From vortex-l-request eskimo.com Thu Feb 1 03:54:48 2001 Received: (from smartlst localhost) by mx1.eskimo.com (8.9.1a/8.8.8) id DAA16792; Thu, 1 Feb 2001 03:54:15 -0800 Resent-Date: Thu, 1 Feb 2001 03:54:15 -0800 Message-ID: <009f01c08c4e$33287100$288f85ce fjsparber> Reply-To: "Frederick Sparber" From: "Frederick Sparber" To: Cc: , Subject: Re: Turbine in a Tube Date: Thu, 1 Feb 2001 04:52:15 -0800 MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-Priority: 3 X-MSMail-Priority: Normal X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook Express 5.00.2615.200 X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V5.00.2615.200 Resent-Message-ID: <"v6GAz2.0.I64.dvKUw" mx1> Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/40529 X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com Status: O X-Status: An axial flow turbine can be built into a tube about 10 to 20 cm diameter and 50 cm long using slotted "stator" plates and spacers with the rotor plates turning between the spaced stator plates, with one end (heated)of the tube acting as a evaporator/boiler and the other end (finned) for rejecting heat (condensing) with a small high pressure condensate return pump pumping the liquid from the condensate sump back to the evaporator end. An integral rotary generator attached to the rotor shaft in the low temperature end can be used to complete the turbo-generator unit. At 20 pounds of steam/hour with a 5 psi condensing pressure the overall efficiency would be about 14%. Plenty good enough for running off a stovetop, open flame, or a solar concentrator to produce several hundred watts at ~ 15 volts at kilohertz frequencies which can be rectified to charge 12 volt batteries. Regards, Frederick From vortex-l-request eskimo.com Thu Feb 1 08:03:48 2001 Received: (from smartlst localhost) by mx1.eskimo.com (8.9.1a/8.8.8) id IAA08017; Thu, 1 Feb 2001 08:03:07 -0800 Resent-Date: Thu, 1 Feb 2001 08:03:07 -0800 Message-Id: Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Date: Thu, 1 Feb 2001 07:12:24 -0900 To: vortex-l eskimo.com From: hheffner mtaonline.net (Horace Heffner) Subject: Re: [theory]Case cell operation Resent-Message-ID: <"A80Iu1.0.Bz1.xYOUw" mx1> Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/40530 X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com Status: O X-Status: At 5:51 PM 2/1/1, Robin van Spaandonk wrote: >In reply to Horace Heffner's message of Wed, 31 Jan 2001 21:17:56 -0900: >[snip] >>Given that the radius is quantized to: >> >> r = (n^2) ((h^2)(e0))/((pi)(q^2)(m)), for n = 1,2,3, ... >> (or in Mills' case: n = 1/2, 1/3, ...) > >Mills claims that for n=1/2,1/3 etc. r is proportional n rather than n^2. >He accomplishes this neat trick, by creating only one kind of charge, i.e. >positive without negative! :] > >This is one of the possible weak points in his theory IMO. That sudden change of proportion is surprising. I haven't brought myself to read much of Mill's stuff. It seems that I should but, I just find it difficult to get interested in something so tedious that already has massive capitalization, is mostly being kept secret and is also totally proprietary and which also has no confirming replication published in the literature. I would think that relativistic effects might increase the apparent q (from the nucleus perspective) of an orbital electron, which is always observed by the nucleus laterally, and this would offset the n^2 value as n increased and the orbitals become increasingly relativistic, but not ever precisely cancel exactly one n. Such a relativistic effect would also not change the external apparent charge of the neutral atom, unless it were in a magnetic field, in which case the atom might appear negative from an observer in a polar point of observation and postitive from an equatorial point of observation. Regards, Horace Heffner From vortex-l-request eskimo.com Thu Feb 1 15:36:29 2001 Received: (from smartlst localhost) by mx1.eskimo.com (8.9.1a/8.8.8) id PAA26307; Thu, 1 Feb 2001 15:15:10 -0800 Resent-Date: Thu, 1 Feb 2001 15:15:10 -0800 From: Robin van Spaandonk To: vortex-l eskimo.com Cc: rmills blacklightpower.com Subject: Re: [theory]Case cell operation Date: Fri, 02 Feb 2001 09:41:52 +1100 Organization: Improving Message-ID: References: In-Reply-To: X-Mailer: Forte Agent 1.8/32.548 MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit X-MIME-Autoconverted: from quoted-printable to 8bit by mx1.eskimo.com id PAA26190 Resent-Message-ID: <"H0t7S.0.qQ6.ytUUw" mx1> Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/40531 X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com Status: O X-Status: In reply to Horace Heffner's message of Thu, 1 Feb 2001 07:12:24 -0900: [snip] >>Mills claims that for n=1/2,1/3 etc. r is proportional n rather than n^2. >>He accomplishes this neat trick, by creating only one kind of charge, i.e. >>positive without negative! :] >> >>This is one of the possible weak points in his theory IMO. > >That sudden change of proportion is surprising. [snip] >I would think that relativistic effects might increase the apparent q (from >the nucleus perspective) of an orbital electron, which is always observed >by the nucleus laterally, and this would offset the n^2 value as n >increased and the orbitals become increasingly relativistic, but not ever >precisely cancel exactly one n. [snip] Mills believes that a photon trapped between the electron and the nucleus constitutes a whole extra charge. It is this increase in charge which is responsible for the change from n^2 to n. My problem with this approach is that he claims that only positive charge is created. The following modification to his theory would however leave it largely in tact, while still preserving conservation of charge. When a hydrino shrinks according to Mills, two separate quantities of 27.2 eV are explicitly removed from the potential energy. One of these is used to create the trapped photon, the other goes to fill the externally supplied "energy hole" (if I haven't misunderstood his theory). Now let us suppose that Frederick Sparber is correct about his 27.2 eV Light Leptons. Then the 27.2 eV that is retained by the shrinking H atom for its trapped photon could actually be used to create a trapped LL (i.e. the trapped photon might actually be a LL). The other 27.2 eV which is used to fill the external "energy hole" might eventually be used to create the other LL of the opposite charge. In that sense, the ion which provides the "energy hole" may only play the role of a true catalyst, converting the energy from the hydrino formation into a LL. In such a process, each atom would create one LL, maintaining a form of symmetry (and also conserving charge). This hints at the possibility that two atoms are required to meet conservation laws. Now about which LL is which. Mills claims that excess positive charge is created on the surface of the nucleus (AFAIK), thus increasing the attraction on the electron. IMO there is a problem here. If you work out the potential energy represented by the proton electric field, you get somewhat more than 1 MeV. It seems to me that creating an extra positive charge on the surface of the proton implies also suddenly creating another MeV of potential energy. Where does this energy come from, there is only 27.2 eV available for charge creation? OTOH, if an extra negative charge at the radius of the electron were to be created iso a positive charge on the surface of the proton, then the energy required at that radius would be exactly 27.2 eV for the first LL created. I foresee a problem however at smaller radii, as the energy at these radii no longer matches the LL formation energy (which has to be a power of alpha times the electron mass, though Fred may not agree :). Assuming however for a moment that this isn't a problem, then I also foresee a possible change in the situation when the combined mass of the trapped LLs is equivalent to that of the electron. At that point the electron may no longer be able to "corral" the trapped LLs, so this might provide a limitation on the minimum size of a hydrino. I think that this altered approach would lead to some changes in the math and might explain most of the experimental results equally well. Regards, Robin van Spaandonk A Future For Humanity see: http://users.bigpond.net.au/rvanspaa/ From vortex-l-request eskimo.com Fri Feb 2 03:26:37 2001 Received: (from smartlst localhost) by mx1.eskimo.com (8.9.1a/8.8.8) id DAA01547; Fri, 2 Feb 2001 03:26:09 -0800 Resent-Date: Fri, 2 Feb 2001 03:26:09 -0800 Message-Id: Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Date: Fri, 2 Feb 2001 02:35:35 -0900 To: vortex-l eskimo.com From: hheffner mtaonline.net (Horace Heffner) Subject: Re: [theory]Case cell operation Resent-Message-ID: <"NBYak3.0.0O.GbfUw" mx1> Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/40532 X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com Status: O X-Status: At 9:41 AM 2/2/1, Robin van Spaandonk wrote: >When a hydrino shrinks according to Mills, two separate quantities of 27.2 >eV are explicitly removed from the potential energy. One of these is used to >create the trapped photon, the other goes to fill the externally supplied >"energy hole" (if I haven't misunderstood his theory). I need to check my understanding of this, and unfortunately time is very short for me right now. I am probably way out in left field in my understanding. If I recall correctly, when an ordinary excited atom radiates, the electron drops from a high potential to low potential. Half the potential change is radiated, the other half is converted into orbital electron kinetic energy. If the process is reversed in ordinary atoms, and a photon absorbed, then it must be that a change in potential of twice the photon energy is involved, half coming from the photon, and half in the reduction in kinetic energy of the electron. In hydrino formation, if the (external) energy hole that is filled is 27.2 eV, then, twice that energy might be involved in the external hole, 27.2 eV being absorbed, and 27.2 ev coming from the change in kinetic enery of the external atom's electron(s). However, this point is moot, in that what happens to the external energy hole is likely unimportant (unless of course only (27.2 eV)/2 need be supplied to some kinds of holes for some reason.) Now, looking at the hydrino formation, if we have, as you indicate: r = (n) ((h^2)(e0))/((pi)(q^2)(m)), , for n = 1/2,1/3,1/4, ... instead of the normal quantized Bohr radius: r = (n^2) ((h^2)(e0))/((pi)(q^2)(m)), for n = 1,2,3, ... then we have an electron velocity of: v = [q^2/(2(e0)(h))] 1/(n^0.5), for n = 1/2,1/3,1/4, ... v = 2.1876914x10^6 m/s 1/(n^0.5), for n = 1/2,1/3,1/4, ... and kinetic energy of the hydrino electron of: Ke = (1/2)(m)(v^2) = 2.179874x10^-18 J [1/n] = 13.605698 eV [1/n], for n = 1/2,1/3,1/4, ... so the full potential change for hydrino formation is: Kp = 2 * 13.605698 eV [1/n], for n = 1/2,1/3,1/4, ... = 27.21140 eV [1/n], for n = 1/2,1/3,1/4, ... However, since the quantum numbers are inverted, it appears that the energy involved in jumping to the increasingly lower 1/n (as n increases) involves ever LESS total energy exchange. Also, it appears the first hydrino state requires only a 13.6 eV potential change, not a 27.2 eV change. Perhaps I have made a clerical error? Now, if you assume the photon involved is trapped inside the hydrino, its wavelength lambda must be less than r: lambda < r = (n) ((h^2)(e0))/((pi)(q^2)(m)), for n = 1/2,1/3,1/4, ... lambda < (n) 5.291773x10^-11 m, for n = 1/2,1/3,1/4, ... so, by Plank's equation: E = h*nu = (h*c)/lambda lambda = h*c/E < r = (n) ((h^2)(e0))/((pi)(q^2)(m)), for n = 1/2,1/3,1/4, ... and we DO see that the size of the hydrino INCREASES as n increases, i.e. 1/n decreases. We have: E > (h*c)/[(5.291773x10^-11 m) (n)], for n = 1/2,1/3,1/4, ... E > 23,429.6 eV (1/n), for n = 1/2,1/3,1/4, ... So, for the first state to contain a photon, the photon energy must be about 27 keV! I think I am totally confused. As to how charge is not conserved, except by relativistic means I am also confused, but that is probably much more difficult to understand than a simple energy balance. Regards, Horace Heffner From vortex-l-request eskimo.com Fri Feb 2 03:46:18 2001 Received: (from smartlst localhost) by mx1.eskimo.com (8.9.1a/8.8.8) id DAA05707; Fri, 2 Feb 2001 03:45:40 -0800 Resent-Date: Fri, 2 Feb 2001 03:45:40 -0800 X-Sender: hheffner mtaonline.net (Unverified) Message-Id: Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Date: Fri, 2 Feb 2001 02:55:07 -0900 To: vortex-l eskimo.com From: hheffner mtaonline.net (Horace Heffner) Subject: Re: [theory]Case cell operation, some corrections Resent-Message-ID: <"VD6oA2.0.5P1.atfUw" mx1> Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/40533 X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com Status: O X-Status: At 9:41 AM 2/2/1, Robin van Spaandonk wrote: >When a hydrino shrinks according to Mills, two separate quantities of 27.2 >eV are explicitly removed from the potential energy. One of these is used to >create the trapped photon, the other goes to fill the externally supplied >"energy hole" (if I haven't misunderstood his theory). Please ignore my prior post. Some corrections have been made below. I need to check my understanding of this, and unfortunately time is very short for me right now. I am probably way out in left field in my understanding. If I recall correctly, when an ordinary excited atom radiates, the electron drops from a high potential to low potential. Half the potential change is radiated, the other half is converted into orbital electron kinetic energy. If the process is reversed in ordinary atoms, and a photon absorbed, then it must be that a change in potential of twice the photon energy is involved, half coming from the photon, and half in the reduction in kinetic energy of the electron. In hydrino formation, if the (external) energy hole that is filled is 27.2 eV, then, twice that energy might be involved in the external hole, 27.2 eV being absorbed, and 27.2 ev coming from the change in kinetic enery of the external atom's electron(s). However, this point is moot, in that what happens to the external energy hole is likely unimportant (unless of course only (27.2 eV)/2 need be supplied to some kinds of holes for some reason.) Now, looking at the hydrino formation, if we have, as you indicate: r = (n) ((h^2)(e0))/((pi)(q^2)(m)), , for n = 1/2,1/3,1/4, ... instead of the normal quantized Bohr radius: r = (n^2) ((h^2)(e0))/((pi)(q^2)(m)), for n = 1,2,3, ... then we have an electron velocity of: v = [q^2/(2(e0)(h))] 1/(n^0.5), for n = 1/2,1/3,1/4, ... v = 2.1876914x10^6 m/s 1/(n^0.5), for n = 1/2,1/3,1/4, ... and kinetic energy of the hydrino electron of: Ke = (1/2)(m)(v^2) = 2.179874x10^-18 J [1/n] = 13.605698 eV [1/n], for n = 1/2,1/3,1/4, ... so the full potential change for hydrino formation is: Kp = 2 * 13.605698 eV [1/n], for n = 1/2,1/3,1/4, ... = 27.21140 eV [1/n], for n = 1/2,1/3,1/4, ... It appears the first hydrino state requires a 54.5 eV potential change, not a 27.2 eV change. Perhaps I have made a clerical error? Now, if you assume the photon involved is trapped inside the hydrino, its wavelength lambda must be less than r: lambda < r = (n) ((h^2)(e0))/((pi)(q^2)(m)), for n = 1/2,1/3,1/4, ... lambda < (n) 5.291773x10^-11 m, for n = 1/2,1/3,1/4, ... so, by Plank's equation: E = h*nu = (h*c)/lambda lambda = h*c/E < r = (n) ((h^2)(e0))/((pi)(q^2)(m)), for n = 1/2,1/3,1/4, ... and we see that the size of the hydrino DECREASES as n increases, i.e. 1/n decreases. We have: E > (h*c)/[(5.291773x10^-11 m) (n)], for n = 1/2,1/3,1/4, ... E > 23,429.6 eV (1/n), for n = 1/2,1/3,1/4, ... So, for the first state to contain a photon, the photon energy must be about 47 keV! It gets worse after that. I think I am totally confused. As to how charge is not conserved, except by relativistic means I am also confused, but that is probably much more difficult to understand than a simple energy balance. Regards, Horace Heffner From vortex-l-request eskimo.com Fri Feb 2 05:42:57 2001 Received: (from smartlst localhost) by mx1.eskimo.com (8.9.1a/8.8.8) id FAA07247; Fri, 2 Feb 2001 05:40:57 -0800 Resent-Date: Fri, 2 Feb 2001 05:40:57 -0800 Message-ID: <3A7ABA9B.ED7D0772 bellsouth.net> Date: Fri, 02 Feb 2001 08:48:11 -0500 From: Terry Blanton X-Mailer: Mozilla 4.73 [en] (WinNT; U) X-Accept-Language: en MIME-Version: 1.0 To: vortex-l eskimo.com Subject: New Cydonia Images Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Resent-Message-ID: <"0w8kd1.0.2n1.eZhUw" mx1> Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/40534 X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com Status: O X-Status: For those who do not subscribe to vortexb, see: http://www.msss.com/mars_images/moc/01_31_01_releases/cydonia/index.html Terry From vortex-l-request eskimo.com Fri Feb 2 08:15:31 2001 Received: (from smartlst localhost) by mx1.eskimo.com (8.9.1a/8.8.8) id IAA09274; Fri, 2 Feb 2001 08:13:42 -0800 Resent-Date: Fri, 2 Feb 2001 08:13:42 -0800 Message-ID: <3A7ADE3C.3A4106CE bellsouth.net> Date: Fri, 02 Feb 2001 11:20:12 -0500 From: Terry Blanton X-Mailer: Mozilla 4.73 [en] (WinNT; U) X-Accept-Language: en MIME-Version: 1.0 To: vortex-l eskimo.com Subject: A Laylady's Perspective on Field Propulsion Workshop Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Resent-Message-ID: <"3E0-j1.0.pG2.rojUw" mx1> Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/40535 X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com Status: O X-Status: She speaks highly of Dr. Puthoff: http://www.hotgossip.co.uk/x-files.html Terry From vortex-l-request eskimo.com Fri Feb 2 09:02:11 2001 Received: (from smartlst localhost) by mx1.eskimo.com (8.9.1a/8.8.8) id IAA30424; Fri, 2 Feb 2001 08:57:22 -0800 Resent-Date: Fri, 2 Feb 2001 08:57:22 -0800 Message-Id: <200102021657.LAA20738 mercury.mv.net> Subject: Fwd: Ginger at Patent Cafe Date: Fri, 2 Feb 2001 11:52:48 -0400 x-sender: zeropoint-ed pop.mv.net x-mailer: Claris Emailer 2.0v3, January 22, 1998 From: "Eugene F. Mallove" To: "Dr. Marcello Truzzi" Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="US-ASCII" Resent-Message-ID: <"_pErK3.0.HR7.mRkUw" mx1> Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/40536 X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com Status: O X-Status: ---------------- Begin Forwarded Message ---------------- Date: 2/2/01 12:01 PM Received: 2/2/01 11:50 AM From: Remy C., remyc prodigy.net To: End Secrecy List, endsecrecy yahoogroups.com Date: Tue, 30 Jan 2001 From: info spreadthenewspr.com Subject: Attn: Editor-GINGER Resource Released For Immediate Release Contact: Andy Gibbs/PatentCafe.com - (530) 671-0204 Todd Brabender/PR Director - (785) 842-8909 PatentCafe.com Launches New "GINGER" Invention Resource Intellectual property portal provides the Internet's most extensive GINGER info. www.PatentCafe.com (Sacramento, California) - In the wake of all the hype surrounding Dean Kamen's intriguing and elusive GINGER invention, PatentCafe.com today announced a new GINGER-focused section on it's renowned invention/intellectual property portal. The PatentCafe's in depth resource contains over 200 pages of GINGER patents, pictures, computer animation and video downloads, links and articles, and the interactive GINGER message boards. The link -- http://GINGER.patentcafe.com -- is the result of more than three-weeks of sustained research into the GINGER patents, market and technology. Nationally recognized invention/intellectual property expert and PatentCafe.com, Inc. CEO Andy Gibbs has meticulously analyzed Kamen's seven US and international patents. The research