but not rotating the test harness made it work backwards. Rotating the drive and test harness 90 degrees made it stop generating thrust at all. Two have been sent to space. One generated no detectable thrust and the other was recently abandoned without being properly tested due to power and communication issues with the cubesat bus it was mounted on. Rogue Space Systems called the mission a success but that seems to be mostly for investor relations purposes because literally no aspect of the satellite seems to have worked properly.

Sorry hey Jim*

Hey Mr sherrick?

At 13:22 the company ThermaShield still appears to be around. A quick Google search for starlitethermashield shows that they have StarLite availalbe. heh

Jim Henson muppet-labs used it a lot for eye-brows and other facial expression.

It's not bro

We are changing the name to.April usa day😊

Low brow comment of the day award. Congratulations.@@Fullyloaded_00

Now the funny thing is, that this is not an Aprils fool video. There truly does exist one way bulletproof glass, nitinol and hydrophobic sand. And the EM drive have really been constructed, but as he said in the video, it's sadly doesn't work, bc if it did, we could theoretically get infinite acceleration without breaking the third law of thermodynamics and the theory of relativity, which states that the closer you get to light speed, the more mass and energy you need, meaning at lightspeed, you would need infinite mass and energy. But with the EM drive, it doesn't accelerate by creating thrust, meaning we could achieve infinite speed, which of course would be far greater than the speed of light. It would have been awesome if it actually worked, then getting around the Universe would suddenly become possible with the tech we have right now. Damn you Newton for inventing thermodynamics and Newton for inventing relativity, that the Universe suddenly had to follow.

Much too expensive: it's far cheaper to replace a steel fender than it would cost to make it out of nitinol in the first place. Also, I don't think it behaves as you'd like when in thick sheets - all of the uses I've seen employ nitinol wire, sometimes woven into larger shapes.

​@@jpdemer5 Nitinol is available in blocks and sheets as well, and in my PhD research we used them quite a bit. It still functions the same. But you are right, it is SUPER expensive. Being part Titanium it is also very hard, which makes working it into shapes difficult.

Thats been proven false

I may be thinking of a different drive system, but didn't someone attempt to sent up a small satellite into orbit to test this? (Though if I remember, the launch had a mishap, causing said experiment to fail to be deployed)

@@VulpisFoxfire Yes, that was a different one. It's called the "IVO drive" and we don't know much about how it's supposed to operate because unlike EMDrive which was released to the public the owners of IVO have played tight to the chest. As best as I can tell from rumors it's supposed to accelerate "virtual particles" caused by vacuum fluctuations, while EMDrive was supposed to work by getting asymmetrical thrust by bouncing microwaves around a cavity (turned out to be experimental error). As you note there was a failure of testing as they supposedly lost communication soon after deploy.

For fire protection (as in an airliner), one use is all you need. For a permanent insulating layer, we have better materials already.

@@jpdemer5 What kind of temporary and fragile insulating layer would be of use in an airliner?

@@davidallen111 It's not fragile and insulating until there's a fire.

@@jpdemer5 Starlite is always fragile. When it is soft, it is easily torn. Once it hardens, it is easily broken. The carbon foam it produces is fragile compared to other carbon foams.

@@jpdemer5it is extremely fragile.

Lexan is just a trademark for polycarbonate.

@@jpdemer5 I know what it is. I sold it for 30 years. And there are at least a dozen different types of Lexan. The stuff I sold was indeed called, bulletproof glass.

@@danidavis7912 Just need to rearrange the quotation marks: so-called bullet-proof "glass". 😉

@@jpdemer5not exactly

@@danidavis7912 I call the pages in my Bible bulletproof. They have never stopped a single bullet but I still call them that.

And if there is, that just means we got the laws wrong.

Are you kidding me there definitely is we can’t even understand a black hole how do describe that

@@kewlideas7687 lol

@@arcuscotangens we as humans made up the “laws of physics” not the universe we are constantly learning how things work and evolving and to think we have hit the end point is just ver ignorant of the reality we live in

Not true. Human stupidity defies all laws including those of physics.

It is way too expensive for large thick chunks like that, and very hard to work into shape, since it likes to spring back into position. Steel is much easier to bend and fold into all the shapes you need.

That just depends on the bullets.

My intuition may be off, but Simon seems like the kind of guy who most likely wouldn't be shooting at someone on the other side of bullet proof glass.

So they say.

I was looking for a comment like this. I recalled it being debunked but couldn't recall why. I admittedly know next to nothing about the drive: would there be any feasability in getting it to work for say, ships at sea? Instead of hundreds of thousands of gallons of diesel? Or would the constant ocean spray, waves, humidy, and salt turn it into instant "oh hell no"

@@thatfuzzypotato1877it's a fair question, unfortunately the level of thrust was equal to that of a hair falling on a piece of paper, so indeed it wouldn't be enough for anything where friction of even air is involved.

@@robsquared2 I appreciate the answer thank you

@@robsquared2 There is no thrust. Not even the weight of an atom.

Whereas Tesla gave up literal millions so that New England and New York could have electricity. Utter shame how he died alone, horribly ravaged by OCD, and penniless.

According to this video no one wanted to let him have 51% ownership. It sounds more like capitalist grifters really can’t be satisfied with 49% ownership for a revolutionary product and would rather let something die off than lose 2% of potential money. With just the information from this video it seems like pettiness and spite on both sides.

The truth is that he only approved tests with himself present to oversee what was done and make it look amazing. If any real tests had been done it would have showed to be useless. As long as he kept it hidden he would be famous and worshiped. It died with him but would have died much sooner if anyone had known what it was.

yeah it was slightly irritating

He would of had to give them the formula for starlite if he had patented it so everyone would know how to make it.

@@mr.potato9449 Yes, the formula would have to be revealed. In most places, if he filed everywhere that he could, he would have the right to legally exclude others from making it or importing it. But there are places where one could make imitations, and there are also lawless persons.

If he released the formula for Starlite then it would be almost instantly known that it was worthless. Only way to remain a celebrity was to hide it so that no one knew it was all a big scam.

Lmao