lead to a bevy of resources, which have now been consolidated onto the PatentCafe site for one of the most comprehensive GINGER information resources on the Internet. Gibbs has also released his first of many GINGER-assessment articles entitled: Taking a Bite Out Of Ginger: http://www.cafezine.com/index_department.asp?deptId=3 This particular article relies more on recent efforts of former Chrysler executive Lee Iacocca rather than creating hype based on testimonials from Steve Jobs, Jeff Bezos and others techno-luminaries who may have a financial interest in Kamen's invention. Additionally, PatentCafe.com will host a LIVE online GINGER Chat Tuesday Nite (1/29/01) from 9:00 - 11:00 pm (Eastern) as part of its weekly ExperChat session. Gibbs will host and moderate the chat, and will address questions and comments ranging from: what is GINGER to the business realities that must be addressed if GINGER is to achieve its supposed earth-shattering success. The ExperChat is a free, weekly invention and innovation event on PatentCafe and can be accessed at http://www.cafeforums.com/chat/010130.html Join the live chat by simply clicking on the "Go Chat Now" icon. For more information or to arrange interviews with Gibbs contact: Spread The News PR: (785) 842-8909 About Andy Gibbs Gibbs is the founder and CEO of PatentCafe.com, Inc., and an appointed member of the US Patent & Trademark Office's Public Patent Advisory Committee. Gibbs is a medical and automotive products inventor (7 patents issued or pending) and in the past 20 years, has founded seven manufacturing companies based on his intellectual property -- his last being acquired by a Fortune 50 automotive supplier. He is a contributing invention editor for Entrepreneur and Inventors' Digest magazines respectively and has served as a technical expert witness and technical advisor to venture capital firms. About PatentCafe.com, Inc. (www.PatentCafe.com) PatentCafe.com, Inc. is an Internet communications, commerce and media company serving the worldwide intellectual property community. The company specializes in developing highly focused, first-to-market content, IP tools and information for specialty segments of the intellectual property market. PatentCafe.com, Inc. maintains six web properties including an online IP magazine; resource directory; digital rights management portal; and message boards. PatentCafe.com, Inc. is funded by Internet.com Fund II (Nasdaq:INTM) and Gray Cary Fund, the investment arm of Gray Cary Ware & Friedenrich. ----------------- End Forwarded Message ----------------- From vortex-l-request eskimo.com Fri Feb 2 09:40:29 2001 Received: (from smartlst localhost) by mx1.eskimo.com (8.9.1a/8.8.8) id JAA15725; Fri, 2 Feb 2001 09:35:06 -0800 Resent-Date: Fri, 2 Feb 2001 09:35:06 -0800 From: "David Rosignoli" Sender: drdaveor enter.net Reply-to: drdaveor enter.net To: vortex-l eskimo.com Date: Fri, 2 Feb 2001 12:34:59 -0500 Subject: Ufo video ala 'Trekkies' X-Mailer: DMailWeb Web to Mail Gateway 2.6k, http://netwinsite.com/top_mail.htm Message-id: <3a7aefc3.75d0.0 enter.net> X-User-Info: 192.91.146.35 MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Resent-Message-ID: <"3mzTy.0.dr3.A_kUw" mx1> Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/40537 X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com Status: O X-Status: Has anyone seen 'Six Days in Roswell'? If it is like 'Trekkies', it should be entertaining. http://www.scifi.com/sfw/issue194/screen.html From vortex-l-request eskimo.com Fri Feb 2 11:05:40 2001 Received: (from smartlst localhost) by mx1.eskimo.com (8.9.1a/8.8.8) id LAA28827; Fri, 2 Feb 2001 11:02:58 -0800 Resent-Date: Fri, 2 Feb 2001 11:02:58 -0800 Message-Id: <3.0.6.32.20010202140359.007bc280 pop.mindspring.com> X-Sender: jedrothwell pop.mindspring.com X-Mailer: QUALCOMM Windows Eudora Light Version 3.0.6 (32) Date: Fri, 02 Feb 2001 14:03:59 -0500 To: vortex-l eskimo.com, "Dr. Marcello Truzzi" From: Jed Rothwell Subject: Re: Fwd: Ginger at Patent Cafe In-Reply-To: <200102021657.LAA20738 mercury.mv.net> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Resent-Message-ID: <"1b1U01.0.627.WHmUw" mx1> Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/40538 X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com Status: O X-Status: Eugene F. Mallove wrote: >Andy Gibbs/PatentCafe.com - (530) 671-0204 >Todd Brabender/PR Director - (785) 842-8909 > >PatentCafe.com Launches New "GINGER" Invention Resource Intellectual >property portal provides the Internet's most extensive GINGER info. This is silly. Information about the machine is being embargoed by the inventor. There is no meaningful information about it, anywhere, intentionally. So what can anyone say? People should ignore it until the inventor reveals everything and allows independent testing of prototypes. That goes for all o-u energy devices. I saw part of a hilarious segment about "Ginger" on the Comedy Channel "Today Show" last night. Unfortunately, I could not see the whole thing, but it looked about as accurate as the real press reports. - Jed From vortex-l-request eskimo.com Fri Feb 2 11:33:27 2001 Received: (from smartlst localhost) by mx1.eskimo.com (8.9.1a/8.8.8) id LAA07315; Fri, 2 Feb 2001 11:21:16 -0800 Resent-Date: Fri, 2 Feb 2001 11:21:16 -0800 Date: Fri, 02 Feb 2001 11:13:22 -0800 From: Jones Beene Subject: Re: [theory]Case cell operation To: vortex-l eskimo.com Message-id: <3A7B06D2.6740643B pacbell.net> MIME-version: 1.0 X-Mailer: Mozilla 4.75 [en]C-CCK-MCD EBM-Compaq1 (Win98; U) Content-type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-transfer-encoding: 7bit X-Accept-Language: en References: Resent-Message-ID: <"Ydo3l.0.Bo1.hYmUw" mx1> Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/40539 X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com Status: O X-Status: Robin van Spaandonk wrote: > Now let us suppose that Frederick Sparber is correct about his 27.2 eV Light > Leptons. Then the 27.2 eV that is retained by the shrinking H atom for its > trapped photon could actually be used to create a trapped LL (i.e. the > trapped photon might actually be a LL). The other 27.2 eV which is used to > fill the external "energy hole" might eventually be used to create the other > LL of the opposite charge. In that sense, the ion which provides the "energy > hole" may only play the role of a true catalyst, converting the energy from > the hydrino formation into a LL. Hi Robin, This is very good stuff! Could I prevail on you to put the whole thing down in the form of a complete hypothesis (that you may or may not really believe) just to see how its stands up as a whole. What I mean to ask specifically is could you synthesize the best part of Mills, as you interpret his ideas, together with Frederick's LL idea and apply all of that to the Case cell? I guess that would get us back full circle to your original post - only it may have undergone a bit of evolution in the mean time. Thanks in advance, Jones From vortex-l-request eskimo.com Fri Feb 2 12:34:14 2001 Received: (from smartlst localhost) by mx1.eskimo.com (8.9.1a/8.8.8) id MAA29824; Fri, 2 Feb 2001 12:02:44 -0800 Resent-Date: Fri, 2 Feb 2001 12:02:44 -0800 Message-ID: <3A7B10B3.AA333957 ix.netcom.com> Date: Fri, 02 Feb 2001 11:55:31 -0800 From: Akira Kawasaki X-Mailer: Mozilla 4.72 [en]C-CCK-MCD NSCPCD472 (Win95; U) X-Accept-Language: en MIME-Version: 1.0 To: Vortex Subject: [Fwd: What's New for Feb 02, 2001] Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Resent-Message-ID: <"rP7oJ1.0.vH7.Z9nUw" mx1> Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/40540 X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com Status: O X-Status: -------- Original Message -------- Subject: What's New for Feb 02, 2001 Date: Fri, 2 Feb 2001 14:05:50 -0500 (EST) From: "What's New" To: aki ix.netcom.com WHAT'S NEW Robert L. Park Friday, 2 Feb 01 Washington, DC 1. STAR WARS: COUNTDOWN TO DEPLOYMENT. The Air Force has boldly announced the day, in fact the very second, when Star Wars will be deployed: http://www.sbl.losangeles.af.mil/ Pre-judging technology has a pebbled history. NASA pulled the Space Station Countdown Clock off the web after delays and cost overruns forced several resets (WN 1 May 98). At least the Air Force is giving itself eleven years. Maybe this is what President Bush has in mind when he says he'll support faith-based organizations. 2. RUDMAN COMMISSION RELEASES REPORT: ANOTHER CALL FOR DOUBLING. Four years ago, a group of science societies pronounced declining research budgets a threat to prosperity and national security. The "7-Percent Solution" (WN 16 May 97) for FY 1998 morphed into a call for doubling federal science budgets that skeptics said would fall on deaf ears. It did not, and this week a bipartisan United States Commission on National Security, co-chaired by former senators Gary Hart and Warren Rudman, weighed in, stating that "the inadequacies of our systems of research and education pose a greater threat to U.S. national security over the next quarter century than any potential conventional war...." It called for doubling the federal R&D budget by 2010, elevating the President's Science Advisor to oversee the task, resuscitating the national labs and passing a National Security S&T Education Act to "produce the needed numbers of science and engineering professionals as well as qualified teachers in math and science." 3. BOEHLERT SETS SCIENCE COMMITTEE PRIORITIES. With the departure of Rep. James Sensenbrenner (R-WI), the House Science Committee is ready for a rehab project. This week its new chair, Sherwood Boehlert (R-NY), began the task with his "maiden speech" to the University Research Association, vowing to "build the Science Committee into a significant force...to ensure that we have a healthy, sustainable and productive R&D establishment." Three issues will dominate: science and math education, energy policy and the environment. Of the "Doubling Bill," which Sensenbrenner opposed, Boehlert said he would like to find a way to pass it, because "it would put Congress on record as saying that science spending is a real priority." He pledged "to run the Committee in a way that would make Einstein smile." WN is smiling already. 4. ROEMER ANNOUNCES RETIREMENT. A mid-July press conference to call for cancellation of the International Space Station (ISS) used to be an annual event in Washington. Standing in front of a mike, surrounded by scientists, Tim Roemer (D-IN) would detail the failures of the ISS. In 1993 he came within a vote of killing the behemoth (WN 25 Jun 93). He was always an endangered species in Congress, taking a firm stand without doing a political calculation. Alas, there is no one to take his place. THE AMERICAN PHYSICAL SOCIETY (Note: Opinions are the author's and are not necessarily shared by the APS, but they should be.) From vortex-l-request eskimo.com Fri Feb 2 12:49:51 2001 Received: (from smartlst localhost) by mx1.eskimo.com (8.9.1a/8.8.8) id MAA14853; Fri, 2 Feb 2001 12:34:55 -0800 Resent-Date: Fri, 2 Feb 2001 12:34:55 -0800 Message-Id: Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Date: Fri, 2 Feb 2001 11:44:17 -0900 To: vortex-l eskimo.com From: hheffner mtaonline.net (Horace Heffner) Subject: Re: [theory]Case cell operation, some corrections Resent-Message-ID: <"Chjdm1.0.rd3.jdnUw" mx1> Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/40541 X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com Status: O X-Status: If I recall correctly, when an ordinary excited atom radiates, the electron drops from a high potential to low potential. Half the potential change is radiated, the other half is converted into orbital electron kinetic energy. If the process is reversed in ordinary atoms, and a photon absorbed, then it must be that a change in potential of twice the photon energy is involved, half coming from the photon, and half in the reduction in kinetic energy of the electron. In hydrino formation, if the (external) energy hole that is filled is 27.2 eV, then, twice that energy might be involved in the external hole, 27.2 eV being absorbed, and 27.2 ev coming from the change in kinetic enery of the external atom's electron(s). However, this point is moot, in that what happens to the external energy hole is likely unimportant (unless of course only (27.2 eV)/2 need be supplied to some kinds of holes for some reason.) Similarly, in the hydrino formation, the kinetic energy of the hydrino electron is: Ke = (1/2)(m)(v^2) = 2.179874x10^-18 J [1/n] = 13.605698 eV [1/n], for n = 1/2,1/3,1/4, ... so the full potential change for hydrino formation is: Kp = 2 * 13.605698 eV [1/n], for n = 1/2,1/3,1/4, ... = 27.21140 eV [1/n], for n = 1/2,1/3,1/4, ... It would superficially appear the first hydrino state requires a 54.5 eV energy exchange, not a 27.2 eV exchange. However, as with the ordinary atom, an explanation is that only the 27.2 eV is taken by the hole in making the first hydrino state. The rest comes from change in state of the hydrino electron, which drops 54.5 ev in potential energy, but only retains 27.2 in eV kinetic energy. Only 27.2 eV need be taken by the hole, as Mills says. However, if this is the case, there is no energy left over for trapping an electron inside the hydrino. It makes no sense that there is a photon in there. That further makes no sense because there is no room for a low energy photon inside the hydrino. Not by a log shot, because 47 keV is not available to make the photon that is small enough to fit in there. Regards, Horace Heffner From vortex-l-request eskimo.com Fri Feb 2 13:50:11 2001 Received: (from smartlst localhost) by mx1.eskimo.com (8.9.1a/8.8.8) id NAA20880; Fri, 2 Feb 2001 13:45:16 -0800 Resent-Date: Fri, 2 Feb 2001 13:45:16 -0800 Message-Id: <5.0.2.1.2.20010202164419.00b03040 pop.mindspring.com> X-Sender: jedrothwell pop.mindspring.com X-Mailer: QUALCOMM Windows Eudora Version 5.0.2 Date: Fri, 02 Feb 2001 16:44:43 -0500 To: vortex-L eskimo.com From: Jed Rothwell Subject: Global Wind Energy Market Report Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"; format=flowed Resent-Message-ID: <"XjOVF3.0.v55.hfoUw" mx1> Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/40542 X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com Status: O X-Status: See: http://www.awea.org/faq/global99.html Quotes: Global Wind Energy Market Report 1999 Best Year Ever for Wind Energy With the end of the millennium world wind energy markets have turned in another record-breaking performance. Preliminary estimates indicate that during 1999 more than 3,600MW of new wind energy generating capacity were installed worldwide, bringing total installed capacity to the 13,400MW range. This total represents an increase of more than 36% over the 1998 total installed capacity of 9,751MW, and the largest worldwide addition to capacity in a single year. With this dramatic growth rate, wind energy seems to retain its position as the fastest growing energy technology in the world. Already, from 1995 to 1998, a total of 4,893MW of additional worldwide capacity was installed, representing a worldwide average growth rate of 27.75%. Wind energy capacity installations worldwide have surged from under 2,000 MW in 1990 to the present level of approximately 13,400 MW at the end of 1999, representing more than a six and a half --fold increase during that time period. . . . From vortex-l-request eskimo.com Fri Feb 2 14:06:07 2001 Received: (from smartlst localhost) by mx1.eskimo.com (8.9.1a/8.8.8) id OAA01810; Fri, 2 Feb 2001 14:02:20 -0800 Resent-Date: Fri, 2 Feb 2001 14:02:20 -0800 Message-ID: <3A7B301D.328C01B1 bellsouth.net> Date: Fri, 02 Feb 2001 17:09:33 -0500 From: Terry Blanton X-Mailer: Mozilla 4.73 [en] (WinNT; U) X-Accept-Language: en MIME-Version: 1.0 To: vortex-l eskimo.com Subject: Re: Global Wind Energy Market Report References: <5.0.2.1.2.20010202164419.00b03040 pop.mindspring.com> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Resent-Message-ID: <"yBZ-K1.0.CS.ivoUw" mx1> Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/40543 X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com Status: O X-Status: Jed Rothwell wrote: > > See: > > http://www.awea.org/faq/global99.html > > Quotes: > > Global Wind Energy Market Report > > 1999 Best Year Ever for Wind Energy > > With the end of the millennium world wind energy markets have turned in > another record-breaking performance. Preliminary estimates indicate that > during 1999 more than 3,600MW of new wind energy generating capacity were > installed worldwide, bringing total installed capacity to the 13,400MW > range. Impressive! That's only 1,000 MW smaller than the generating capacity of Georgia Power! Terry From vortex-l-request eskimo.com Fri Feb 2 14:47:40 2001 Received: (from smartlst localhost) by mx1.eskimo.com (8.9.1a/8.8.8) id OAA15101; Fri, 2 Feb 2001 14:31:42 -0800 Resent-Date: Fri, 2 Feb 2001 14:31:42 -0800 Message-Id: <5.0.2.1.2.20010202172021.02bffc28 pop.mindspring.com> X-Sender: jedrothwell pop.mindspring.com X-Mailer: QUALCOMM Windows Eudora Version 5.0.2 Date: Fri, 02 Feb 2001 17:31:38 -0500 To: vortex-l eskimo.com, vortex-l@eskimo.com From: Jed Rothwell Subject: Re: Global Wind Energy Market Report In-Reply-To: <3A7B301D.328C01B1 bellsouth.net> References: <5.0.2.1.2.20010202164419.00b03040 pop.mindspring.com> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"; format=flowed Resent-Message-ID: <"8nwyp.0.ph3.DLpUw" mx1> Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/40544 X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com Status: O X-Status: Terry Blanton wrote: > > . . . installed worldwide, bringing total installed capacity to the > 13,400MW > > range. > > > >Impressive! That's only 1,000 MW smaller than the generating >capacity of Georgia Power! Yes. So much for claims that alternative energy sources are too small to be practical. Potential wind power in Texas is 136,000 MW. There are few potential good sites in GA or PA . . . Here is an article relevant to California's electric energy crisis: http://www.awea.org/news/news010125nwn.html Quotes: NEW WIND PLANTS IN NORTHWEST, NEVADA TO BE WORLD'S LARGEST The unveiling of plans within the past two weeks for what will be the world's two largest wind power plants underline both wind energy's growing maturity and competitiveness . . . The two plants, one to be installed on the Oregon-Washington boundary and the other slated for the U.S. Department of Energy's (DOE) Nevada Test Site (NTS), will have a total capacity of 560 megawatts (MW) and will generate enough power annually to serve more than half a million people. "More importantly for California, AWEA said, of the 560 MW in the two plants, 385 MW will be in place and generating enough electricity for 385,000 people by the end of this year. Fossil-fired power plants often take several years to complete, nuclear plants even longer." A third large-scale wind plant, adding another 200 MW, is also due to be up and running in Southern California by year's end. . . . "Wind power is extremely competitive today," said AWEA executive director Randall Swisher, "and new wind plants can be installed within 18 months to two years, with only six months required for construction. The wind potential of California and neighboring states is vast . . ." According to AWEA, the total wind energy potential of California and five other Western states (Nevada, Wyoming, Montana, Washington, and Oregon) is more than 600,000 MW. "There are limits to how much of this resource can be tapped in the near term, primarily because of limited transmission line capacity," Swisher said, "but wind should be the top of the list as California looks for new sources of electricity." . . . [Yes, it "should be," but I'll bet it isn't. I don't know. - JR] From vortex-l-request eskimo.com Fri Feb 2 16:11:04 2001 Received: (from smartlst localhost) by mx1.eskimo.com (8.9.1a/8.8.8) id QAA23938; Fri, 2 Feb 2001 16:06:49 -0800 Resent-Date: Fri, 2 Feb 2001 16:06:49 -0800 Message-Id: Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Date: Fri, 2 Feb 2001 15:16:03 -0900 To: vortex-l eskimo.com From: hheffner mtaonline.net (Horace Heffner) Subject: Orbital electron fits in hydrino? Resent-Message-ID: <"-yHkF1.0.yr5.PkqUw" mx1> Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/40545 X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com Status: O X-Status: Assuming the electron kintic energy in a hydrino is: v = 2.1876914x10^6 m/s 1/(n^0.5), for n = 1/2,1/3,1/4, ... and given deBroglie's: lambda = h/p we have the electron wavelength in a hydrino given by: lambda_e = h/(m*v) lambda_e = 3.324914x10^-10 m [n^0.5], for n = 1/2,1/3,1/4, ... but this seems to conflict with: r = (n) ((h^2)(e0))/((pi)(q^2)(m)), for n = 1/2,1/3,1/4, ... = (n) 5.291773x10^-11 m, for n = 1/2,1/3,1/4, ... Taking even the first hydrino state, n = 1/2: lambda_e = 2.351069x10^-10 M but: r = 2.645887x10^-11 m a ratio of 8.885. The problem gets worse as n gets smaller, because r ~ n and lambda_e ~ n^0.5, so: r/lambda_e = n/n^0.5 = n^0.5 and r shrinks in proportion to lambda as n gets smaller. How does that big electron fit into that little hydrino? Regards, Horace Heffner From vortex-l-request eskimo.com Fri Feb 2 17:08:48 2001 Received: (from smartlst localhost) by mx1.eskimo.com (8.9.1a/8.8.8) id RAA18439; Fri, 2 Feb 2001 17:05:11 -0800 Resent-Date: Fri, 2 Feb 2001 17:05:11 -0800 From: Tstolper aol.com Message-ID: Date: Fri, 2 Feb 2001 20:04:30 EST Subject: Re: [theory]Case cell operation To: vortex-l eskimo.com MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="US-ASCII" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-Mailer: AOL 4.0 for Mac - Post-GM sub 147 Resent-Message-ID: <"Rw3Fi2.0.wV4.5brUw" mx1> Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/40546 X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com Status: O X-Status: Some comments from a layman who has been following Mills' work since 1991: The energy from the BLP hydrogen-based process comes from the electric field of the hydrogen atom. I think that Farrell said that long ago. The energy from the BLP hydrogen-based process does NOT come from converting any of the mass of the nucleus to energy. The BLP process and using the energetic plasma generated by it in the BLP gyrotron are sufficiently different from cold fusion or any other prior art as to be easily patentable, except that the people who run the patent office think that any claim of a new source of energy is nuts and so is any device to produce energy from a new source. You can't go any further than approximately 200 steps down the hydrino ladder. After that, electron capture is a near certainty, and you wind up with a neutral particle that is different from a neutron. Hydrinos can't <> the electrons surrounding the nucleus of a heavy metal atom. Robin van Spaandonk's suggestion some time ago that the <> reported by so many cold fusioneers were really hydrino hydride compounds (or deuterino hydride compounds) is intriguing. So is Jones Beene's observation on the Hydrino Study Group that the reverse gyrotron is an old technology and that Siemens had the original patent on it. Implication: a lot of engineering for the BLP gyrotron has already been done and isn't controversial at all. Please don't ask me to expand on any of this. For one thing, I don't understand all of the implications of Mills' theory, and for another, I'm snowed under right now. Tom Stolper From vortex-l-request eskimo.com Fri Feb 2 17:58:06 2001 Received: (from smartlst localhost) by mx1.eskimo.com (8.9.1a/8.8.8) id RAA15927; Fri, 2 Feb 2001 17:54:36 -0800 Resent-Date: Fri, 2 Feb 2001 17:54:36 -0800 From: Robin van Spaandonk To: vortex-l eskimo.com Subject: Re: [theory]Case cell operation Date: Sat, 03 Feb 2001 12:53:54 +1100 Organization: Improving Message-ID: References: In-Reply-To: X-Mailer: Forte Agent 1.8/32.548 MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit X-MIME-Autoconverted: from quoted-printable to 8bit by mx1.eskimo.com id RAA15869 Resent-Message-ID: <"nVveL2.0.nu3.RJsUw" mx1> Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/40547 X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com Status: O X-Status: In reply to Tstolper aol.com's message of Fri, 2 Feb 2001 20:04:30 EST: [snip] >The energy from the BLP hydrogen-based process comes from the electric field >of the hydrogen atom. I think that Farrell said that long ago. Hi Tom, If you followed the H[1/1000] thread on the HSG, you would know that there are problems with this statement. > >The energy from the BLP hydrogen-based process does NOT come from converting >any of the mass of the nucleus to energy. See above. > >The BLP process and using the energetic plasma generated by it in the BLP >gyrotron are sufficiently different from cold fusion or any other prior art >as to be easily patentable, except that the people who run the patent office >think that any claim of a new source of energy is nuts and so is any device >to produce energy from a new source. Probably correct. > >You can't go any further than approximately 200 steps down the hydrino >ladder. After that, electron capture is a near certainty, and you wind up >with a neutral particle that is different from a neutron. This is news to me, and I suspect it would be news to Mills as well. > >Hydrinos can't <> the electrons surrounding the >nucleus of a heavy metal atom. Since electrons apparently comprise "rotating rings" (more or less), according to Mills, I see no reason why a sufficiently small heavy neutral particle shouldn't be able to wend it's way between them. Note that neutrons appear able to do this, without too much difficulty. > >Robin van Spaandonk's suggestion some time ago that the <> >reported by so many cold fusioneers were really hydrino hydride compounds (or >deuterino hydride compounds) is intriguing. I thought so too :). > >So is Jones Beene's observation on the Hydrino Study Group that the reverse >gyrotron is an old technology and that Siemens had the original patent on it. > Implication: a lot of engineering for the BLP gyrotron has already been >done and isn't controversial at all. While this is true, the engineering that still needs to be done I suspect pertains to use of a neutral plasma to provide electrons. Any attempt to remove an electron from a plasma will result in a space charge that works against that removal. This works to your advantage in MHD, but not in a gyrotron as far as I can tell. > >Please don't ask me to expand on any of this. For one thing, I don't >understand all of the implications of Mills' theory, and for another, I'm >snowed under right now. [snip] That's OK, expand at will, in your own time ;). Regards, Robin van Spaandonk A Future For Humanity see: http://users.bigpond.net.au/rvanspaa/ From vortex-l-request eskimo.com Fri Feb 2 18:03:19 2001 Received: (from smartlst localhost) by mx1.eskimo.com (8.9.1a/8.8.8) id SAA18656; Fri, 2 Feb 2001 18:01:11 -0800 Resent-Date: Fri, 2 Feb 2001 18:01:11 -0800 Message-Id: Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Date: Fri, 2 Feb 2001 17:10:37 -0900 To: vortex-l eskimo.com From: hheffner mtaonline.net (Horace Heffner) Subject: Re: [theory]Case cell operation Resent-Message-ID: <"w2DKQ2.0._Y4.cPsUw" mx1> Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/40548 X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com Status: O X-Status: At 8:04 PM 2/2/1, Tstolper aol.com wrote: [snip] >The energy from the BLP hydrogen-based process does NOT come from converting >any of the mass of the nucleus to energy. [snip] Excellent! This then might be a line worth pursuing for the lone, broke, lunatic fringe investigator. The nucleus DOES represent a huge reserve of energy, stored both via the nuclear forces and via EM forces. And there is plenty of it! (See the AIP Bulletin 443 quoted below.) It seems to me if there is a means to get high flux electron traffic through the nucleus that some of that nuclear heat might be tapped incrementally without detectable radiation. If there is a means to obtain electron tunneling into the nucleus or between closely grouped nucleii, then that too presents an opportunity to gradually tap off some of that nuclear heat. >PHYSICS NEWS UPDATE >The American Institute of Physics Bulletin of Physics News >Number 443 August 16, 1999 by Phillip F. Schewe and Ben >Stein > >NUCLEAR THERMOMETER. How hot is it inside the nucleus >of a dysprosium atom (element 62, abbreviated Dy)? Temperature >is a statistical concept that normally applies to an ensemble of >many particles, such as air molecules or a gas of atoms kept in a >bottle. Inside a heavy nucleus, swarming with protons and >neutrons (collectively called nucleons) it's not so easy to define >temperature, owing to the many pairing and other inter-nucleon >interactions that take place, but it can be done. The nuclear >environment can be sampled by colliding nuclei together and then >carefully measuring the photons that fly out: high energy gamma >rays, in this case, rather than the visible and infrared photons that >come out of heated-up atomic gases. In this way, physicists at the >University of Oslo have deduced the temperature inside a Dy >nucleus (in effect, a gas of 162 nucleons) to be 6 billion K. It can >be said, therefore, that even in winter parts of Norway (very small >parts) remain quite warm. This is the first time a nuclear >temperature has been measured strictly on the basis of the spectrum >of gammas emitted. (E. Melby et al., Physical Review Letters, >tent. 30 August 1999; contact Magne Guttormsen, >magne.guttormsen fys.uio.no, 011-47-2285-6460.) Regards, Horace Heffner From vortex-l-request eskimo.com Fri Feb 2 18:07:05 2001 Received: (from smartlst localhost) by mx1.eskimo.com (8.9.1a/8.8.8) id SAA20231; Fri, 2 Feb 2001 18:05:05 -0800 Resent-Date: Fri, 2 Feb 2001 18:05:05 -0800 From: Robin van Spaandonk To: vortex-l eskimo.com Subject: Re: Orbital electron fits in hydrino? Date: Sat, 03 Feb 2001 13:04:22 +1100 Organization: Improving Message-ID: <9ipm7tsep6lpfbj3stsj11r6ujpevlnjiu 4ax.com> References: In-Reply-To: X-Mailer: Forte Agent 1.8/32.548 MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit X-MIME-Autoconverted: from quoted-printable to 8bit by mx1.eskimo.com id SAA20200 Resent-Message-ID: <"eVYyp.0.0y4.FTsUw" mx1> Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/40549 X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com Status: O X-Status: In reply to Horace Heffner's message of Fri, 2 Feb 2001 15:16:03 -0900: [snip] > lambda_e = 3.324914x10^-10 m [n^0.5], for n = 1/2,1/3,1/4, ... > >but this seems to conflict with: > > r = (n) ((h^2)(e0))/((pi)(q^2)(m)), for n = 1/2,1/3,1/4, ... > [snip] I haven't been following your calculations in detail (too hot here), but I think this is because you have assumed q^2 rather than (q^2)/n. I.e. you have taken the increase in central charge into account that Mills postulates. Regards, Robin van Spaandonk A Future For Humanity see: http://users.bigpond.net.au/rvanspaa/ From vortex-l-request eskimo.com Fri Feb 2 18:15:14 2001 Received: (from smartlst localhost) by mx1.eskimo.com (8.9.1a/8.8.8) id SAA26101; Fri, 2 Feb 2001 18:13:57 -0800 Resent-Date: Fri, 2 Feb 2001 18:13:57 -0800 From: Robin van Spaandonk To: vortex-l eskimo.com Subject: Re: [theory]Case cell operation Date: Sat, 03 Feb 2001 13:13:19 +1100 Organization: Improving Message-ID: <26qm7tgg81g79rgatmgil2151n75h4pg7i 4ax.com> References: In-Reply-To: X-Mailer: Forte Agent 1.8/32.548 MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit X-MIME-Autoconverted: from quoted-printable to 8bit by mx1.eskimo.com id SAA25970 Resent-Message-ID: <"6lhQw3.0.dN6.bbsUw" mx1> Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/40550 X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com Status: O X-Status: In reply to Horace Heffner's message of Fri, 2 Feb 2001 17:10:37 -0900: [snip] >>NUCLEAR THERMOMETER. How hot is it inside the nucleus >>of a dysprosium atom (element 62, abbreviated Dy)? Temperature >>is a statistical concept that normally applies to an ensemble of >>many particles, such as air molecules or a gas of atoms kept in a >>bottle. Inside a heavy nucleus, swarming with protons and >>neutrons (collectively called nucleons) it's not so easy to define >>temperature, owing to the many pairing and other inter-nucleon >>interactions that take place, but it can be done. The nuclear >>environment can be sampled by colliding nuclei together and then >>carefully measuring the photons that fly out: high energy gamma >>rays, in this case, rather than the visible and infrared photons that >>come out of heated-up atomic gases. In this way, physicists at the >>University of Oslo have deduced the temperature inside a Dy >>nucleus (in effect, a gas of 162 nucleons) to be 6 billion K. It can >>be said, therefore, that even in winter parts of Norway (very small >>parts) remain quite warm. This is the first time a nuclear >>temperature has been measured strictly on the basis of the spectrum >>of gammas emitted. (E. Melby et al., Physical Review Letters, >>tent. 30 August 1999; contact Magne Guttormsen, >>magne.guttormsen fys.uio.no, 011-47-2285-6460.) [snip] Methinks they have measured the temperature of the bombardment energy. Regards, Robin van Spaandonk A Future For Humanity see: http://users.bigpond.net.au/rvanspaa/ From vortex-l-request eskimo.com Fri Feb 2 18:18:17 2001 Received: (from smartlst localhost) by mx1.eskimo.com (8.9.1a/8.8.8) id SAA27864; Fri, 2 Feb 2001 18:17:10 -0800 Resent-Date: Fri, 2 Feb 2001 18:17:10 -0800 From: Robin van Spaandonk To: vortex-l eskimo.com Subject: Re: Orbital electron fits in hydrino? Date: Sat, 03 Feb 2001 13:15:40 +1100 Organization: Improving Message-ID: References: <9ipm7tsep6lpfbj3stsj11r6ujpevlnjiu@4ax.com> In-Reply-To: <9ipm7tsep6lpfbj3stsj11r6ujpevlnjiu 4ax.com> X-Mailer: Forte Agent 1.8/32.548 MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit X-MIME-Autoconverted: from quoted-printable to 8bit by mx1.eskimo.com id SAA27203 Resent-Message-ID: <"X5S18.0.Ip6.cesUw" mx1> Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/40551 X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com Status: O X-Status: In reply to Robin van Spaandonk's message of Sat, 03 Feb 2001 13:04:22 +1100: Oops, [snip] >think this is because you have assumed q^2 rather than (q^2)/n. I.e. you >have taken the increase in central charge into account that Mills ^ n't! >postulates. Regards, Robin van Spaandonk A Future For Humanity see: http://users.bigpond.net.au/rvanspaa/ From vortex-l-request eskimo.com Fri Feb 2 18:23:04 2001 Received: (from smartlst localhost) by mx1.eskimo.com (8.9.1a/8.8.8) id SAA29488; Fri, 2 Feb 2001 18:21:01 -0800 Resent-Date: Fri, 2 Feb 2001 18:21:01 -0800 Message-Id: Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Date: Fri, 2 Feb 2001 17:30:30 -0900 To: vortex-l eskimo.com From: hheffner mtaonline.net (Horace Heffner) Subject: Re: Orbital electron fits in hydrino? Resent-Message-ID: <"wTC8g.0.aC7.DisUw" mx1> Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/40552 X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com Status: O X-Status: At 1:04 PM 2/3/1, Robin van Spaandonk wrote: >In reply to Horace Heffner's message of Fri, 2 Feb 2001 15:16:03 -0900: >[snip] >> lambda_e = 3.324914x10^-10 m [n^0.5], for n = 1/2,1/3,1/4, ... >> >>but this seems to conflict with: >> >> r = (n) ((h^2)(e0))/((pi)(q^2)(m)), for n = 1/2,1/3,1/4, ... >> >[snip] >I haven't been following your calculations in detail (too hot here), but I >think this is because you have assumed q^2 rather than (q^2)/n. I.e. you >have taken the increase in central charge into account that Mills >postulates. > The Bohr model standard formulas give you: r = (n^2) ((h^2)(e0))/((pi)(q^2)(m)), for n = 1, 2, 3, ... (compare to the above) but you said Mills' model uses n instead of n^2, so I did that, giving the formula you quote. If I were to substitute q^2/n for q^2 we would have: r = (n^3) ((h^2)(e0))/((pi)(q^2)(m)), for n = 1/2,1/3,1/4, ... which is also going to have some untenable consequences, which I will pursue if this formula is what you think is correct. I think no matter how you cut it, the electron is not going to fit right into a sub-ground state hydrogen atom, and a photon of less than keV energy is way way too big. Regards, Horace Heffner From vortex-l-request eskimo.com Fri Feb 2 18:24:53 2001 Received: (from smartlst localhost) by mx1.eskimo.com (8.9.1a/8.8.8) id SAA31540; Fri, 2 Feb 2001 18:24:17 -0800 Resent-Date: Fri, 2 Feb 2001 18:24:17 -0800 Message-ID: <004601c08d8b$38978ac0$c4b4bfa8 fjsparber> Reply-To: "Frederick Sparber" From: "Frederick Sparber" To: References: Subject: Re: Orbital electron fits in hydrino? Date: Fri, 2 Feb 2001 18:41:52 -0800 MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-Priority: 3 X-MSMail-Priority: Normal X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook Express 5.00.2615.200 X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V5.00.2615.200 Resent-Message-ID: <"VBdEA3.0.ii7.HlsUw" mx1> Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/40553 X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com Status: O X-Status: ----- Original Message ----- From: Horace Heffner To: Sent: Friday, February 02, 2001 4:16 PM Subject: Orbital electron fits in hydrino? Horace wrote: > Assuming the electron kintic energy in a hydrino is: > > v = 2.1876914x10^6 m/s 1/(n^0.5), for n = 1/2,1/3,1/4, ... Snip The "velocity" 2.1876914E6 = Alpha*c = 0.00729729*2.997925E8 > Snip The Lambda for an electron wave is the COMPTON WAVELENGTH (h/mc) = 2.428E-12 meters. The Rest Radius of the electron = kq^2/Eo = 2.304E-28/8.176E-14 J = 2.81E-15 (Meters). The Potential V = - kq/2R(2 x orbit 1/2) = 1.44E-9/5.29E-11= 27.2 "volts" That orbit = Electron rest radius/Alpha^2= 2.81E-15/(.00729729)^2 = 5.29E-11 Meters. :-) > > How does that big electron fit into that little hydrino? Let the electron cloud of Potassium force the electron of a Hydrogen atom close to the Hydrogen nucleus and plug in QED for Light Lepton Pair Production 54.4 ev : dE = h/dt, t = 6.626E-34/(54.4*1.6E-19) = 7.6E-17 seconds. The LL- will instantly assume a radius around the proton of R = kq^2/(Eo + Eb) where Eo is it's 27.2 ev radius and Eb is it's binding energy to the proton in some fractional orbit. The LL+ will most likely form an "Electrino" orbit around one of the electrons, similar to "Positronium" formed by the electron-positron pairs. Regards, Frederick > > Regards, > > Horace Heffner > > > From vortex-l-request eskimo.com Fri Feb 2 18:45:09 2001 Received: (from smartlst localhost) by mx1.eskimo.com (8.9.1a/8.8.8) id SAA05376; Fri, 2 Feb 2001 18:44:31 -0800 Resent-Date: Fri, 2 Feb 2001 18:44:31 -0800 From: Robin van Spaandonk To: vortex-l eskimo.com Subject: Re: Global Wind Energy Market Report Date: Sat, 03 Feb 2001 12:59:09 +1100 Organization: Improving Message-ID: References: <5.0.2.1.2.20010202164419.00b03040 pop.mindspring.com> <3A7B301D.328C01B1@bellsouth.net> <5.0.2.1.2.20010202172021.02bffc28@pop.mindspring.com> In-Reply-To: <5.0.2.1.2.20010202172021.02bffc28 pop.mindspring.com> X-Mailer: Forte Agent 1.8/32.548 MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit X-MIME-Autoconverted: from quoted-printable to 8bit by mx1.eskimo.com id SAA05341 Resent-Message-ID: <"IQF8t3.0.oJ1.E2tUw" mx1> Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/40554 X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com Status: O X-Status: In reply to Jed Rothwell's message of Fri, 02 Feb 2001 17:31:38 -0500: [snip] >According to AWEA, the total wind energy potential of California and five >other Western states (Nevada, Wyoming, Montana, Washington, and Oregon) is >more than 600,000 MW. "There are limits to how much of this resource can be >tapped in the near term, primarily because of limited transmission line >capacity," Swisher said, "but wind should be the top of the list as >California looks for new sources of electricity." . . . > >[Yes, it "should be," but I'll bet it isn't. I don't know. - JR] Years ago, I went to a wind energy seminar, and one of the key points that the presenter made was the fact that wind power can supply base load power if the generators are well spread out geographically. This is because the wind is usually blowing in some locations even if not in others. Regards, Robin van Spaandonk A Future For Humanity see: http://users.bigpond.net.au/rvanspaa/ From vortex-l-request eskimo.com Fri Feb 2 18:50:38 2001 Received: (from smartlst localhost) by mx1.eskimo.com (8.9.1a/8.8.8) id SAA06810; Fri, 2 Feb 2001 18:49:30 -0800 Resent-Date: Fri, 2 Feb 2001 18:49:30 -0800 From: Robin van Spaandonk To: vortex-l eskimo.com Subject: Re: [theory]Case cell operation Date: Sat, 03 Feb 2001 13:48:54 +1100 Organization: Improving Message-ID: <7asm7t8750hljj7fubc7d9cfa1b0plurf0 4ax.com> References: <3A7B06D2.6740643B@pacbell.net> In-Reply-To: <3A7B06D2.6740643B pacbell.net> X-Mailer: Forte Agent 1.8/32.548 MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit X-MIME-Autoconverted: from quoted-printable to 8bit by mx1.eskimo.com id SAA06775 Resent-Message-ID: <"BEqu21.0.Kg1.w6tUw" mx1> Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/40555 X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com Status: O X-Status: In reply to Jones Beene's message of Fri, 02 Feb 2001 11:13:22 -0800: [snip] >Hi Robin, > >This is very good stuff! > >Could I prevail on you to put the whole thing down in the >form of a complete hypothesis (that you may or may not >really believe) just to see how its stands up as a whole. >What I mean to ask specifically is could you synthesize the >best part of Mills, as you interpret his ideas, together >with Frederick's LL idea and apply all of that to the Case >cell? [snip] Sorry, I'm all out of inspiration with this heat. I'm afraid you'll just have to make do with my previous posts for the time being. Regards, Robin van Spaandonk A Future For Humanity see: http://users.bigpond.net.au/rvanspaa/ From vortex-l-request eskimo.com Fri Feb 2 19:09:11 2001 Received: (from smartlst localhost) by mx1.eskimo.com (8.9.1a/8.8.8) id TAA13504; Fri, 2 Feb 2001 19:07:47 -0800 Resent-Date: Fri, 2 Feb 2001 19:07:47 -0800 Message-Id: Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Date: Fri, 2 Feb 2001 18:17:14 -0900 To: vortex-l eskimo.com From: hheffner mtaonline.net (Horace Heffner) Subject: Re: Orbital electron fits in hydrino? Resent-Message-ID: <"7bzGG.0.uI3.3OtUw" mx1> Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/40556 X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com Status: O X-Status: At 1:04 PM 2/3/1, Robin van Spaandonk wrote: >I haven't been following your calculations in detail [snip] Part of the problem in following my caluclations may be that I no longer supply intermediate results, constant values used, etc., because I never see them now that I use a TI-89 calculator. I enter the formulas as shown in my posts into the calculator and get a direct calculation, with units all correctly handled. The TI-89 also does symbolic integration and differentiation, which avoids some tedium - but makes for some leaps in technical writing unless one follows along using a symbolic calculator like the TI-89, or Mathcad, or Mathematica. If the consequences of my calculations come into play then I will be happy to do them longhand. However, I think that is probably not the issue at hand, but rather the assumptions, because I think the untenable consequences, that the electron and photon can't fit, fall directly from the Bohr model, and the equations I provided as corresponding to Mills' assumptions. I just don't see how these conflicts, and also the violation of conservation of charge work - but I really don't understand Mills' work either. It seems reasonable these conflicts will also fall from any QM model that remotely resembles or extends to macro reality. I hoped it might be possible to gain some basic understanding of Mills without having to pay $100 for a book (anathema - since most of my physics library cost $1 or less per book) and without investment of a lot of time in something like that when I have my own fish to fry. Maybe, like magnetism, it will just have to be another of those things I just don't understand because I can't see how it can all be right. Regards, Horace Heffner From vortex-l-request eskimo.com Fri Feb 2 19:09:36 2001 Received: (from smartlst localhost) by mx1.eskimo.com (8.9.1a/8.8.8) id TAA13562; Fri, 2 Feb 2001 19:07:54 -0800 Resent-Date: Fri, 2 Feb 2001 19:07:54 -0800 Message-Id: Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Date: Fri, 2 Feb 2001 18:17:18 -0900 To: "Frederick Sparber" , From: hheffner mtaonline.net (Horace Heffner) Subject: Re: Orbital electron fits in hydrino? Resent-Message-ID: <"O4G9K.0.qJ3.AOtUw" mx1> Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/40557 X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com Status: O X-Status: At 6:41 PM 2/2/1, Frederick Sparber wrote: >----- Original Message ----- >From: Horace Heffner >To: >Sent: Friday, February 02, 2001 4:16 PM >Subject: Orbital electron fits in hydrino? > >Horace wrote: > > >> Assuming the electron kintic energy in a hydrino is: >> >> v = 2.1876914x10^6 m/s 1/(n^0.5), for n = 1/2,1/3,1/4, ... > >Snip > >The "velocity" 2.1876914E6 = Alpha*c = 0.00729729*2.997925E8 ????? The velocity, momentum, angular mumentum, and kinetic energy of an orbital electron is a function of its quantum state. What is the momentum of the first hydrino state? The second hydrino state? >> >Snip > >The Lambda for an electron wave is the COMPTON WAVELENGTH (h/mc) >= 2.428E-12 meters. ??? The lambda is a function of the quantum state. > >The Rest Radius of the electron = kq^2/Eo = 2.304E-28/8.176E-14 J = >2.81E-15 (Meters). > >The Potential V = - kq/2R(2 x orbit 1/2) = 1.44E-9/5.29E-11= 27.2 "volts" > >That orbit = Electron rest radius/Alpha^2= 2.81E-15/(.00729729)^2 = >5.29E-11 Meters. :-) I don't see where you have said a single thing that relates to Mills fractional quantum state. >> >> How does that big electron fit into that little hydrino? > >Let the electron cloud of Potassium force the electron of a Hydrogen atom >close to the Hydrogen nucleus and plug in QED for Light Lepton Pair Production >54.4 ev : dE = h/dt, t = 6.626E-34/(54.4*1.6E-19) = 7.6E-17 seconds. I assume that Mills does not say anything about light leptons? > >The LL- will instantly assume a radius around the proton of R = kq^2/(Eo + Eb) >where Eo is it's 27.2 ev radius and Eb is it's binding energy to the >proton in some >fractional orbit. Can you quantify that? What is the radius of the first hydrino by your assumptions? > >The LL+ will most likely form an "Electrino" orbit around one of the >electrons, similar >to "Positronium" formed by the electron-positron pairs. I'd like to see some more numbers. It seems to me your model will have the same problems as Mills' with regard to fitting waveforms to the radius. How does that light lepton fit into Mills' supposed spectrographic data? The light lepton is going to have to assume energies and radii similar to an electorn at the various fractional quantum states. I don't see how the light lepton can do that, because the resulting gammas at 0.1 c for the first fractional quantum state velocity (or at higher velocities of any of the other states) will not cause a match up in the orbital dynamics of the light lepton due to relativity. Of course the question then arises - does Mills really have any spectrographic data to back up his model? Regards, Horace Heffner From vortex-l-request eskimo.com Fri Feb 2 19:28:11 2001 Received: (from smartlst localhost) by mx1.eskimo.com (8.9.1a/8.8.8) id TAA19804; Fri, 2 Feb 2001 19:25:44 -0800 Resent-Date: Fri, 2 Feb 2001 19:25:44 -0800 From: Robin van Spaandonk To: vortex-l eskimo.com Subject: Re: Orbital electron fits in hydrino? Date: Sat, 03 Feb 2001 14:24:50 +1100 Organization: Improving Message-ID: References: In-Reply-To: X-Mailer: Forte Agent 1.8/32.548 MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit X-MIME-Autoconverted: from quoted-printable to 8bit by mx1.eskimo.com id TAA19183 Resent-Message-ID: <"jVq7-3.0.Hr4.uetUw" mx1> Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/40558 X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com Status: O X-Status: In reply to Horace Heffner's message of Fri, 2 Feb 2001 17:30:30 -0900: [snip] >The Bohr model standard formulas give you: > > r = (n^2) ((h^2)(e0))/((pi)(q^2)(m)), for n = 1, 2, 3, ... > >(compare to the above) but you said Mills' model uses n instead of n^2, so >I did that, giving the formula you quote. If I were to substitute q^2/n >for q^2 we would have: > > r = (n^3) ((h^2)(e0))/((pi)(q^2)(m)), for n = 1/2,1/3,1/4, ... [snip] I'm afraid that in order to give you a proper response, I would have to wade through about a 100 pages of Mills book, and it's all Greek to me! (well large parts of it anyway ;). Mills doesn't appear to start out from any of the common equations, but derives almost everything from the fundamentals. I can only suggest that you try wading through his book yourself. I assume that by now, you know where to find it. Regards, Robin van Spaandonk A Future For Humanity see: http://users.bigpond.net.au/rvanspaa/ From vortex-l-request eskimo.com Fri Feb 2 19:34:03 2001 Received: (from smartlst localhost) by mx1.eskimo.com (8.9.1a/8.8.8) id TAA21866; Fri, 2 Feb 2001 19:32:50 -0800 Resent-Date: Fri, 2 Feb 2001 19:32:50 -0800 From: Robin van Spaandonk To: vortex-l eskimo.com Subject: Re: Orbital electron fits in hydrino? Date: Sat, 03 Feb 2001 14:32:10 +1100 Organization: Improving Message-ID: References: In-Reply-To: X-Mailer: Forte Agent 1.8/32.548 MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit X-MIME-Autoconverted: from quoted-printable to 8bit by mx1.eskimo.com id TAA21815 Resent-Message-ID: <"QAu7t2.0.aL5.YltUw" mx1> Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/40559 X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com Status: O X-Status: In reply to Horace Heffner's message of Fri, 2 Feb 2001 18:17:14 -0900: [snip] >model that remotely resembles or extends to macro reality. I hoped it >might be possible to gain some basic understanding of Mills without having >to pay $100 for a book (anathema - since most of my physics library cost $1 >or less per book) and without investment of a lot of time in something like >that when I have my own fish to fry. [snip] Mills book is now available on the web in PDF, at http://www.blacklightpower.com/book.html Regards, Robin van Spaandonk A Future For Humanity see: http://users.bigpond.net.au/rvanspaa/ From vortex-l-request eskimo.com Fri Feb 2 19:41:21 2001 Received: (from smartlst localhost) by mx1.eskimo.com (8.9.1a/8.8.8) id TAA23547; Fri, 2 Feb 2001 19:37:13 -0800 Resent-Date: Fri, 2 Feb 2001 19:37:13 -0800 Message-Id: Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Date: Fri, 2 Feb 2001 18:46:37 -0900 To: vortex-l eskimo.com From: hheffner mtaonline.net (Horace Heffner) Subject: Re: [theory]Case cell operation Resent-Message-ID: <"uhefU2.0.ql5.eptUw" mx1> Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/40560 X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com Status: O X-Status: At 1:13 PM 2/3/1, Robin van Spaandonk wrote: >[snip] >Methinks they have measured the temperature of the bombardment energy. Well, let's see, they measured 6 billion K. Given that 1 eV = 11,600 K, the gammas might be 86.2 keV x-rays. They measured the dysprosium nucleus "(element 62, abbreviated Dy)" heat by colliding nucleii, which are presumably naked (how embarrassing for them!) In the CRC handbook ionization potentials table, it shows element 62 as being Sm and element 66 being Dy, but no matter, both have shell IV ionization potentials at around 42 ev, and that's as high as the table goes for them, so no info there. Still, it is hard to belive they were foolish enough to bombard with an energy peak around 86.2 keV, or that Dy has an ionization potential around 86.2 keV, or that things like that would get past a referee. It does make me wonder what the temperature of the Pd or Ni nucleus might be, and what the consequences (signature) might be if that energy were depleted. It might slide the neutron cross section vs energies around? Regards, Horace Heffner From vortex-l-request eskimo.com Fri Feb 2 20:55:11 2001 Received: (from smartlst localhost) by mx1.eskimo.com (8.9.1a/8.8.8) id UAA27965; Fri, 2 Feb 2001 20:52:10 -0800 Resent-Date: Fri, 2 Feb 2001 20:52:10 -0800 Message-Id: Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Date: Fri, 2 Feb 2001 18:21:15 -0900 To: vortex-l eskimo.com From: hheffner mtaonline.net (Horace Heffner) Subject: Re: [theory]Case cell operation Resent-Message-ID: <"gm8lX1.0.tq6.vvuUw" mx1> Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/40561 X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com Status: O X-Status: At 1:48 PM 2/3/1, Robin van Spaandonk wrote: >Sorry, I'm all out of inspiration with this heat. I'm afraid you'll just >have to make do with my previous posts for the time being. Somehow, that Australian heat doesn't sound too bad right now. I'm all worn out from shovelling snow here in Alaska. Better to be here than in the midwest USA though, I gather! Regards, Horace Heffner From vortex-l-request eskimo.com Fri Feb 2 20:55:13 2001 Received: (from smartlst localhost) by mx1.eskimo.com (8.9.1a/8.8.8) id UAA28004; Fri, 2 Feb 2001 20:52:17 -0800 Resent-Date: Fri, 2 Feb 2001 20:52:17 -0800 Message-Id: Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Date: Fri, 2 Feb 2001 17:18:23 -0900 To: vortex-l eskimo.com From: hheffner mtaonline.net (Horace Heffner) Subject: Re: [theory]Case cell operation Resent-Message-ID: <"afBcf3.0.Or6.1wuUw" mx1> Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/40562 X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com Status: O X-Status: At 12:53 PM 2/3/1, Robin van Spaandonk wrote: >While this is true, the engineering that still needs to be done I suspect >pertains to use of a neutral plasma to provide electrons. Any attempt to >remove an electron from a plasma will result in a space charge that works >against that removal. This works to your advantage in MHD, but not in a >gyrotron as far as I can tell. This can't be much of a problem can it? As long as any conductor, that is also part of a circuit connected to ground, is in contact with the plasma, then any change in net charge in the plasma will be spread all over the surface of the earth at near light speed. Regards, Horace Heffner From vortex-l-request eskimo.com Fri Feb 2 21:56:55 2001 Received: (from smartlst localhost) by mx1.eskimo.com (8.9.1a/8.8.8) id VAA32577; Fri, 2 Feb 2001 21:55:46 -0800 Resent-Date: Fri, 2 Feb 2001 21:55:46 -0800 From: Robin van Spaandonk To: vortex-l eskimo.com Subject: Re: [theory]Case cell operation Date: Sat, 03 Feb 2001 16:55:10 +1100 Organization: Improving Message-ID: <2c6n7tge9tlpihsep43ftdv0sg7dqdvf4o 4ax.com> References: In-Reply-To: X-Mailer: Forte Agent 1.8/32.548 MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit X-MIME-Autoconverted: from quoted-printable to 8bit by mx1.eskimo.com id VAA32545 Resent-Message-ID: <"Ar2hX1.0.xy7.YrvUw" mx1> Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/40563 X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com Status: O X-Status: In reply to Horace Heffner's message of Fri, 2 Feb 2001 18:46:37 -0900: [snip] >>Methinks they have measured the temperature of the bombardment energy. > >Well, let's see, they measured 6 billion K. Given that 1 eV = 11,600 K, >the gammas might be 86.2 keV x-rays. They measured the dysprosium nucleus >"(element 62, abbreviated Dy)" heat by colliding nucleii, which are >presumably naked (how embarrassing for them!) [snip] First, I suspect you have dropped a 1. I think the previous report said Dy162. Next, consider that nuclei that have a "temperature" are like metastable nuclei, i.e. they tend to radiate gamma rays until they cool off. Then consider that Dy162 is stable, and radiates no gammas, ergo has no energy to give, so if they got gammas out of it, then they must have put the energy in themselves, or they triggered some form of decay. No form of beta decay yields energy, but alpha decay yields 84.7 keV, remarkably close to the "temperature" measured. My conclusion therefore is that they in fact triggered the alpha decay of Dy162, and my original guess was wrong. Regards, Robin van Spaandonk A Future For Humanity see: http://users.bigpond.net.au/rvanspaa/ From vortex-l-request eskimo.com Fri Feb 2 22:09:24 2001 Received: (from smartlst localhost) by mx1.eskimo.com (8.9.1a/8.8.8) id WAA05622; Fri, 2 Feb 2001 22:08:52 -0800 Resent-Date: Fri, 2 Feb 2001 22:08:52 -0800 From: Robin van Spaandonk To: vortex-l eskimo.com Subject: Re: [theory]Case cell operation Date: Sat, 03 Feb 2001 16:58:10 +1100 Organization: Improving Message-ID: References: In-Reply-To: X-Mailer: Forte Agent 1.8/32.548 MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit X-MIME-Autoconverted: from quoted-printable to 8bit by mx1.eskimo.com id WAA05598 Resent-Message-ID: <"dTFEK.0.hN1.p1wUw" mx1> Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/40564 X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com Status: O X-Status: In reply to Horace Heffner's message of Fri, 2 Feb 2001 17:18:23 -0900: [snip] >This can't be much of a problem can it? As long as any conductor, that is >also part of a circuit connected to ground, is in contact with the plasma, >then any change in net charge in the plasma will be spread all over the >surface of the earth at near light speed. [snip] Horace, you put me to shame! I should have thought of that. Regards, Robin van Spaandonk A Future For Humanity see: http://users.bigpond.net.au/rvanspaa/ From vortex-l-request eskimo.com Fri Feb 2 22:20:13 2001 Received: (from smartlst localhost) by mx1.eskimo.com (8.9.1a/8.8.8) id WAA08332; Fri, 2 Feb 2001 22:19:40 -0800 Resent-Date: Fri, 2 Feb 2001 22:19:40 -0800 Message-Id: Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Date: Fri, 2 Feb 2001 21:29:07 -0900 To: vortex-l eskimo.com From: hheffner mtaonline.net (Horace Heffner) Subject: Re: [theory]Case cell operation Resent-Message-ID: <"KW25H3.0.622.xBwUw" mx1> Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/40565 X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com Status: O X-Status: At 4:55 PM 2/3/1, Robin van Spaandonk wrote: >In reply to Horace Heffner's message of Fri, 2 Feb 2001 18:46:37 -0900: >[snip] >>>Methinks they have measured the temperature of the bombardment energy. >> >>Well, let's see, they measured 6 billion K. Given that 1 eV = 11,600 K, >>the gammas might be 86.2 keV x-rays. They measured the dysprosium nucleus >>"(element 62, abbreviated Dy)" heat by colliding nucleii, which are >>presumably naked (how embarrassing for them!) >[snip] >First, I suspect you have dropped a 1. I think the previous report said >Dy162. For once it wasn't I who made the error: begin AIP quote: - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - >PHYSICS NEWS UPDATE >The American Institute of Physics Bulletin of Physics News >Number 443 August 16, 1999 by Phillip F. Schewe and Ben >Stein > >NUCLEAR THERMOMETER. How hot is it inside the nucleus >of a dysprosium atom (element 62, abbreviated Dy)? Temperature >is a statistical concept that normally applies to an ensemble of >many particles, such as air molecules or a gas of atoms kept in a >bottle. Inside a heavy nucleus, swarming with protons and >neutrons (collectively called nucleons) it's not so easy to define >temperature, owing to the many pairing and other inter-nucleon >interactions that take place, but it can be done. - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - end quote >Next, consider that nuclei that have a "temperature" are like >metastable nuclei, i.e. they tend to radiate gamma rays until they cool off. >Then consider that Dy162 is stable, and radiates no gammas, ergo has no >energy to give, so if they got gammas out of it, then they must have put the >energy in themselves, or they triggered some form of decay. No form of beta >decay yields energy, but alpha decay yields 84.7 keV, remarkably close to >the "temperature" measured. >My conclusion therefore is that they in fact triggered the alpha decay of >Dy162, and my original guess was wrong. Could be. And if an alpha was obtained - that's OK too, provided the "banging together" energy was low enough. If there IS a mechanism to drain off small increments of energy, say in the UV range, then the missing signature problem associated with CF goes away. I don't know for a fact that they got an 84.7 keV gamma peak, but assuming they did get that by banging together nucleii, maybe smaller chunks of energy can be taken away by banging the nucleus with electrons. Regards, Horace Heffner From vortex-l-request eskimo.com Fri Feb 2 22:48:44 2001 Received: (from smartlst localhost) by mx1.eskimo.com (8.9.1a/8.8.8) id WAA15174; Fri, 2 Feb 2001 22:48:08 -0800 Resent-Date: Fri, 2 Feb 2001 22:48:08 -0800 From: Robin van Spaandonk To: vortex-l eskimo.com Subject: Re: [theory]Case cell operation Date: Sat, 03 Feb 2001 17:47:34 +1100 Organization: Improving Message-ID: <61an7tkqs19up6m4ca19vofko9hpr072iv 4ax.com> References: In-Reply-To: X-Mailer: Forte Agent 1.8/32.548 MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit X-MIME-Autoconverted: from quoted-printable to 8bit by mx1.eskimo.com id WAA15152 Resent-Message-ID: <"opYw93.0._i3.ecwUw" mx1> Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/40566 X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com Status: O X-Status: In reply to Horace Heffner's message of Fri, 2 Feb 2001 21:29:07 -0900: [snip] >For once it wasn't I who made the error: >begin AIP quote: >- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - >>PHYSICS NEWS UPDATE >>The American Institute of Physics Bulletin of Physics News >>Number 443 August 16, 1999 by Phillip F. Schewe and Ben >>Stein >> >>NUCLEAR THERMOMETER. How hot is it inside the nucleus >>of a dysprosium atom (element 62, abbreviated Dy)? Temperature >>is a statistical concept that normally applies to an ensemble of >>many particles, such as air molecules or a gas of atoms kept in a >>bottle. Inside a heavy nucleus, swarming with protons and >>neutrons (collectively called nucleons) it's not so easy to define >>temperature, owing to the many pairing and other inter-nucleon >>interactions that take place, but it can be done. >- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - >end quote [snip] Sorry, you are correct, it was AIP (and I) that erred. They did however correct the error further down in the same article.... >>come out of heated-up atomic gases. In this way, physicists at the >>University of Oslo have deduced the temperature inside a Dy >>nucleus (in effect, a gas of 162 nucleons) to be 6 billion K. It can .....^ here. >>be said, therefore, that even in winter parts of Norway (very small >>parts) remain quite warm. This is the first time a nuclear Regards, Robin van Spaandonk A Future For Humanity see: http://users.bigpond.net.au/rvanspaa/ From vortex-l-request eskimo.com Sat Feb 3 01:33:41 2001 Received: (from smartlst localhost) by mx1.eskimo.com (8.9.1a/8.8.8) id BAA24384; Sat, 3 Feb 2001 01:33:04 -0800 Resent-Date: Sat, 3 Feb 2001 01:33:04 -0800 Message-Id: Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Date: Sat, 3 Feb 2001 00:42:24 -0900 To: vortex-l eskimo.com From: hheffner mtaonline.net (Horace Heffner) Subject: Re: [theory]Case cell operation Resent-Message-ID: <"UGIKV2.0.wy5.G1zUw" mx1> Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/40567 X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com Status: O X-Status: At 5:47 PM 2/3/1, Robin van Spaandonk wrote: [snip] >They did however >correct the error further down in the same article.... > >>>come out of heated-up atomic gases. In this way, physicists at the >>>University of Oslo have deduced the temperature inside a Dy >>>nucleus (in effect, a gas of 162 nucleons) to be 6 billion K. It can > .....^ here. Oh yes, that's right. I didn't really notice. I wonder why they picked that element and that isotope for the test. 162Dy has only a 25.5% abundance, and is mixed in with lots of isotopes of nearby weight. Also Dy ranges form 141Dy all the way up to 169Dy, with the stables bunched between 156 and 164. Maybe they picked 162Dy because of some special availability and because it is right in the middle of a stable group from 160 to 164. Or maybe they simply picked 162 as a number in the middle of the group but did not actually use a pure isotope. It seems like it would be better/easier to use, Y, Rh, I, Cs, etc. with only one natural isotope? Maybe the choice was made due to the nuclear structure. I guess its time to stop my speculating. Regards, Horace Heffner From vortex-l-request eskimo.com Sat Feb 3 01:55:50 2001 Received: (from smartlst localhost) by mx1.eskimo.com (8.9.1a/8.8.8) id BAA28010; Sat, 3 Feb 2001 01:54:47 -0800 Resent-Date: Sat, 3 Feb 2001 01:54:47 -0800 Message-ID: <00e201c08dcf$d47a37a0$c4b4bfa8 fjsparber> Reply-To: "Frederick Sparber" From: "Frederick Sparber" To: Cc: , Subject: Re: A place to find out if Cold Fusion is Real? Date: Sat, 3 Feb 2001 02:54:21 -0800 MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: multipart/mixed; boundary="----=_NextPart_000_0005_01C08D8C.9BCFD240" X-Priority: 3 X-MSMail-Priority: Normal X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook Express 5.00.2615.200 X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V5.00.2615.200 Resent-Message-ID: <"iW9Ar2.0.Vr6.cLzUw" mx1> Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/40568 X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com Status: O X-Status: This is a multi-part message in MIME format. ------=_NextPart_000_0005_01C08D8C.9BCFD240 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit http://www.punxsutawneyphil.com/askgroundhog/ ------=_NextPart_000_0005_01C08D8C.9BCFD240 Content-Type: application/octet-stream; name="Punxsutawney Phil .com A Tribute to Groundhog Day and our Favorite Town!.url" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Content-Disposition: attachment; filename="Punxsutawney Phil .com A Tribute to Groundhog Day and our Favorite Town!.url" [DEFAULT] BASEURL=http://www.punxsutawneyphil.com/askgroundhog/ [InternetShortcut] URL=http://www.punxsutawneyphil.com/askgroundhog/ Modified=00668D60CF8DC00170 ------=_NextPart_000_0005_01C08D8C.9BCFD240-- From vortex-l-request eskimo.com Sat Feb 3 10:00:24 2001 Received: (from smartlst localhost) by mx1.eskimo.com (8.9.1a/8.8.8) id JAA01075; Sat, 3 Feb 2001 09:50:54 -0800 Resent-Date: Sat, 3 Feb 2001 09:50:54 -0800 Message-ID: <3A7C3746.5B1A9A16 ix.netcom.com> Date: Sat, 03 Feb 2001 10:52:24 -0600 From: Edmund Storms X-Mailer: Mozilla 4.5 (Macintosh; U; PPC) X-Accept-Language: en,pdf MIME-Version: 1.0 To: vortex-l eskimo.com Subject: Re: [theory]Case cell operation References: Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii; x-mac-type="54455854"; x-mac-creator="4D4F5353" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Resent-Message-ID: <"4VfPI1.0.jG.-J4Vw" mx1> Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/40569 X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com Status: O X-Status: Does TNT have a higher temperature than an equal quantity of, say, cement? In other words, why does simply measuring the contained energy of a nucleus have anything to do with temperature? Ed Storms Horace Heffner wrote: > At 4:55 PM 2/3/1, Robin van Spaandonk wrote: > >In reply to Horace Heffner's message of Fri, 2 Feb 2001 18:46:37 -0900: > >[snip] > >>>Methinks they have measured the temperature of the bombardment energy. > >> > >>Well, let's see, they measured 6 billion K. Given that 1 eV = 11,600 K, > >>the gammas might be 86.2 keV x-rays. They measured the dysprosium nucleus > >>"(element 62, abbreviated Dy)" heat by colliding nucleii, which are > >>presumably naked (how embarrassing for them!) > >[snip] > >First, I suspect you have dropped a 1. I think the previous report said > >Dy162. > > For once it wasn't I who made the error: > begin AIP quote: > - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - > >PHYSICS NEWS UPDATE > >The American Institute of Physics Bulletin of Physics News > >Number 443 August 16, 1999 by Phillip F. Schewe and Ben > >Stein > > > >NUCLEAR THERMOMETER. How hot is it inside the nucleus > >of a dysprosium atom (element 62, abbreviated Dy)? Temperature > >is a statistical concept that normally applies to an ensemble of > >many particles, such as air molecules or a gas of atoms kept in a > >bottle. Inside a heavy nucleus, swarming with protons and > >neutrons (collectively called nucleons) it's not so easy to define > >temperature, owing to the many pairing and other inter-nucleon > >interactions that take place, but it can be done. > - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - > end quote > > >Next, consider that nuclei that have a "temperature" are like > >metastable nuclei, i.e. they tend to radiate gamma rays until they cool off. > >Then consider that Dy162 is stable, and radiates no gammas, ergo has no > >energy to give, so if they got gammas out of it, then they must have put the > >energy in themselves, or they triggered some form of decay. No form of beta > >decay yields energy, but alpha decay yields 84.7 keV, remarkably close to > >the "temperature" measured. > >My conclusion therefore is that they in fact triggered the alpha decay of > >Dy162, and my original guess was wrong. > > Could be. And if an alpha was obtained - that's OK too, provided the > "banging together" energy was low enough. If there IS a mechanism to > drain off small increments of energy, say in the UV range, then the missing > signature problem associated with CF goes away. I don't know for a fact > that they got an 84.7 keV gamma peak, but assuming they did get that by > banging together nucleii, maybe smaller chunks of energy can be taken away > by banging the nucleus with electrons. > > Regards, > > Horace Heffner From vortex-l-request eskimo.com Sat Feb 3 10:29:50 2001 Received: (from smartlst localhost) by mx1.eskimo.com (8.9.1a/8.8.8) id KAA06193; Sat, 3 Feb 2001 10:14:21 -0800 Resent-Date: Sat, 3 Feb 2001 10:14:21 -0800 Message-ID: <3A7C3CC4.6C576A56 ix.netcom.com> Date: Sat, 03 Feb 2001 11:15:51 -0600 From: Edmund Storms X-Mailer: Mozilla 4.5 (Macintosh; U; PPC) X-Accept-Language: en,pdf MIME-Version: 1.0 To: vortex-l eskimo.com Subject: Re: Hydrino based CF References: <3A622239.B0DE6409 ix.netcom.com> <3A634C7D.95C5E5C9@pacbell.net> <3A636219.3B9D2155@ix.netcom.com> <3A6465B1.96F32D44@ix.netcom.com> <3A685402.3D0C150D@ ix.netcom.com> <23th6t4f4rklemsue40p6lf34nq5cu9vpi@4ax.com> <3A69C660.1CCEDCF6@pacbell.net> <3A6C9BA9.3F2EE932@ix.netcom.com> <9onp6toob4ul639i7qbplu31frdsg4cj12@4ax .com> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii; x-mac-type="54455854"; x-mac-creator="4D4F5353" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Resent-Message-ID: <"Yeg_11.0.dW1.yf4Vw" mx1> Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/40570 X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com Status: O X-Status: Robin van Spaandonk wrote: > In reply to Edmund Storms's message of Mon, 22 Jan 2001 14:44:26 -0600: > [snip] > >This type of nickel has been used and is claimed to produce anomalous energy. > >However, the effect in the Ni-H2O system seems to be very surface dependent. > > Actually, I was thinking more along the lines of H2 gas rather than > electrolysis. Water molecules in the cavities would just get in the way. I > suppose this too would depend on whether or not there was a passage from the > surface to the interior. Attempts to initiate nuclear reactions using H2 gas and Ni have been attempted and some success is claimed. However, once again, the effect is not reproducible. Apparently, as is the case with all efforts to initiate such reactions, a very difficult to create chemical-physical environment is required. Loading can not be the only variable because normal gas pressures can produce only modest concentrations of H in Ni. > > > >Hence, the role of voids is unknown. Voids in Pd apparently stop the reaction > >because they allow the high D pressure to dissipate, thereby reducing the > >necessary high D concentration. > > This problem seems to have been "worked around" by Arata with his hollow > cathode. This seems to imply that voids are only a problem with Pd when they > provide a passage to the surface. Purely internal voids OTOH could prove > beneficial, especially if they were only slightly larger than the required > minimum size in order to increase the density of the gas in the cavity (or > would the density be independent of cavity size?). Perhaps cavity size would > have more bearing on the average number of atoms in a cavity, and if too > small would reduce hydrino formation because the average number would be > less than three. I think however that if the cavity is too large then you > may end up with a population of H2 (D2) in the cavity, which would also just > get in the way. High temperatures would probably help too, as this would > ease the dissociation of any unwanted molecules that may form. > [snip] You are assuming that small particles of palladium-black contain internal voids. While some might be present, SEM examination of such material shows what look like bunches of grapes. You would have to assume that the "grapes" are hollow to find any voids because the average space between the "grapes" is large compared to the "grape" size. As for temperature, the dissociation reaction requires a very high temperature before many H atoms are formed. Unfortunately, it is the nature of the solid that the higher the temperature, the less H is dissolved. Nature seems to fight any explanation at every turn. Regards, Ed Storms > > > Regards, > > Robin van Spaandonk > > A Future For Humanity see: http://users.bigpond.net.au/rvanspaa/ From vortex-l-request eskimo.com Sat Feb 3 11:55:15 2001 Received: (from smartlst localhost) by mx1.eskimo.com (8.9.1a/8.8.8) id LAA03260; Sat, 3 Feb 2001 11:53:46 -0800 Resent-Date: Sat, 3 Feb 2001 11:53:46 -0800 Message-Id: <200102031953.OAA20141 mercury.mv.net> Subject: What is mass Date: Sat, 3 Feb 2001 14:49:26 -0400 x-sender: zeropoint-ed pop.mv.net x-mailer: Claris Emailer 2.0v3, January 22, 1998 From: "Eugene F. Mallove" To: "VORTEX" Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="US-ASCII" Resent-Message-ID: <"vpyAX.0.so.976Vw" mx1> Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/40571 X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com Status: O X-Status: >From New Scientist - http://www.eurekalert.org/releases/ns-wim013101.html From vortex-l-request eskimo.com Sat Feb 3 13:13:49 2001 Received: (from smartlst localhost) by mx1.eskimo.com (8.9.1a/8.8.8) id NAA23952; Sat, 3 Feb 2001 13:07:21 -0800 Resent-Date: Sat, 3 Feb 2001 13:07:21 -0800 From: Robin van Spaandonk To: vortex-l eskimo.com Subject: Re: Hydrino based CF Date: Sun, 04 Feb 2001 08:06:39 +1100 Organization: Improving Message-ID: References: <3A636219.3B9D2155 ix.netcom.com> <3A6465B1.96F32D44@ix.netcom.com> <3A685402.3D0C150D@ix.netcom.com> <23th6 t4f4rklemsue40p6lf34nq5cu9vpi 4ax.com> <3A69C660.1CCEDCF6@pacbell.net> <3A6C9BA9.3F2EE932@ix.netcom.com> <9onp6toob4ul639i7qbplu31frdsg4cj12@4ax.com> <3A7C3CC4.6C576A56@ix.netcom.com> In-Reply-To: <3A7C3CC4.6C576A56 ix.netcom.com> X-Mailer: Forte Agent 1.8/32.548 MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit X-MIME-Autoconverted: from quoted-printable to 8bit by mx1.eskimo.com id NAA23922 Resent-Message-ID: <"Xh4o03.0.6s5.9C7Vw" mx1> Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/40572 X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com Status: O X-Status: In reply to Edmund Storms's message of Sat, 03 Feb 2001 11:15:51 -0600: [snip] >You are assuming that small particles of palladium-black contain internal voids. >While some might be present, SEM examination of such material shows what look like >bunches of grapes. You would have to assume that the "grapes" are hollow to find >any voids because the average space between the "grapes" is large compared to the >"grape" size. Actually, I was thinking of the spaces between the grapes, particularly where two grapes touch. An "atom gas" isn't much going to care what the shape of the cavity is. This is where variations in the sintering conditions would play a large role, as they will determine the average size of the remaining spaces. I suspect that high pressure and relatively low temperature would work best, as I think this would lead to many small spaces. > >As for temperature, the dissociation reaction requires a very high temperature >before many H atoms are formed. Unfortunately, it is the nature of the solid that >the higher the temperature, the less H is dissolved. Nature seems to fight any >explanation at every turn. No probs. Since more H dissolves at low temps, and this involves the break up of molecules, just dissolve the gas at low temps, then raise the temp rapidly, with a quick heat pulse. If everything goes according to plan, the reaction itself will do the rest. [snip] Regards, Robin van Spaandonk A Future For Humanity see: http://users.bigpond.net.au/rvanspaa/ From vortex-l-request eskimo.com Sat Feb 3 13:53:00 2001 Received: (from smartlst localhost) by mx1.eskimo.com (8.9.1a/8.8.8) id NAA04311; Sat, 3 Feb 2001 13:50:53 -0800 Resent-Date: Sat, 3 Feb 2001 13:50:53 -0800 Message-ID: <3A7C6FA4.9E2F82AA ix.netcom.com> Date: Sat, 03 Feb 2001 14:53:16 -0600 From: Edmund Storms X-Mailer: Mozilla 4.5 (Macintosh; U; PPC) X-Accept-Language: en,pdf MIME-Version: 1.0 To: vortex-l eskimo.com Subject: Re: Hydrino based CF References: <3A636219.3B9D2155 ix.netcom.com> <3A6465B1.96F32D44@ix.netcom.com> <3A685402.3D0C150D@ix.netcom.com> <23th6 t4f4rklemsue40p6lf34nq5cu9vpi 4ax.com> <3A69C660.1CCEDCF6@pacbell.net> <3A6C9BA9.3F2EE932@ix.netcom.com> <9onp6toob4ul639i7qbplu31frdsg4cj12@4ax.com> <3A7C3CC4.6C576A56@ix.netcom.com> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii; x-mac-type="54455854"; x-mac-creator="4D4F5353" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Resent-Message-ID: <"4Cdzg2.0.H31.zq7Vw" mx1> Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/40573 X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com Status: O X-Status: Robin van Spaandonk wrote: > In reply to Edmund Storms's message of Sat, 03 Feb 2001 11:15:51 -0600: > [snip] > >You are assuming that small particles of palladium-black contain internal voids. > >While some might be present, SEM examination of such material shows what look like > >bunches of grapes. You would have to assume that the "grapes" are hollow to find > >any voids because the average space between the "grapes" is large compared to the > >"grape" size. > > Actually, I was thinking of the spaces between the grapes, particularly > where two grapes touch. An "atom gas" isn't much going to care what the > shape of the cavity is. This is where variations in the sintering conditions > would play a large role, as they will determine the average size of the > remaining spaces. I suspect that high pressure and relatively low > temperature would work best, as I think this would lead to many small > spaces. I think more is needed besides intersecting surfaces. The surface on a P-F electrode is exposed to 10^6 atm and seldom produces excess energy. Even the cracks in such an electrode have a high pressure while their presence seems to be counter productive. The surface on Arata's palladium-black is exposed to no more than 100 atm and frequently makes energy. The difference is that the surface energy of palladium-black is much higher than the surface on bulk Pd. In addition, all kinds of chemical environments are present on such surfaces, some of which might provide the necessary environment. I do not see any evidence that voids play a role. > > > > > >As for temperature, the dissociation reaction requires a very high temperature > >before many H atoms are formed. Unfortunately, it is the nature of the solid that > >the higher the temperature, the less H is dissolved. Nature seems to fight any > >explanation at every turn. > > No probs. Since more H dissolves at low temps, and this involves the break > up of molecules, just dissolve the gas at low temps, then raise the temp > rapidly, with a quick heat pulse. If everything goes according to plan, the > reaction itself will do the rest. I tried this and the only effect was a very rapid expulsion of gas from a crack that formed. Regards, Ed Storms From vortex-l-request eskimo.com Sat Feb 3 19:14:52 2001 Received: (from smartlst localhost) by mx1.eskimo.com (8.9.1a/8.8.8) id TAA18611; Sat, 3 Feb 2001 19:09:01 -0800 Resent-Date: Sat, 3 Feb 2001 19:09:01 -0800 From: Robin van Spaandonk To: vortex-l eskimo.com Subject: Re: Hydrino based CF Date: Sun, 04 Feb 2001 14:08:22 +1100 Organization: Improving Message-ID: References: <3A6465B1.96F32D44 ix.netcom.com> <3A685402.3D0C150D@ix.netcom.com> <23th6t4f4rklemsue40p6lf34nq5cu9vpi@4ax.com> <3A69C660.1CCEDCF6@pacbell.net> <3A6C9BA9.3F2EE932@ix.netcom.com> <9onp6toob4ul639i7qbplu31frdsg4cj12@4ax.com> <3A7C3CC4.6C576A56@ix.netcom.com> <3A7C6FA4.9E2F82AA@ix.netcom.com> In-Reply-To: <3A7C6FA4.9E2F82AA ix.netcom.com> X-Mailer: Forte Agent 1.8/32.548 MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit X-MIME-Autoconverted: from quoted-printable to 8bit by mx1.eskimo.com id TAA18566 Resent-Message-ID: <"bWFdc3.0.eY4.DVCVw" mx1> Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/40574 X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com Status: O X-Status: In reply to Edmund Storms's message of Sat, 03 Feb 2001 14:53:16 -0600: [snip] >I think more is needed besides intersecting surfaces. The surface on a P-F electrode >is exposed to 10^6 atm and seldom produces excess energy. Even the cracks in such an >electrode have a high pressure while their presence seems to be counter productive. I suspect that the cracks are mostly too big. I.e. atoms get a chance to recombine into molecules, and the molecules have enough room to just "wander off". >The surface on Arata's palladium-black is exposed to no more than 100 atm and >frequently makes energy. There is also much more of it, and furthermore H2 (D2) that forms can be reabsorbed, while in an electrolysis unit, if H2 or D2 forms, it tends to escape as bubbles. (I'll probably get clobbered on this one :) >The difference is that the surface energy of >palladium-black is much higher than the surface on bulk Pd. Does this have to do with the actual structure of the surface, i.e. "rough" at all scales perhaps (which would also help explain why it is black)? >In addition, all kinds of >chemical environments are present on such surfaces, some of which might provide the >necessary environment. I do not see any evidence that voids play a role. The ideal holes, are probably very small. E.g. a point lattice defect (i.e. a missing atom) might provide just about the right sized hole (perhaps slightly too small). Inclusion of other atoms (say 1%) of a considerably different size to Pd that seriously upset the lattice organisation could also work. This may explain the boron results. If so, then inclusion of carbon rather than boron would probably work even better. Ba or Cs might work too, but these would have to be used in a gas experiment, not electrolysis, I suspect. Does anyone know anything about the formation process of the Case cell catalyst? Is it possible that small amounts of C migrate into the Pd during production? Regards, Robin van Spaandonk A Future For Humanity see: http://users.bigpond.net.au/rvanspaa/ From vortex-l-request eskimo.com Sat Feb 3 19:15:36 2001 Received: (from smartlst localhost) by mx1.eskimo.com (8.9.1a/8.8.8) id TAA18845; Sat, 3 Feb 2001 19:10:13 -0800 Resent-Date: Sat, 3 Feb 2001 19:10:13 -0800 From: Robin van Spaandonk To: vortex-l eskimo.com Subject: Re: Hydrino based CF Date: Sun, 04 Feb 2001 14:09:37 +1100 Organization: Improving Message-ID: <4uhp7tchrau57caq9tl3t0bom1rcfmqmns 4ax.com> References: <3A6465B1.96F32D44 ix.netcom.com> <3A685402.3D0C150D@ix.netcom.com> <23th6t4f4rklemsue40p6lf34nq5cu9vpi@4ax.com> <3A69C660.1CCEDCF6@pacbell.net> <3A6C9BA9.3F2EE932@ix.netcom.com> <9onp6toob4ul639i7qbplu31frdsg4cj12@4ax.com> <3A7C3CC4.6C576A56@ix.netcom.com> <3A7C6FA4.9E2F82AA@ix.netcom.com> In-Reply-To: <3A7C6FA4.9E2F82AA ix.netcom.com> X-Mailer: Forte Agent 1.8/32.548 MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit X-MIME-Autoconverted: from quoted-printable to 8bit by mx1.eskimo.com id TAA18811 Resent-Message-ID: <"UosD82.0.Kc4.KWCVw" mx1> Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/40575 X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com Status: O X-Status: In reply to Edmund Storms's message of Sat, 03 Feb 2001 14:53:16 -0600: [snip] >> No probs. Since more H dissolves at low temps, and this involves the break >> up of molecules, just dissolve the gas at low temps, then raise the temp >> rapidly, with a quick heat pulse. If everything goes according to plan, the >> reaction itself will do the rest. > >I tried this and the only effect was a very rapid expulsion of gas from a crack that >formed. Perhaps if the crack hadn't formed and released the gas, it would have worked? [snip] Regards, Robin van Spaandonk A Future For Humanity see: http://users.bigpond.net.au/rvanspaa/ From vortex-l-request eskimo.com Sun Feb 4 02:09:28 2001 Received: (from smartlst localhost) by mx1.eskimo.com (8.9.1a/8.8.8) id CAA01713; Sun, 4 Feb 2001 02:08:45 -0800 Resent-Date: Sun, 4 Feb 2001 02:08:45 -0800 Date: Sun, 4 Feb 2001 05:14:52 -0500 (EST) From: John Schnurer To: Vortex Subject: Ralph ] DC Generator design (fwd) Message-ID: MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: TEXT/PLAIN; charset=US-ASCII Resent-Message-ID: <"1yoTt1.0.hQ.jeIVw" mx1> Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/40576 X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com Status: O X-Status: Dear Ralph L., There is a wealth, a heritage or rotating machine design which anyone can draw on. A few clever designs that come to mind are: The Amplidyne ..... and rotating current amplifier The "DC Transformer" .... as Bendix termed their motor-generator sets with a set of brushes on BOTH ends of the shaft and two sets of windings... these were capable of transforming DC to DC ot AC to AC or AC to DC or DC to AC... in nearly any combinations.... some models could even change frequency smoothly while delivering power. How about the synchronous rotating capacitor ... which was not a capacitor at all... but an unloaded synchonous "motor" used to alter the power factor? Numerous moving core self adjusting constant current or constant voltage devices and automatic load movers instead of fuses.... power supplies that send the back emf to another part of the set up to be used as another power output. Alloys which kept a magnetic circuit stable by changing their permeability over a range of temperatures in a manner equal but opposite to another part of a magnetic circuit..... often alloys of copper and nickle or iron. A wide range of variable inductors ... controlled their permeability by means of a secondary magnetic field... they would often have fantastic names so the different manfacturers could teach you theirs was "better" ... like microwave phase shifters controlled by permanent magnets or windings or a combination of the two. From vortex-l-request eskimo.com Sun Feb 4 07:51:10 2001 Received: (from smartlst localhost) by mx1.eskimo.com (8.9.1a/8.8.8) id HAA22125; Sun, 4 Feb 2001 07:50:09 -0800 Resent-Date: Sun, 4 Feb 2001 07:50:09 -0800 Message-ID: <3A7D6C9A.411C958B ix.netcom.com> Date: Sun, 04 Feb 2001 08:52:12 -0600 From: Edmund Storms X-Mailer: Mozilla 4.5 (Macintosh; U; PPC) X-Accept-Language: en,pdf MIME-Version: 1.0 To: vortex-l eskimo.com Subject: Re: Hydrino based CF References: <3A6465B1.96F32D44 ix.netcom.com> <3A685402.3D0C150D@ix.netcom.com> <23th6t4f4rklemsue40p6lf34nq5cu9vpi@4ax.com> <3A69C660.1CCEDCF6@pacbell.net> <3A6C9BA9.3F2EE932@ix.netcom.com> <9onp6toob4ul639i7qbplu31frdsg4cj12@4ax.com> <3A7C3CC4.6C576A56@ix.netcom.com> <3A7C6FA4.9E2F82AA@ix.netcom.com> <4uhp7tchrau57caq9tl3t0bom 1rcfmqmns 4ax.com> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=iso-8859-1; x-mac-type="54455854"; x-mac-creator="4D4F5353" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit Resent-Message-ID: <"WYR732.0.aP5.neNVw" mx1> Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/40578 X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com Status: O X-Status: Robin van Spaandonk wrote: > In reply to Edmund Storms's message of Sat, 03 Feb 2001 14:53:16 -0600: > [snip] > >> No probs. Since more H dissolves at low temps, and this involves the break > >> up of molecules, just dissolve the gas at low temps, then raise the temp > >> rapidly, with a quick heat pulse. If everything goes according to plan, the > >> reaction itself will do the rest. > > > >I tried this and the only effect was a very rapid expulsion of gas from a crack that > >formed. > Perhaps if the crack hadn't formed and released the gas, it would have > worked? Perhaps, but pressure rises very rapidly as temperature increases. At some point the pressure will be sufficient to rupture the lattice. You would suggest, I think, that if I held the temperature just short of this critical value, the nuclear reaction would have its maximum rate. I have used increased temperature to deload samples. In this case, a temperature of 175° C will deloaded one of my plates in a few minutes. Consequently, even if a fissure does not form, the time at temperature during which the sample contains sufficient D would be rather short. > > > [snip] > Regards, > > Robin van Spaandonk > > A Future For Humanity see: http://users.bigpond.net.au/rvanspaa/ From vortex-l-request eskimo.com Sun Feb 4 07:52:50 2001 Received: (from smartlst localhost) by mx1.eskimo.com (8.9.1a/8.8.8) id HAA22077; Sun, 4 Feb 2001 07:49:52 -0800 Resent-Date: Sun, 4 Feb 2001 07:49:52 -0800 Message-ID: <3A7D6C64.80C32AF6 ix.netcom.com> Date: Sun, 04 Feb 2001 08:51:19 -0600 From: Edmund Storms X-Mailer: Mozilla 4.5 (Macintosh; U; PPC) X-Accept-Language: en,pdf MIME-Version: 1.0 To: vortex-l eskimo.com Subject: Re: Hydrino based CF References: <3A6465B1.96F32D44 ix.netcom.com> <3A685402.3D0C150D@ix.netcom.com> <23th6t4f4rklemsue40p6lf34nq5cu9vpi@4ax.com> <3A69C660.1CCEDCF6@pacbell.net> <3A6C9BA9.3F2EE932@ix.netcom.com> <9onp6toob4ul639i7qbplu31frdsg4cj12@4ax.com> <3A7C3CC4.6C576A56@ix.netcom.com> <3A7C6FA4.9E2F82AA@ix.netcom.com> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii; x-mac-type="54455854"; x-mac-creator="4D4F5353" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Resent-Message-ID: <"PL7qB3.0.tO5.WeNVw" mx1> Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/40577 X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com Status: O X-Status: Robin van Spaandonk wrote: > In reply to Edmund Storms's message of Sat, 03 Feb 2001 14:53:16 -0600: > [snip] > >I think more is needed besides intersecting surfaces. The surface on a P-F electrode > >is exposed to 10^6 atm and seldom produces excess energy. Even the cracks in such an > >electrode have a high pressure while their presence seems to be counter productive. > > I suspect that the cracks are mostly too big. I.e. atoms get a chance to > recombine into molecules, and the molecules have enough room to just "wander > off". They can only wonder off if the void has a channel to the surface. Many voids do not have such a channel, hence the D2 will stay put. Nevertheless, excess energy is seldom produced. > > > >The surface on Arata's palladium-black is exposed to no more than 100 atm and > >frequently makes energy. > > There is also much more of it, and furthermore H2 (D2) that forms can be > reabsorbed, while in an electrolysis unit, if H2 or D2 forms, it tends to > escape as bubbles. > (I'll probably get clobbered on this one :) You are correct and not clobberable. The difference is that an electrolytic cell produces a much larger deuterium activity (concentration) than ambient gas. Simply applying ambient gas pressure to bulk palladium does nothing while applying a very high concentration using electrolysis occasionally produces nuclear reactions. Consequently, something is different within the palladium-black, whether it be in the Arata or Case environment. > > > >The difference is that the surface energy of > >palladium-black is much higher than the surface on bulk Pd. > > Does this have to do with the actual structure of the surface, i.e. "rough" > at all scales perhaps (which would also help explain why it is black)? The black color is thought to be caused by the material being a perfect absorber because so many "black-body" holes are present. Indeed, all metals no matter their color in the bulk are black when finely powdered. > > > >In addition, all kinds of > >chemical environments are present on such surfaces, some of which might provide the > >necessary environment. I do not see any evidence that voids play a role. > > The ideal holes, are probably very small. E.g. a point lattice defect (i.e. > a missing atom) might provide just about the right sized hole (perhaps > slightly too small). Inclusion of other atoms (say 1%) of a considerably > different size to Pd that seriously upset the lattice organisation could > also work. This may explain the boron results. If so, then inclusion of > carbon rather than boron would probably work even better. Ba or Cs might > work too, but these would have to be used in a gas experiment, not > electrolysis, I suspect. The PdD lattice always contains many point defects, in both the D and the Pd sublattices. Nevertheless, samples do not always produce excess energy. Why? As for boron upsetting the lattice, the surface always contains a rich assortment of impurities (mainly Li and Pt) that upset the lattice, yet excess energy is seldom produced. In addition, I have studied many alloys including ones containing boron. The excess energy did not relate to the amount or kind of impurity. Indeed, almost all palladium contains some boron, yet excess energy is seldom produced. The behavior simply is not consistent with alloy formation being required. > > > Does anyone know anything about the formation process of the Case cell > catalyst? Is it possible that small amounts of C migrate into the Pd during > production? Small amounts of C surely migrate into the Pd. However, C has a very low solubility in Pd so that the amount would be very small. Regards, Ed From vortex-l-request eskimo.com Sun Feb 4 15:06:06 2001 Received: (from smartlst localhost) by mx1.eskimo.com (8.9.1a/8.8.8) id PAA09144; Sun, 4 Feb 2001 15:00:58 -0800 Resent-Date: Sun, 4 Feb 2001 15:00:58 -0800 Message-ID: <3A7DDF8D.E5CAD5A5 earthlink.net> Date: Sun, 04 Feb 2001 16:02:37 -0700 From: Rich Murray X-Mailer: Mozilla 4.74 [en] (Win98; U) X-Accept-Language: en MIME-Version: 1.0 Newsgroups: sci.physics.fusion,sci.physics To: Vortex-L eskimo.com Subject: Harris: Bernoulli's Law: how airplanes really fly 1.29.01 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Resent-Message-ID: <"HDdwN3.0.nE2.fyTVw" mx1> Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/40579 X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com Status: O X-Status: Harris: how airplanes really fly 1.29.01 Subject: The Physical Universe: Best Science Writers? Date: Mon, 29 Jan 2001 02:03:21 "GMT" From: physics.guide ABOUT.COM David Harris To: PHYSICS MCLIST.ABOUT.COM ------The Physical Universe------- January 28, 2001 Vol. 2 No. Fluid Dynamics Links * Misinterpretations of Bernoulli's Law The way Bernoulli's Law is often taught and explained in textbooks is misleading and sometimes incorrect. This article goes into detail about the problem and explains some alternative ways of thinking about Bernoulli's Law. * Encyclopaedia Britannica on Bernoulli's Law A good discussion of Bernoulli's Law including derivations and a good way to think about the Law (rather than the misleading ways mentioned in the previous article). * How Airplanes Really Fly An essay that debunks the myth that lift on an airplane wing is due to a longer travel path over the wing than under the wing. Find these links at http://physics.about.com/cs/fluiddynamics/index.htm ****************************************************************** From vortex-l-request eskimo.com Mon Feb 5 08:17:44 2001 Received: (from smartlst localhost) by mx1.eskimo.com (8.9.1a/8.8.8) id IAA22694; Mon, 5 Feb 2001 08:11:11 -0800 Resent-Date: Mon, 5 Feb 2001 08:11:11 -0800 From: FZNIDARSIC aol.com Message-ID: Date: Mon, 5 Feb 2001 10:55:38 EST Subject: is this for real? To: vortex-l eskimo.com MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="US-ASCII" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-Mailer: AOL 5.0 for Windows sub 128 Resent-Message-ID: <"RT87U3.0.KY5.T2jVw" mx1> Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/40580 X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com Status: O X-Status: PWTC - POWER TECHNOLOGY INC Exchange: OTCBB Delay: at least 15 minutes Last Price: 230.13 at 10:21 EST Change: Up 229.40 (+31424.66%) High: 781.25 at 9:31 EST Low: 230.13 at 10:21 EST Open: 781.25 Previous Close: 0.73 on 2/2 Volume: 78,800 Shares Outstanding: 18,877,000 Market Cap.: 4,344,164,010 Currency Units: US Dollar Confirm all data with your broker or financial advisor before trading. Data by: S&P ComStock Want to send this story to another AOL member? Click on the heart at the top of this window. Power Technology, Inc. Announces New Battery Test Results; Power Technology's Grid Structure Delivers Higher Charge Capacity LAS VEGAS--(BUSINESS WIRE)--Jan. 25, 2001--Power Technology, Inc. (OTCBB:PWTC), today announced that BC Research, Inc.'s (BCRI) Chemical and Environmental Process Group, located in Vancouver, BC, has just released the results of their latest experiments and the results obtained using Power Technology's patented reticulated lead foams employed in flooded lead-acid batteries. These experiments were performed to assess the performance of Power Technology's "second generation" reticulated foam in direct comparison with the grid design currently used in conventional flooded, single cell lead-acid batteries. Critical measurement criteria, such as delivered capacity; specific energy and specific power, were normalized based upon the paste weight in order to carry out a straightforward comparison with the data obtained by using other pastes such as Bipolar Power's proprietary lead-acid battery paste. *T TEST RESULTS Discharge Actual Specific Specific "C" rate Capacity Energy Power Ah/Kg paste Wh/Kg paste W/Kg paste --------- ----------- ----------- ---------- PWTC's Reticulated Grid 2.75h 19.1 35.2 13.0 Standard grid 2.40h 6.2 11.2 4.2 For definitions, see Glossary at end of release. Correspondingly, the charging capacity per total initial paste weight was about 90% higher for Power Technology's foam, e.g.: 20.8 Ah/Kg paste as compared to only 10.9 Ah/Kg paste for the standard grid. This increase in charging capacity per paste weight represents an important step forward for the Company's second-generation grid structure. Test results further indicated that Power Technology's reticulated structure, because of its high specific area, allows for a significantly higher charge capacity than a standard grid of similar geometric area. Furthermore, the advantage of Power's reticulated lead structure lies not only in its ability to hold a larger quantity of paste but also in the intricate interaction between the three-dimensional grid matrix and the applied paste. In its testing, B.C.R.I. employed a novel float charging protocol, modified from standard industry practice. Using this new approach, B.C.R.I. found that standard charging techniques "undercharged" Power Technology's reticulated grid. The resulting charging protocol is referred to as the "extended two-step float charge." The standard grid could not withstand the modified charging technique. Power Technology's reticulated battery, when charged using this extended two-step float charge method, provided the following data: -0- Discharge Actual Capacity Specific Energy Specific Power "C" rate Wh/Kg-paste Wh/Kg-paste W/Kg-paste 3.8h 26.4 52.7 13.1 Commented Lee Balak, Power Technology's President and Chief Executive Officer, "We are energized and excited by these latest test findings. We are continuing to investigate and develop additional ways of increasing the power-to-energy ratio to 20w/Wh in order to meet the requirements of the hybrid and electric vehicle market. We will focus our efforts towards manufacturing the reticulated structure by alternative methods so as to compete head-on with the more exotic chemistries." Power Technology, Inc is a Las Vegas-based technology development company, which holds several patents in the power generation and power storage fields, and is working to provide innovative and practical battery technology solutions for commercial, government, and industrial applications worldwide. Glossary: Ah: Amp hour Charging Capacity: applied charging current X charging time. Express in Ah. Actual (or Delivered) Capacity: discharged (or delivered) current X discharge time Expressed in Ah. C-rate: the rate at which a battery with an actual (or rated) capacity ("C") is discharged. The number represents the discharge time in hours. E.g. C/5 means the battery was discharged for 5 hours. For a battery rated at a capacity of 100 Ah, the discharge rate C/5 means that the battery was discharged for 5 hours at 20 A current. Power: Calculated as discharge current X average voltage during discharge. Specific Power (or Power Density): the power delivered by a battery divided by the total weight of the battery (including plates, plastic case, electrolyte, etc.). Expressed in W/kg) Specific Energy (or Energy Density): the energy supplied by a battery divided by the total weight of the battery. Expressed in Wh/kg. The energy released by a battery can be calculated as the discharge current X discharge time X average voltage during use. Watt = Ampere X Volt. Wh: Watt hour Certain statements in this news release may constitute "forward looking" statements within the meaning of section 21E of the Securities Act of 1934. Such forward looking statements involve risks, uncertainties, and other factors, which may cause the actual results, performance or achievement expressed or implied by such forward looking statement to differ. URL: http://www.powerpwtc.com CONTACT: Power Technology, Inc. For Investor Information: Investor Communications Company 888/345-0434 or For Product Information: Princeton Research 702/251-7163 - voice 702/251-7165 - fax KEYWORD: NEVADA BW0344 JAN 25,2001 9:05 PACIFIC 12:05 EASTERN From vortex-l-request eskimo.com Mon Feb 5 10:57:53 2001 Received: (from smartlst localhost) by mx1.eskimo.com (8.9.1a/8.8.8) id KAA20535; Mon, 5 Feb 2001 10:38:12 -0800 Resent-Date: Mon, 5 Feb 2001 10:38:12 -0800 Message-ID: <000401c08faa$e8a95e40$3b8f85ce fjsparber> Reply-To: "Frederick Sparber" From: "Frederick Sparber" To: Subject: Re: An Argument for Electrochemical Energy Storage Systems Date: Mon, 5 Feb 2001 11:36:00 -0800 MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: multipart/mixed; boundary="----=_NextPart_000_0005_01C08F67.D04721E0" X-Priority: 3 X-MSMail-Priority: Normal X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook Express 5.00.2615.200 X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V5.00.2615.200 Resent-Message-ID: <"btfZ32.0.W05.HClVw" mx1> Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/40581 X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com Status: O X-Status: This is a multi-part message in MIME format. ------=_NextPart_000_0005_01C08F67.D04721E0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Possible pathways to beat the 11 to 14 watt-hrs/pound of lead-acid storage batteries. http://www.trlinc.com/energy/paper-1/paper-1.htm FJS ------=_NextPart_000_0005_01C08F67.D04721E0 Content-Type: application/octet-stream; name="An Argument for Electrochemical Energy Storage Systems.url" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Content-Disposition: attachment; filename="An Argument for Electrochemical Energy Storage Systems.url" [DEFAULT] BASEURL=http://www.trlinc.com/energy/paper-1/paper-1.htm [InternetShortcut] URL=http://www.trlinc.com/energy/paper-1/paper-1.htm Modified=00DC1990AA8FC0017F ------=_NextPart_000_0005_01C08F67.D04721E0-- From vortex-l-request eskimo.com Mon Feb 5 11:24:33 2001 Received: (from smartlst localhost) by mx1.eskimo.com (8.9.1a/8.8.8) id LAA09311; Mon, 5 Feb 2001 11:23:47 -0800 Resent-Date: Mon, 5 Feb 2001 11:23:47 -0800 Message-ID: <000a01c08fad$f8cd6b60$3b8f85ce fjsparber> Reply-To: "Frederick Sparber" From: "Frederick Sparber" To: Subject: High power density module Date: Mon, 5 Feb 2001 11:57:15 -0800 MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: multipart/mixed; boundary="----=_NextPart_000_0015_01C08F6A.C86BFEC0" X-Priority: 3 X-MSMail-Priority: Normal X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook Express 5.00.2615.200 X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V5.00.2615.200 Resent-Message-ID: <"GNLL01.0.yG2.0tlVw" mx1> Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/40582 X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com Status: O X-Status: This is a multi-part message in MIME format. ------=_NextPart_000_0015_01C08F6A.C86BFEC0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit http://www.trlinc.com/energy/paper-3/paper-3.htm ------=_NextPart_000_0015_01C08F6A.C86BFEC0 Content-Type: application/octet-stream; name="High power density module.url" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Content-Disposition: attachment; filename="High power density module.url" [DEFAULT] BASEURL=http://www.trlinc.com/energy/paper-3/paper-3.htm [InternetShortcut] URL=http://www.trlinc.com/energy/paper-3/paper-3.htm Modified=40D03DD0AD8FC0011A ------=_NextPart_000_0015_01C08F6A.C86BFEC0-- From vortex-l-request eskimo.com Mon Feb 5 12:05:55 2001 Received: (from smartlst localhost) by mx1.eskimo.com (8.9.1a/8.8.8) id LAA23390; Mon, 5 Feb 2001 11:54:21 -0800 Resent-Date: Mon, 5 Feb 2001 11:54:21 -0800 Message-ID: <002501c08fae$f8da2020$3b8f85ce fjsparber> Reply-To: "Frederick Sparber" From: "Frederick Sparber" To: Subject: Re: Synergy Vol 3 No 1 ZBB super battery goes mobile Date: Mon, 5 Feb 2001 12:04:54 -0800 MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: multipart/related; type="multipart/alternative"; boundary="----=_NextPart_000_0019_01C08F6B.DA468060" X-Priority: 3 X-MSMail-Priority: Normal X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook Express 5.00.2615.200 X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V5.00.2615.200 Resent-Message-ID: <"QVSD83.0.Ij5.hJmVw" mx1> Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/40583 X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com Status: O X-Status: This is a multi-part message in MIME format. ------=_NextPart_000_0019_01C08F6B.DA468060 Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary="----=_NextPart_001_001A_01C08F6B.DA468060" ------=_NextPart_001_001A_01C08F6B.DA468060 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="Windows-1252" Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable Synergy Vol 3 No 1: ZBB super battery goes mobile =20 ZBB super battery goes mobile=20 Volume 3 No 1 Autumn 1999 =20 =20 =20 =20 =20 other resources at Murdoch=20 =20 =20 =20 The revolutionary, Murdoch-developed Zinc-Bromine Battery (ZBB) has = managed to power a golf buggy twice as far as conventional batteries = have been able to do. =20 ZBB engineer Bjorn Jonshagen (left) and Chief Executive = Officer of ZBB Energy Corporation Rob Parry take the ZBB-powered buggy = for a spin.=20 It's the latest application for the battery which is being = developed on campus through a commercial partnership between the = University and ZBB Energy Corporation.=20 The battery powered a Yamaha electric golf car 80 kilometres = on a single charge -- twice the range that a lead acid battery could = achieve.=20 While the new application was designed specifically for a = 48volt golf car, ZBB says the door is open for a broad range of mobile = electric applications, including wheel chairs, bicycles, tricycles and = cars.=20 Research and development for the ZBB technology is based at = Murdoch while the manufacturing facilities are in Milwaukee in the USA.=20 =20 Further information=20 ZBB Battery Project=20 Bjorn Jonshagen Telephone (08) 9360 2754 email bjorn central.murdoch.edu.au =20 =20 =20 Volume 3 No 1, Autumn 1999 All material may be used without permission but correct reference = to persons quoted and Murdoch University is requested. Document author: Office of Community Relations, Murdoch University Document creation date: 24/03/1999 Expiry date: N/A HTML last modified: 25/05/1999 Modified by: Peter Roots, Publications Assistant = (p_roots central.murdoch.edu.au) Authorised by: Lachlan McCrudden, Director, Office of Community = Relations (lachlan central.murdoch.edu.au) Copyright =A9 Murdoch University 1999: Disclaimer and Copyright = Notice URL: http://wwwcomm.murdoch.edu.au/synergy/0301/zbb.html =20 ------=_NextPart_001_001A_01C08F6B.DA468060 Content-Type: text/html; charset="Windows-1252" Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable Synergy Vol 3 No 1: ZBB super battery goes = mobile
 
3DSynergy

ZBB super battery goes mobile

Volume = 3 No=20 1
Autumn 1999
3DContents=20
other resources at=20 Murdoch
3DResearch=20
 The revolutionary, Murdoch-developed Zinc-Bromine Battery = (ZBB) has=20 managed to power a golf buggy twice as far as conventional = batteries have=20 been able to do.
ZBB engineer Bjorn Jonshagen (left) and = Chief=20 Executive Officer of ZBB Energy Corporation Rob Parry take = the=20 ZBB-powered buggy for a=20 = spin.
      = It's=20 the latest application for the battery which is being developed on = campus=20 through a commercial partnership between the University and ZBB = Energy=20 Corporation.
      The battery = powered a=20 Yamaha electric golf car 80 kilometres on a single charge -- twice = the=20 range that a lead acid battery could achieve.=20
      While the new application was = designed=20 specifically for a 48volt golf car, ZBB says the door is open for = a broad=20 range of mobile electric applications, including wheel chairs, = bicycles,=20 tricycles and cars.
      Research = and=20 development for the ZBB technology is based at Murdoch while the=20 manufacturing facilities are in Milwaukee in the USA.
Further=20 information
ZBB Battery Project
Bjorn Jonshagen
Telephone (08) 9360 2754
email bjorn@central.murdoch.edu.au= =20
=

3DTop

Volume 3 No 1, Autumn 1999
All material may be = used=20 without permission but correct reference to persons quoted and = Murdoch=20 University is requested.
Document author: Office of Community = Relations,=20 Murdoch = University
Document=20 creation date: 24/03/1999
Expiry date: N/A
HTML last = modified:=20 25/05/1999
Modified by: Peter Roots, Publications Assistant (p_roots@central.murdoch.ed= u.au)
Authorised=20 by: Lachlan McCrudden, Director, Office of Community Relations (lachlan@central.murdoch.ed= u.au)
Copyright=20 =A9 Murdoch University 1999: Disclaimer and = Copyright=20 Notice
URL: = http://wwwcomm.murdoch.edu.au/synergy/0301/zbb.html=20
------=_NextPart_001_001A_01C08F6B.DA468060-- ------=_NextPart_000_0019_01C08F6B.DA468060 Content-Type: image/gif; name="dot_clear.gif" Content-Transfer-Encoding: base64 Content-Location: http://wwwcomm.murdoch.edu.au/synergy/images/dot_clear.gif R0lGODlhAQABAIAAAP///wAAACH5BAEAAAAALAAAAAABAAEAAAICRAEAOw== ------=_NextPart_000_0019_01C08F6B.DA468060 Content-Type: image/gif; name="synergy.gif" Content-Transfer-Encoding: base64 Content-Location: http://wwwcomm.murdoch.edu.au/synergy/0301/images/synergy.gif R0lGODlhWgAeALP/APLl68iRrNChuJkzZp9AcKZNeaxZg7Rpj7t3mcGEo9atwt27zOPI1uvY4vjx 9f///ywAAAAAWgAeAEAE/3DISau9OOvN+1DPwyQHAj4O4a1suxoMI1hNKC2hESJUyFAM2yDkiBlj Eh/F8WhQao8J7qF78FyYQGihwmILCkCoIShMtA+ud81urxOheDFgHhBCAMk9PYk3EAdTeQNVfwhQ B0lxIQdwTQgIYjZ7g3sLKwkLkgALiRQIeBZKE0FRZ6UNAV1DIhUEAmIACKWfoW63uLm6u7wYCQxM TWW9xC22EwUBAQdQVwMCIQmKDAYLTA3Sn6jZ0zAPia/XszbNE9AP3BsECAJQcQEDjvAgDj2tpEI1 gxI1Tqz7A5gAhCJB3gcUHk4AWHYgABR4EoI9UFBhlARa8bYAQkOR1Y8JjtQMuVsSpyOuAgdKGShG 4QRENJcGoFTJsqbNmzhz6tzJkyUBd4scOOtZLFaFE+mI8oLCIMDKCmhm8AvRBY/EEBAHoFlk0oek REAfSNIaQuoAKKs0BLgaR+oUM46cEVk19uCDOgVCdCzZpVSdKqbeZrTiBYEgO1sGiDHpEYiQRZBN WWyMz5QlxRM94ElLQIw/R0Hq2ft4UUgQgBXvlb4rIa+QwaFX/Iyst2WcoZRXTwjbpKrqqYvqSjhB eJdrsztriG5ddtdW0jUNsEVR57nS69iza98eAQA7 ------=_NextPart_000_0019_01C08F6B.DA468060 Content-Type: image/gif; name="contents.gif" Content-Transfer-Encoding: base64 Content-Location: http://wwwcomm.murdoch.edu.au/synergy/images/contents.gif R0lGODlhUAAWALP/AP///7/a1LPTzIC1qmammECQfzOJdgBrVABWQwBAMgAgGQAAAAAAAAAAAAAA AAAAACwAAAAAUAAWAEAE/1DISau9OOvNhRKEcYxjAQDBkB7BOQxnMMLnDAzH6+L7UByn26hWUKF8 rRTgRzogEp9Qc0qtWq/YrHb0jIq24LA43AV9SS0cyQRonn4wXMtFqg3b7jbbnhMemEB4JGUECYaH iImKi4yNjo+PXgaTlJWWl5iZmpucmYRnUy9qJS+Afz5rqKKiOatwo62nrjOoU59TfDawcX00RX6B dUFCLijBuiNzKKZOUGZUNHQFysvIf3R3wkE8gnMkvNPDzLdj5ebmhATq6+zt7u/w8fLz8s5S5/j5 WOT6/f7834bhCBckABNfyIbVUMhNRrZoLvYA42IPFIuJbPLAKdhLmMc8b2uOdQzEbFBFXIKsIYvD hle2O9uCpeHjMscchya9TGGTYsUcHcZGxnwZSNQPO9ECDnSRxNbJKqxS1SIFqAigF99mYc2aqupW pzr9ic33CYHZs2jTql3Ltq3bt22dKZhLt67du3jz6t3Lt6+CCAA7 ------=_NextPart_000_0019_01C08F6B.DA468060 Content-Type: image/gif; name="dot_white.gif" Content-Transfer-Encoding: base64 Content-Location: http://wwwcomm.murdoch.edu.au/synergy/images/dot_white.gif R0lGODlhAQABAID/AP///wAAACwAAAAAAQABAEABATIAOw== ------=_NextPart_000_0019_01C08F6B.DA468060 Content-Type: image/gif; name="research.gif" Content-Transfer-Encoding: base64 Content-Location: http://wwwcomm.murdoch.edu.au/synergy/images/research.gif R0lGODdhUAAWALMAAP///7/a1LPTzIC1qmammECQfzOJdgBrVABWQwBAMgAgGQAAAAAAAAAAAAAA AAAAACwAAAAAUAAWAAAE/1DISau9OOvNhRJEKI5kaZ5oqqrJRxhwLM90bd94fiMtaBzAoHBILBqP yKSR5/opn9CoNMj0Ta/YbPVFHAC+gQLwSx4cCoGv+UBWB8lBL1gMRIMP3jUbsOxxh3Jwe2WDX2Nt a4GJbXx4jI56hkVbTkJ5B2lmkkBeAWd0m0GZAJ6QmACaqJymh31NXaqXagMDBXK0b6i0oHySl3md gKS0cq5WwgHFhappgoxmv7HDhpeWjKFClLBkvMR0eJl73qfJaZ6BAGLB1sm02FR+lXGo4XtCaGLh 2Nd8efVueFjZmxQPVi1Jz64dKtOJWKY8BXw9qjaQiDZhZvQhckSKV5l6jkySMVN1ptk5khWHXMzC suWRlS5jxoQpsyYWmjZzQqGEoKfPn0CDCh1KtKhRon4SKF3KtKnTp1CjSp069YOCq1izat3KtavX r2DDKogAADs= ------=_NextPart_000_0019_01C08F6B.DA468060 Content-Type: image/gif; name="webster.gif" Content-Transfer-Encoding: base64 Content-Location: http://wwwcomm.murdoch.edu.au/synergy/images/webster.gif R0lGODdhUAAWALMAAP///7/a1LPTzIC1qmammECQfzOJdgBrVABWQwBAMgAgGQAAAAAAAAAAAAAA AAAAACwAAAAAUAAWAAAE/1DISau9OOvNhRJEKI5kaZ5oqqrJRxhwLM90bd94fiMtaBzAoHBILBqP yKSR5/opn9CoNMj0Ta/YbPV1HAAGwEAA6B14AWjA4YwGk9GBwiGdntPBd+XWWSwAxnZhAAVsaGt0 g4dpeIh2i45tSXtIhmeMh25vYGV2cpmBQIZChn5qSJNHAYOWfpt/Zq4BA6pycANyQaJ2sLWmuks9 XF1fd1+KdYWJpZGhppDGbaqfRahGftJeqm+yZpgHpUGEuuNfZr1wesF8RotsmkKc4LLf5LnOzeCS 6klnzW7Jx2whykTukSFp+pokuSYIF8BCcb6pMmbPnkE1+Y5Uy8KxIzCFHjtDijywcaTJKSVPqkzX BIHLlzBjypxJs6bNmzWDJdjJs6fPn0CDCh1KlOgHBUiTKl3KtKnTp1CjSlUQAQA7 ------=_NextPart_000_0019_01C08F6B.DA468060 Content-Type: image/gif; name="contacts.gif" Content-Transfer-Encoding: base64 Content-Location: http://wwwcomm.murdoch.edu.au/synergy/images/contacts.gif R0lGODdhUAAWALMAAP///7/a1LPTzIC1qmammECQfzOJdgBrVABWQwBAMgAgGQAAAAAAAAAAAAAA AAAAACwAAAAAUAAWAAAE/1DISau9OOvNhRJEKI5kaZ5oqqrJRxhwLM90bd94fiMtaBzAoHBILBqP yKSR5/opn9CoNMj0Ta/YbPWV7XqTWydxACgXgIVAOXAGkgNB8uBQrgPc5Xkwvabb73wAekJhRX9z ZId4AHAHcn52QJGLdZCVf0SFQ29nBWd5i5Rnj5J3aIxqbaCOQWV4cJ6ZPVxDZkJvQmqIjK6kfnGC j7hEro55g4SzYq2mwMjCgmoBvsW/v75C1WqVQ5rZAG2vuYLGc2vkpafBZsO1zW663cpjjJ2f6Il4 cwV1g8WJdszhY4aGzYF4yZoYCmhMUTkg2/yZOjYgH8Bqxf68A+JtU502gUwM6guC8Be/d7ZCElwk MqGVLzBjHugos+YUmjZzKgmDoKfPn0CDCh1KtKhRorMSKF3KtKnTp1CjSp069YOCq1izat3KtavX r2DDKogAADs= ------=_NextPart_000_0019_01C08F6B.DA468060 Content-Type: image/jpeg; name="zbb.jpeg" Content-Transfer-Encoding: base64 Content-Location: http://wwwcomm.murdoch.edu.au/synergy/0301/images/zbb.jpeg /9j/4AAQSkZJRgABAQEA4QDhAAD/2wBDAAYEBQYFBAYGBQYHBwYIChAKCgkJChQODwwQFxQYGBcU FhYaHSUfGhsjHBYWICwgIyYnKSopGR8tMC0oMCUoKSj/2wBDAQcHBwoIChMKChMoGhYaKCgoKCgo KCgoKCgoKCgoKCgoKCgoKCgoKCgoKCgoKCgoKCgoKCgoKCgoKCgoKCgoKCj/wgARCACCANIDASIA AhEBAxEB/8QAGwAAAQUBAQAAAAAAAAAAAAAABQACAwQGAQf/xAAYAQADAQEAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAA AQIDBP/aAAwDAQACEAMQAAAB0hWld6Mh+I2uQ0gxqcdqJqHJ6S+AyoYogWkD109FdyDQ2AgfZQct Ab8VaZEk4WUIrghELvUOtirAGlnkh/bc7BYS2y5zPofmxKp2wo5zHTOIXpNY5QO2IrMo5FSGd0Tp eaRvOUrxxjM6hkqFQgi60KlG/WuUrKCa8x8VkzFXTUgGL9Dz1SyqN0tIaYpxhsylO9yb5CNk2+em 4xuOgAZar9GRW/DbzoBd5WpNijfSa6+PAqs8kaJk74qIYUAUpigplItbAEk6JEKbFbIjiGWlWO1l 2tNXpcALauFrkTOQDy5RxoLS4NPEGrud5Wl6BYpUj5QFaArBTamREksk0TLZl1LhwJXaPGMgbmnY e6GuJdFnt6i9wCWy0vRB64acbwCz0IWQy8VTlC6PbPOqwrknObsYaZqPRQsD53dh6WXfowlTLRdo mZc6hISgfSGSebWvRnhDctcx1CXiaCkmsC/l9QMaxHNM3bPOrYJOpYCyphn3nVInWYTQo1wsnXi8 SRpTbZ19vifQs6m7FJjop43py17CTifxgTOr1BEaPnTto3YfPuqdgsihyVFX0iSFqafwtkJPT3eZ lJqaEfXudfpQmHivXbHkRua9IkxhvOzrmdzoBelHaSUHy+aVPWQu6MrcovqDSCoCUCQKokxtFJLr 0gIQJBo8ilNcalU8ekj1k0ly9NcIlaz2US2xlmSuV1IcaSF//8QAKRAAAgIBBAIBAwUBAQAAAAAA AgMBBAAFERITFCEiECMxICQyM0E0Ff/aAAgBAQABBQJKpFjZGBaQsSw+VnToDyQfEKuOAE1d601o WdSmgmD2Krs8z5BYTE9kHg5YjirbkB+w+M5G8ssM6sEJFCzmM7YPKPrALZmCJc2jzjqGStI8O1pj hF4AUypcvsKQpMTZWqDsGeAW6+Wb5ywbDIyLk55SiwWCWEWK9RFgpdzhsQPGFTE5eX1tFq5ziyck pMy5kpUrJWp8mrQ3qZWNbTObEmwHbcNs45T9Hv8AWInOO+bRGRG883gFXvktSXMNSmHLuTxyoluz z5HJlXGLKtvizLHHhaXKsixC68jtlB/ScM6huXuCH27BTTgWQpEjYKnzyaBYlXM4pjhoXEBwsVyL gwCg1VymGW92aitvQsrIESeRlIqGZgOO6pyqZuBxmtKHdg6Qj42aINWyCVLLHK6hnPHFEyifVRUg I+h1S2+LFF7III+3vlP1XUHY2mJwRBGXUCNXta6sRTFGDdkf2/AVCylsoQmLUkKdIQLmWXjVVILd moVZnUJQ19tGnTzJJeTXmfKA4yPxqq/3GmjuQlxgiHjtkxIQR8CtSAKtgJ2GrhGBMKpd8CqkHbmo D9oUt4huwdTLanXAaa7NgpYh+w/31doSA+4njOpkEZU333nLAjCagfturlDp2ySkZtq41lyE1Uug krr9QNsrfbshOWAICqRAp1CI4IewUadv0X19wymzZwqTwKKnBdV8rrOPsGr8VCXLUWlsNRkcYn0y IYubfXOzynyCW2zXbzen9rT3KlXDrs6ozdMViXVbXkhGtCQN/JWpfJNr3aUcprhYLs58sVZYzF2m nFm0Vk76/cMmRWW9m1PEH/bFZz4mo2SCu6R4wU5pFc2vZbZFAbrRxNoi1LUbMpNht4q1IWirnK73 HrbAmd8Z6rP/AEM/5pOfEXsoeXWQ+j1LdQFJi1D2kZJMMa34MfJwLCnT7TLJjP5DhEaMcBVFks0R NSWImwFfWtXYLXWLcV6ixbRfB7xqrPugwCrvs9qHSBOsSaUpXLAhRmTN4Gf56tB7kuxaynMjBsna eRFJyM02dlUS+cTk7xi4ZlR3OoDwztrumDWA9kBAuUR/iNQCWOlVhRwxsK7NssAFhXRC46xjCrrL GLiR8EAxLupCvlWjK8iCbcicU6jXl4+8+GvAqLjFIzqmY8f1AbZKt8ZTGcXWgPoxAlPoWV34TJ5G TCk1HEWvTUqg1nbYiKFjyUEsTixVWKw/M10llgFgFFfTV+sT9Pubhzic5Z+c4ximdaZ1BMYi8AZ/ 6yMi47JuvGJ1J+Dqz9rTCsWNDmePEd7E/bIfnz+Ix32v0R9S/Eeoy4uW14c2I7mDkvOJ3KMh7NjZ xjsZhZyytX72ULXjGl6mjZ/rt7TncM5o4cm9y+Ylg+/pH1KxYnEkUxluwNcDmeyD2ztDBeOd68ks 5e8iPekFHkYJSMvtusVxH4T+SLwdMmd8VZcrE6y4cXrisr6jXfMYRbQcnOHJ8QLaL9jyLUTvk/oj P8n8T+Zz/IyJ2l/plaN7evfw/QP8tGKSpsxn9dyZibzD8PI+n+T+M//EAB8RAAICAwADAQEAAAAA AAAAAAABAhEQEiEgMUFhcf/aAAgBAwEBPwFEiJVnDY2LLxZeLwyLrC6alGoxH0++EV9ZJHXhHdvO z4M/omIQ+FlYf4a2N8NyyxsssTJOyPstjlwbJPmdTUaKPeNTQ6UdGUUWjhF9HiHlubG7z6NsXqKY pLMpVm/KXvK9DJeH/8QAJBEAAgICAgICAgMAAAAAAAAAAAECERIhEDETUSBBA0IwMmH/2gAIAQIB AT8BfZCj8i2Wo6FZgjxmDQ4soxKGr2Yf6WL2iUbE39IeuzNJmaPIhOx7NpH0Lh9k5fqiMvZpD6JF LArhvZ3xe6MV7P2I19jV9DQyXZFNooc+juyPtmdEY7PGmNWUJKytFWSRFUTeikuxR2KJBbHrjPRm KRY9D6M0eRFoyRoi6LMjFmyS0Lj8nr40eI8aPFH4Y8VkOA4vjsjG3/DHrmX9iBH4f//EADwQAAED AwEFBAgFAwMFAAAAAAEAAhEDEiExIjJBUXEQE2GBBCNCYpGhsfAgM1LB4XKS0RQwojVDc4Lx/9oA CAEBAAY/AoHzJz5FC7SdEbCRs4T4iOEeCpx10VNz4aLdJn5qGsbfoBboFfElpyCNCOCfcSSdp+c8 EathGMcITnXFx0gDmt1SGhse6sEHos6qW/mNzMItJNpEI6+SlUyPMFVNrLjj3fuCrATkzJyowYyo cXDOYwnUXESzIHBFrW8BoOxpGLdeiLZ3uMaIs2myN7Seit5ZaVc7onDRtxNtuDk8fMIVZlrfZYU4 vgB+13Z4eCik0dSsnHJPbGcfX8G98VtNHksyOq2XB3mtkaIl0j5qt3rAXMMBvXRTSLtSNk5UXEAO 3R0BQZU3g45PHxQq0ztNEwu9GyCM+KmankP5XeMEDj1KJfULAeXFCTcGiYlU3WG5s55hB+qFSmQ5 0QVUFJgDGmMHVS8OA7X/ANJWezH4NkHyClgcRHyQ7yy2Mwmlu7V2COZ4Kjstcxo15pw7rLva5oPq P6D90T3okutDeKGRUaZMA7vNDe+AQvbsDRa7Jxsp1T0eJiccE/HrHTELPkuc/VOe543jLUDRy5+6 vWXHPEKjNN3rJJJ4eCGZZwwi4O1zop2U1pxcCVDnGeEIxTh3C44Tm02hgt3k2mxjg/RwTm09wiE8 uPsNI816ObtkfX7hRUa7A4N+KmmzI97ip70if05T6npD7+XNYbB/RqVnvZ/9F60VGlw4BDuqYGs7 Qwn3S48eKNSpTwnbR7+SblD9l4Vak9xNN+ANYJTKVR82zATodmeSa0HQYgprgZaRz05IBGl6O6wN 1woruBLhAjU/cqHm48V6yMceCa0Yc4mJMQg8T3eW/JPacGb/AAz9lN9qCQGn4/sqjgfyyMCOfy/h eqc0uGDs6qS5xvI1fw1+ituA8JgobeWYuJ1W5Ibk+KGG+ZhDu/qi4OAgE/wqtS0BrhoDz4Jg8kxz eGdN5UqkeqqOaOiqCm0u2ir6rmzyb0Xd4MZ8lTHvfum02x+n7+HYSRhydsnTULaOESVXczZNOSIV GQcEYb/jnqqdU7swen3Ce5wGnEaKlRbHqxc8nPRVQ7ci4E6jnHjoml+r90T4K1tTZA4cUfhtZ+9V UDXZB2hHCUIbUj+hyZUacTOU61wzjqop6lNcYLSzQoulpMwGxou8uucM44ff7qBganr2aZhXcluR 7QMaIJ5c24RMJgI8cGZQ7wC6eSda6Ruz4qpdhxRcx88SmVHTLhtiIvEKo2rLixm346rv65Iqu2nH kmub+WfVDG994TA1uz7XgT4raaLRoRkJoZbETA5cFWc0xMNIH6pyqYFHAaPbCpuFipNYGw19xCir UsbyarHXOZ8QnXscX83aItfNlwA+Ke7QjxQBU+8R8j2EOPxQRb+oLuGGC02wCsemtY8jcLcr/SVi 192A5uPjyQtbvDNs8OaeGiTB4KmH08gRa/GirUjTd3LzE8PvKcxlNz3cwFQtp7V20DmE1zGm4aTx Himza99w4eR+SbTabbmt8zqqTxMlxPlgD9lW/rKoNbGmqFOu0Z9oI93a4c5Rtbp7yxT0MaqjTNPF 13wH8oQ/JxrotPNB0TnRCM5QKpu4p5aI4TKYGiDxWqFX2GnVVa0MvY6PDgqTq9NvdVNCFV9HtFrR Mqg0NB7x0dFVIpiW7ud5NDG+vJixDvIu8Ee9ds6xzjK7wGkWX29B9gIw++Wg6yBlVf6ivRz7qnjo qbbrTrCrE6SFAu5leiFph2T9E5npGXDioaeHggSR5aqGFAS44RLQy5p46I3taGeA7ATl07sYhPBc Jm7yhekz+v8AwvR3VKpdTAa6yPBV31XWgsA+i9GhxDYvujgf/i7xrpLxsg9FR9Jqie83saKQcK2d 5sJzcNqPdMqo65pNTu2taOYOU9wa6CSdVQupUywiGxUJQu2Z0AMps69chNnaLuGf8qGQ5/HX/Kp3 iNeMoVgxx4eSmMdl1JjiOi28eCrUf+5vDKtOeqysoGm10jkFTb6RvkZuVjQdbdFJohztnVonMR9V iQ1uzhpW0c8tT8FYKjC4+zK0RLWsNuPHwR9Uf7cLu+7OMjGQoNE/NejOdBNwyoGib4aZQlumNVBJ HBVSCXOc0gF3BDvnRGCUYMim42nwTkwBsYWYV9EgNad4q59jn87F+TS/tX5bPgtplNh91b5WHCeZ ahpPgt9w6FG64zrOef8An6JlpMNdP/G3sLz6P3k8cLNOvTH6p/hMBqvGzLzHRG304Af+NbXpAiY3 t3xX/UP+X8ogPvj2p1Rd3tJpHB2qtYYfOTgq44doUQ6DzRLRB8MIq7bzwlGGhU2ZmM/ixARvII/B oEb53nfVaOVGWu9Wwg/JaP8AgheWkcimkMHm1ZbT/tW5S+CfUfqVWHDCLva69jhoOylTOhMnp/sa 9rmje4KA8jzW8M8wi4ANPCEbeAwt5qADA3xyt50LeX8J08tfFOkS12qLmPBA18OzotQqlY6boVve Nv5StfxPYKT5DokNjrr5raY8H3o/bsF2XHRvNHn2fln+5G5hz4r8pGEOyHGBzT2a4nslpIPMKxxa 7mdD2gaPj5qTqvV1HAcltsa75LbpvHTKhlTPI9miiQOgRcXu3ZThyKc/2dG9OzX8BRT+ievLtkYK x+lv0VIHIuCp9fwhC4k9UOq+P1Rg8T+y3nZfnOuO09Pwf//EACYQAAICAgEEAgMBAQEAAAAAAAER ACExQVFhcYGRofCxweHREPH/2gAIAQEAAT8hNwAhjL6rPnqIBgAMBRskj9xbYTGVnO3/ALNZx2Yp MrcwaVi1yd8+CVAlMtsL65muBPI7Cxxz2hCFpFDlL0+PiCYLYLCwdhjklJnDg9MKpIUWcneHiFyq hrW9OvQEIYU2Xcq4CB4dFEqAcoYQ4Ay8wAREATYm873n3C48k6VJe4SbsOgxAKXtnFfEYGkbHsfd wqsScKEAMvMBI3RNbd/dxSYQ7CeANkHXWK2hSEllKr89RLzEQCtMv5gkQRmwC2R4694c23AiwMj0 HQGvqgjRAWZsfxn3CODmEorxFjkm4Q5E8RkGOrVB0uGYCsASWPLLuKPhiJdCCwRRDwj9pn7J0QRQ eV/ebr1jIVS6mkLWBDZe3YIpmsHoP3/wazKpgTPtBm0dMoHgb+GfUO9wTVEgjEdleKjFBnnI9IaA faAAHJyYDBxkZC79Nh+myM0niIsEAZv+WYpBIhibsWfOe0KL1qOMj15zMrhkF+FaNE9BCcSITejx DLMbNeDvnfUKFg1ZO+gP4jYAgcGnzjYgpne26nUJrqY9gvBA/cBnpm09p2B253SRngzbfvjzGhMy SCH5/wCDc1Ha6XeMMCI3EScjOynMTDnLzKwo9yU0GJLA5biM2xBbqj7gRAUFUGNjnP4h9Sfco45y +/rCCCySJED4AhBdghCLebyT+4e+KxRMLoK+YMy4DjdmvvfWlYcoCOkLCn+P8gZzrqBV3rvCYhdC IVj2f8h1IEYIJ0yTXf47xMhrtqhAUGqz4fKg0SBBWUAaHWhAa9CyOp/VwlYNsP3tHagwisqeneoR gZRYdGy+SYFHug6oCQBK9RLN1GACB+4Kn88DlARWS43iApK3CzyR2B8wiyr9N9tAO+In0o0ER0zS H48QywUmsh5twwShWwO3q79ZrbjcXy/f+wzdT0ORVNmhi+8EjNyyDHO3WMZXCi6LBEi5SSSokrbM JAnOiBBIqs4O6A9TOuZYy8iPJQkUBPVnpr8xloQhAHnr1iaGVgBBuxkq30hjtVOyEcL7Yh7JFmhL Jxof5LQZPT7+4IFASxQCwPfnuw8QeBPn73jmcK0gg0OVCv8Ao9eYBjtmThrFeB5EcAFEKyHQkk3+ FDhg8oQaCUpeEJNmi3R6a7QsDSRZ8nP2452sEViAPfVLmMmsE5fT1wgcDo4UJ4AjsrCJxQx5QDBz JYy1/EH5BUKloeyyIGzT3wyL5QhUchAAAAYZ3+kSDhsmOd4zgA4mMFClbLeGpnESwXVso7z0fogi LFpL06iXgi7sE8eOs2cEG0NN8R2jATKDW+D6hOAXrQA5jPJrlA+SQOVmX3II7Qk+NwkEF2gGcnUW cIDT20rtQEjq7p8pSiKk1q34h7tbBpJ6g9IINSCO6UISBANwH68QgbEYIsnqZWdIAmOTYJhEIknC xjzHW7doo+BL9uYLFparVfY4aR8INgoxNQ+VLaoXGGFHNsvW4VNJABwspgWWWoa65M0gB+RjAgoI AA1YOtZr/wBj5ktDgEg5A6BH1hgZkLEvQkgAcFZuGHOQJG+VC4XQjY2/UqGQnfVzv+wleiyeePzD tYDhWV7T+mDFhOi+wvtwkBvHgEEfj5SswYvGzyYSCbBDcO0JoZ5X+VAiEDwepeAJngiwu9nHWHAK CiRsXeAjxAVbObcNkLOB/kOV5wEMGaHX744rYurK/wBJlHg62MgZ5v8AMCAIrrS/fkH8ONnUMCEs ucbgRuR7rHavMIiwoJBCLPRE066gasgAgdhs2+gdpWJVdvPOvGIiUgKrfV9IQDhzABkL8atg4bGE IAFepdGF1a+mOEAMZAdCusGdT1uvkdzBEABrIh0UICYaEQA515gdhwA27D5EWBVa6OkEthKyorOs jsD9TyCh4eFhlA531jn0QXUycFgyXVn1n3AOANkCkPlwG0+bcCdBtAEDMLwJsDtx6hUkqtohwDmD oDIhCGsQNLAD7ZdIYj0JkgAwFkB1G7OMGvQzmD0KMptpjTfMIBUrAInBg2NxDDImhQSHQWEeXmIE EQ2SRYF3YFuvWKRV7esLs9DdZz8wkhJWuMwhcBU/E6aGf4hIdgB/mEGWM69HIQTBJ0MDvmCOBWj/ ABMspMl1moRgTIYDjX1n1HyvJQvcgE0OnW4Gsgb5J5cRy9xRjWPUvo8ylgMT+TrBaAjjkh3nrCnQ wDOB/samQi9CP9gRkMw0Z4zDmSlZ3y+I0LPI0mEANlZYEG9Zg0KBAEkXEAGsLqQJk0DUBTzKCWPz Qm83cnxCL8beVGEzZLL194gO0gckBU/7DBKQBqyz/DDKZrxmMMyD4Spfn3AKiqYtXaCkoXuG+kKQ JB1/5GbhIgF5/RhKDF+nMc1MqP8ARAX+pZrNKzubh5loB3RahDz/ANyLiE7Cm/1EWECibXGBQbqk VgMAanEnoFdKf/sQ0sd5nI6FdtiKhiQYI2IMCYA5FIM/ycTA5ocN/esCWAtBIIe37ENqBlOe0FYc UwFyoGxAMSoVs43DUYwNkQ63CZEAXOGodnQoGJKHOUyDMfAOp5hBlNivTZ7/AORHuiD35gR2yIo4 WBlGKoEhsLghNFlyWviHHJWPwjKwgYRDiekxN+h9qOoy16SrfiEkJgvAUGx01CXNgJkcp6fRDxHG CCKQr74hK4poQUEnSzg+ohgKAWQnjtAEAIBQEOFA2BcgEk9FeHD4MpsFl3mBImN4ff44EBAGQo3D CQMjnBY9zLvnAIABXMqZIIlsRCkQaHSgDshJJkFn5+uZgL12f3CAS1YHk/mEyGoNBQ+6hWO1DFBD D6EZKte75go9ixh+x+4UIpCZP8jtKRY4QhLmYKJ39ECDBIRIEfuF+IQ5fYwyB9WxffxAMChr5K/9 p2ELSI32RzkYhsGnh8QFkw2oq6BDv72lCrE0CRIHuEJBSjvRg6ltMPDRx4yUCI5QAl4VLDpqhaXz 8ReJB6DgLNYn8GUIVAUPqBCLR0l/AIMJXxLouBUKaAAwHRNmA8xQCG3KhdDUc6OP7A4pKyI7zBzu NMQBf4oz4ljo6+FHdh4AD/MC6NQy9PUVRGeEhyCRBAlYxgReSsgR50NzGoa1gGQBtx+4YnA/UAdK k/Jf+CASZJBMsr08S51h7FrzrUCCAX1lLiqmmGfhwZluA1AIFxRYgsgwfxMBkjqXNwj5CtTv+4iw zion4QATBgpwBfEBx2Rh2iZA8QiRtDtHVU0IGTXpHGCPrmWMwPARr8GJJVKZC/8AZyFqLy4xDCkY MWvO33tEWXK4u1P6/r3EtD0T9QkFAmf/ABQzUoxgTA06O0SQYZMyYuHTQuuAGgB2hjxCE89Jw8n0 pVlDh2QCG3eDBIAozRn8QYsLM9ki0ZhcFDqQdPuYTcHx3gqMQSAtHVx/I0FnJgrri6twpvn1+oRm EzZO5jwcmPUwM9LQtdVoEFAAywmE0RDVNKKfyzaOYjAqzWiT+pplz6b/AHDjjT1Pr8xcOXpj3/5Q 1K4lh3wYdBT6PWEckoyKLfiHCYQgikGCIIpAWV2QA6CDIO7hFDrTxDvvN/8ANwvZCSUZycw7coRG YOEDBXEgVFVZTl/wyMVY/wCWKVMsc//aAAwDAQACAAMAAAAQZXRgGaY/JATSQ9soQKmHlPSqlvTD ZoBMlc6UIF0g8DnmQYX0uG6uBp/NlNJe3MNx7rYC4wBu4a6AnZGc2ptM2yC5MpLncWjOXAwNn52l AopOZcn/AAwHYo3gQ/nPvfPf/8QAHxEBAQEBAAMBAQADAAAAAAAAAQARIRAxQVFxYbHR/9oACAED AQE/EBhy37nzkp7JxaPUMkpAbZGwnkOc/Lf5Z9lvG1YyCathYWkt/bcM7DE7GK31cdTt39jhcK+p GkaMAOWqbPyACTFz1bZhtv8ALN3bzA5CnJ0y61vWQtZH8h9LEyOOTUJxaOQi1MHuMMYMbs5aoj1C evy6O/ZR5YQRGfd7f48HTLB2CGjzsthwQXgdMs77v7/1/wBj7Xt7k4+QM7EOr4PKoX8y3xL49BI2 dluQQfZHp8emwcttteHx98eyPHqvW9o8/wD/xAAkEQEAAgMAAgEDBQAAAAAAAAABABEhMUEQUWEg 0fBxgaGxwf/aAAgBAgEBPxB2FiDRAcoE6lt0VcG3EuRgizMBuWC4IKiTM0HZSMEKgrpKuIBqCTcZ B7MNjMlEzjpHRxGiG4WV1EamPUoiZKcsqaUUcyjhErmAhqWuBlTsRD7ggL3A9HZRh+Bl0D1LG1mB lFJcCIfEDa5QiCvdwCxBKHkVnRlARC72bn3+8EXK6nMjcRsEmEv3BEQdRvfKY7WK/wAgJk/SKzZF Q1MKdgLzC3BOIuJRs48DBWOiWsy5bL1dS/r+/tHjX5+0WuD+ZsdjbwxzFqKjBqbzALDlYAVPggeN qMxbPGZWLyD2TOoAOTea8VKPL454Hxsm00fo/8QAJRABAQEAAgICAgIDAQEAAAAAAREhADFBUWFx gZGhwbHR8PHh/9oACAEBAAE/ELp6JJUaQNAEC6EkLc2KZToMetRb98AhxlSucUMouaxEIgg5SUIR Bq01tVdq8vtwRKrVAq9COgUvABPYpkDp0g61fIjXqGDhoomRQHaBvRKyZRJTKlEeCD3xppKSQMoC AIaAQnmWhsCrEIgg0EDR4Zp3yFG3L1VRgaxYKygEID6BO/niBSMYus0QK58vzwpT1d+/cfXCCAiP s22T279PHMw6he1VgdK9ikoy4TMroPHbx5664DIXKgb1LI86GNtlT4Jak08cWA4ioIBpBGjivnke hTZo6cFCgaqhJnDBq4Dna0LKvSrCzgY1GYQL1IlqJ3cFxPbGhTfBP0Kdpe0VsqSB18V3QpysQIEC YIuQ6YuI8eta1FC/BeWZqJNTADsIhJIokFUthwMG0BE9aAeQ+lFsSqcDRSgYbzSQG9Mg9+Om+R3l wwFMgYyxz4uGnHVioBGaQpXlGIpwNXRbltUBVFgpCw4GsGkZsSKSkmFADeFx09qYV4IgkAbOJQbY YFoQ7683751nQ16RE/D4GOpXU4ujPHXDCtOdeVqdvxXZ9c1xton7t/rkD0Rpj1af8cd1IQU/I1OK fgBoWP4HBwj1t4iIl2gHoRejoNt7cKsAmYMPVgWhhoRC87BRR1VljBbOnIY3CajoUyEZmCdjWTOg Qikag9ABS8VgYJRKBQiAMWjiaaSCFWQitKAT8T8RpS759Hrk0sXkkwTZIUE9k4CoGkGPrMVRNy+E Xb2cgGRBYCG4YABCYaAAQLSC5kmgiHG7+NoXPRPmx/PXCoGZRBKi0ANFiiOCuUIVnbWQhwSKzil6 5YutWv5XhBG9bnIQ1xQEU2+cOfrmoY9TlX49x4YimVYfs4mNFJQrxS0775NZDgK7+eSUNiLTLMPW /XHckvhtEAY+ungwrVZQRaFRPXjjgI7epS19JCVjOGdlUApATR0aZa7XhUqspqgez6UIWugQC1UW PIAoPRRqglcjyFCB8JUnluHCkvD1u35EcLujzuKxV0HVXfvjFUcEIxxKBoRVXtTnyP0BisFRkNXB zGwG4YkSqIACetapSZDRFJpbBjPVYRfkAWV4vszfXf1w3sEFB1b8F12QYycccCkcCFErRpO/ZH5+ PA8HhGRGvTE4iOBRRMhAh5hjxAzZDEDj3XovSrOOOTIREih8ATTzjyYFbIAVC359cbBwImle9Drv 8eeJ24FrCEgVQketZlb7MEwCtEdvzxvbyjWRIPT8HnDvhWhU6NPQGCN+R3x6GoJVKHagjVEIkIua xwpxNHwJ39OJk8VBISFiThjfOnKSTWoOidzEXSxHOEBV4oFoYVKo7QUq8uAmE7TxgWRKsCteEdF4 AjJwkgbMVFkUuuBR9AJ5XWtKMaRKg0pQNNUJwMP2rbXda/vffKGmCYGlB9GPgxZwnKBOscC6ly9u 8yXZJEGmNFO4DpKJZLs6tJ6nlEcJ0cSOgo5gIGlKw6bDZfTZO12R+kaYgTu8QE94yFfYqA2kyuEM qiaDOxjX59seeI2EIQ0nfnzzfsrDalFGpu00JE4raeiyBE6ACkGh54M3R/pn9cHIKcDYFHBejb3n NgHgTBgKuETBXBeaSIx0pGCCp5APJwNctJQxZ0YCj1iu1gQMEw0te9CNUgqD5ZVASSmOooULwUSQ SkoAgiLAgYVgMeyw5GPEXRK9A5SsUoBKAdkBIo0zjhRQK2GB20RPLpGGYfxlFPZJnfgOJE2oGwJJ DiKlFzbwpsCwBBNC7i7B7nLCq2JhW4omGLCx5KSACqGeUVfEJxPSC2oGkWoTp0y+2nyuAKIZthT4 r6HBbC1ZaBSAepu3km6BHimDQ0w3fjjnjXQvAmxML1DbwZ1uQZp5BA+Gzvug+QwFCmYIXvrviIUN mnAnwdSjPXHgVGYU7ax2Sd/G8bcCl00CTIHqQ8Q4e30OmW6fYBbj6eAg7fXNrUUhIQp3IPwPqcnU AYVg227A4dSTeXQD2I56Og9VeuHGIAXR7sknw314rg0yAp2TBPMAWVDGa3JCpOwXvnrBxmAAYAcS O8QIooXOAG1doDqnUCnv1yv4CTUogFVYF1wMdU4NQRgQC0Mdo+gvk5r1UMvRAcpDQdox1JCitF6s oQCabxhaQOlAul0jjM3kKWUVSVhPYqxCMhUmQQnyY80uW4zmAmIRCC69TlCmhmhEm5Uk7BBpOKBp AOgRbquHczXVQCcZIoFYCrXxPhQO6nKygEdsB+XnKurcFTWWQPaMOR2iIllXz4nwQ6DnQ5B7U46M Llpsv7ldzOjlLXYIvt31c4ABC8Q2k10uonh28JqQqjK8fpH5VR1Ol6zeErYDABp1XE7Ez8cpJSqI C97uGF8l7QEFGLw6C47OhsrN5lHKBpcYSDIvA45wRqwVPcqXske0eg7Smd1gsYDClrktHk9xdTV2 fIXpeJLoYxNQgpPZKgNi0Jg5VCUBBC3sonGHekSwlDWEXa0weDhMEaVqNxBAZhY5JPFGKdLTDtbX 4mX64iIQMAeVAcOHPpRCABi0+ngcGID77FBkU/dsacW1e4IBQRtf5nJ5xgEaD01K0h8c7DpqQJBo J4xhCMOBZPHC+CJgg+no0bynSMrSYs9dHd4iomfQlKUXpyR374IEaqKzP6/B8c+ZEup/TH8nLIOq muVk/NH8cgHQqbt0VdPgOjfTFzR6yx745AStVT4j/I8HtpEdaEq+hRTpvAcGoiTGdNVLuVg8XyGG KZtEUiZIvbN3eQTBJEWGWrV744+EQLo54e4+XOr2EAwXQoidwevNOuLSEGUNlskdq4W8RdNjE3Q3 wQ9vk4Lsu6Q1ccYaZAHtwusJiIUwug2onWravMZBYGkVFhvRLIquPtm7V6OhVo6kKVdwpVqN1OAB UIuPPlr4ko8msZnXxxNKjWYuNN8efJ75U0B/Siieb74RNOpi2zr4cG2qQ6JMn24GEq9UgDjyfKZx 77nQqBdxkzveCoxhwD5zQ/ic3KdgQqpcsVl1yl4hBUmQzXSdfOvrQ2FEJbgqHxxlEcB2JhXzg8T3 VENiFWBzcd+OJuXSlEfkO5D8tzxFPlvHwVYZUlDRcnlN8u2KBQKFmvPz64Xy+JEiBfCgyycCLYpF q067/jw+YqMVGn+3rjAsW0mUSiFARr5jeLZneCNsdT5nh8C8gkahQ9Dt0MYpeuYx78Y2GFxAgLfl JXjAIbooEYFfPFkaow7nCFh+9xhzzHZ3v45bU6KqqXfzd4Nc/cT/ADQ74TL21FCC9TDe0cpJSmCt PmEcHgMThO/l/gnAE9LoLh3rAPWPfA0pVbl+SMfDXAqclJ2EdGLrLLVw9nO8LemDTZVfAPqcwI3S A+qM/fWdZyA7VwKhdAPTDeBIs6u0OyNn7cCsWADoiu6fJyUFsrJ/tvFFcGJN1MF0geRGnD5WZVl8 wPycWMSY/m/vl3Q0ERCjJczpTOztlwNSSBeh/XLEibiEALdSzZ1qHNzuF6DuQI9ro8CEkmaLoSqk qkINMe0lRDEfXNNW6aKRPaFGidmCOiMZgFsKTp6ejECAvyXVBRbKDZNKlTZUAUUnPRRENEwRyFF/ vkYu1cW0xo6Hv9PFkRbFU+HTlz44QnnMFOnyvie+RKiJvC9ANNjmDeCWL2aosqkgfzzsTawemn2f bCcV8SLNjEI9r/P3x/SO/DBZ9M/niZSWiS+Tqj1/vinuwyDsoz+bwoZ4bMCUtVv6OCaJRs+4eAZD 4fH1+uJAqBKSnviKgDSTsT0N1bEHXIFKQB4QfJFFNi8N1fPtuj4oQihMRWJzqdAJVE8uQZaATdoY ucIgoEzGdoW6GsYCA0vg4noYMD5QuglVHX1vM9lAQDwfHFjq9ykAgPglKI8QRk6yIwHR4w/N5MCw 1QvY6nklmmQmxehNO6cAgUwKhQ67Z1TioNkSvvv/AL3woU2LFE97im9eONTQnGDo7+Xj9IVdahW2 sHW8ziTtECQVBqXHdcJdG1QfkZaC5/XGXP0KyCGaq/68tlwDCs/44uSMpBhXxq8FMFXwR+Hxy3hz uiYGrI/rTnRFCEYJ5XiH451gbWL/AA88OV0UJ8XH64lAGlspMeg18yQriWvJDrk0cSTIBSCeLVzv vhy0AUWbCoXxWe+EknxVL1ap9jyEGhESqDELQCXLNLCCCOAFJ4Kzvlz9sXhkVwE4GJwembffCBuN 1B57Qzwe+Nd2aZwnRZnIS3Q4qG3oYLNZ5h9cNkCJFHU6o1zXwPNFc9fgfb2e/wCeK+BRwqNJ9p3x eFWhbuAYX6fPjhZcKWEhiltt+s2oRpl5GNPhE76/lEFOMaoKHnEY+x4Gs2r50wjr5HgFJO1+eAQS rJg6qT7vFQ8iItf7m/jhFGyLiGelT6OEsj7OIvXI6S+qbyAIX3yKLPjlOUEYR8Jr/Dr5pSaFa8nX QP38HLKX8JzGF8KchOw93riCCvbPI+SwAoZjrOBqlm6jc3tjyy+gB0l115WcWRzFUH13yef2ZhRq 74s+jm2IKyi1EkKGd6NbeRMmQQDo+XOuDgCRqfmR/HBOrqCSAAPoDzwxQYeoF/464QdSuTSLQvjA mB5INJ5fvmRqceAmvBrwn8mVtP8AE4Q4QlFDrvp/HlJFH4vfAOC+PvlAnTvGJv55UZnCJ8cS0haq BieD/v44oVaiS/TP98IJEO3X7eJ49PBFZvBSYdh5a93xwgYVOsnynzwErEqJXi6M7f64kQqwx/Au Dvfkm2tjkONfCN8fxwAAAQev8cWghARxRYt99fx29WGIlO/Z1j3LyVHFmtfHxL/vicXnTQ7Ph8c0 AYR6hQdh+jgyI9A0RLj2zPvOBzirQ1KHRpqdC9bxEB6U/rm2Imo99R/LjBKEWb63881s0mIrFTsQ 7524nEzFEfPleUECX3frmYYvDGcgV5PBzo8IAExC3dOiPmVxOA9+lqr1czPB473jjpqcXupEBTv8 F145PkxO7YDx9cWoBiwh/wB4zgDnBw+frAy/55CFmxr4dkyf74IBAJVr9w5JgeWt91fjKzv8cewE QlxccYfx1xYAMpW3rB/jgQFlAIhmd9w/fIEvYs8GI7G2YbwR2zne0mQGjE6op++Qm4ax0CEEJ2el 145/Mp6bJvwHPOf/AFximbT5Hpjr9duXAqVVT3X/ALvkAukyd9qfxx0Ax3Sfbp/HDb5lID/F4lFw BbLl8QeHQEdE4SSq5Z4X+uKqUKB6+Q8UevPAJIkgVkAGyenb28QhELV1kr8Djt1aekY9DrYeseOU 1KZ36f8Azri0tREbDo765dtEGWN7/wDf+3gorUezc5rdXzeDTsMvjHgFQIIHw1/0frmRMIz8OIRV xt++NaVLJi3j+Y82r8cSiFREfY8XAOATV1/LwIIw0CaJ54YaNtZfLjdXc/54/wCX9vHo4cMTUoH9 8BYiFF3887/n+3jUiUKdxN5uRPUsY+uElxnApo1o/PHD/vXEald4zit09H85wXf+GeebR7nf5eKr rz//2Q== ------=_NextPart_000_0019_01C08F6B.DA468060 Content-Type: image/gif; name="dot_0301.gif" Content-Transfer-Encoding: base64 Content-Location: http://wwwcomm.murdoch.edu.au/synergy/0301/images/dot_0301.gif R0lGODlhAQABAID/AJkzZgAAACwAAAAAAQABAAACAkQBADs= ------=_NextPart_000_0019_01C08F6B.DA468060 Content-Type: image/gif; name="top.gif" Content-Transfer-Encoding: base64 Content-Location: http://wwwcomm.murdoch.edu.au/synergy/images/top.gif R0lGODlhUAAWALP/AP///7/a1LPTzIC1qmammECQfzOJdgBrVABWQwBAMgAgGQAAAAAAAAAAAAAA AAAAACwAAAAAUAAWAEAE71DISau9OOvNhRKEcYxkaZ5lMQRAMBQF0K5yMcp0gO78gSSfUG9ILBqN v6DoyGw6UUnQ8nkaAAYjFnZk1R1wW6opSkiYz+i0es1uu99vpWFOr9vv+Lx+z8+Tp2IHKgOELySF JoVhgSN/jCVWWzImk19XLF6Mjo9cV4cyoGGVnI1AUqSoYmQErK2ur7CxsrO0tbSmQqm6TJu7vkO9 gVagnsOhJMQANo/BjJFZnp1elaOBzcLR1ZY3xMuauIDO0TEzLMrcutdiKt5chImLnOq/9KVKCPj5 +vv8/f7/AAP+M6WgoMGDCBMqXMiwocOHCiIAADs= ------=_NextPart_000_0019_01C08F6B.DA468060 Content-Type: image/gif; name="sidebar.gif" Content-Transfer-Encoding: base64 Content-Location: http://wwwcomm.murdoch.edu.au/synergy/0301/images/sidebar.gif R0lGODlh3AUBAID/AJkzZv///ywAAAAA3AUBAAACMISPqcvtD6MLtNqLs968+w+G4kiW5omm6sq2 7gvH8kzX9o3n+s73/g8MCofEovFUAAA7 ------=_NextPart_000_0019_01C08F6B.DA468060-- From vortex-l-request eskimo.com Mon Feb 5 13:25:08 2001 Received: (from smartlst localhost) by mx1.eskimo.com (8.9.1a/8.8.8) id NAA09459; Mon, 5 Feb 2001 13:15:09 -0800 Resent-Date: Mon, 5 Feb 2001 13:15:09 -0800 Message-ID: <000901c08fad$f7548700$3b8f85ce fjsparber> Reply-To: "Frederick Sparber" From: "Frederick Sparber" To: Subject: The zinc-bromine electrochemical couple Date: Mon, 5 Feb 2001 11:56:46 -0800 MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: multipart/mixed; boundary="----=_NextPart_000_000D_01C08F6A.B7016080" X-Priority: 3 X-MSMail-Priority: Normal X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook Express 5.00.2615.200 X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V5.00.2615.200 Resent-Message-ID: <"mF4MO1.0.ZJ2.SVnVw" mx1> Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/40584 X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com Status: O X-Status: This is a multi-part message in MIME format. ------=_NextPart_000_000D_01C08F6A.B7016080 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit http://www.trlinc.com/energy/paper-2/T2.htm ------=_NextPart_000_000D_01C08F6A.B7016080 Content-Type: application/octet-stream; name="The zinc-bromine electrochemical couple.url" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Content-Disposition: attachment; filename="The zinc-bromine electrochemical couple.url" [DEFAULT] BASEURL=http://www.trlinc.com/energy/paper-2/T2.htm [InternetShortcut] URL=http://www.trlinc.com/energy/paper-2/T2.htm Modified=C03160B8AD8FC00106 ------=_NextPart_000_000D_01C08F6A.B7016080-- From vortex-l-request eskimo.com Mon Feb 5 13:46:56 2001 Received: (from smartlst localhost) by mx1.eskimo.com (8.9.1a/8.8.8) id NAA06855; Mon, 5 Feb 2001 13:44:19 -0800 Resent-Date: Mon, 5 Feb 2001 13:44:19 -0800 Message-Id: <5.0.1.4.0.20010205124645.03944ec0 earthtech.org> X-Sender: little earthtech.org X-Mailer: QUALCOMM Windows Eudora Version 5.0.1 Date: Mon, 05 Feb 2001 12:46:51 -0600 To: vortex-l eskimo.com From: Scott Little Subject: software "noise" Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"; format=flowed Resent-Message-ID: <"lViaJ3.0.qg1.ownVw" mx1> Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/40585 X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com Status: O X-Status: (Anybody doing data acquisition with BASIC should read this) In recent BLP experiments here at Earthtech, our data acquisition system has been occasionally plagued by what looked like some kind of externally-induced electrical interference. In the calorimetric data plot of this run, for example: http://www.earthtech.org/blp/HiFi/run1.html you can see this "noise" making a smattering of data points all over the vertical scale about halfway thru the run. I've been wondering what was causing this "noise" for months now. I've checked the electrical connections in my data acquisition system about 10 times now, suspected that our neighbors were operating some noisy electrical device periodically, asked my son if he was doing a lot of TIG welding after hours, etc, etc, etc. When I got here this AM, the weekend's data was peppered with this "noise"...and, thankfully, it was happening right before my eyes. I could see the usually rock-steady temperature readings flopping all over the place apparently without cause. After first noting that the voltages being measured by the data acquisition system were perfectly steady during these fluctuations, I began to investigate the software!! I'm using QuickBASIC, which has 16 bit "signed integers". This means as the 16-bit integer value varies from 0-65535, the value interpreted by QB varies from 0-32767, then snaps to -32768 and comes back up to -1 as the raw integer reaches 65535. Now the guys who wrote the low-level routines that QB calls to access the DAC board's readings understood this situation so they make their conversion algorithm produce a monotonically increasing output in response to this peculiar signed input, thus utilizing the full 16 bit range. So far so good. The problem was created by me when I decided to take advantage of a special routine they provided that reads each channel rapidly a specified number of times. The idea was to read each input say 20 times and average the results...rather than just reading it once. It was supposed to improve noise immunity, etc. The results of this routine are returned to QB in an array....an array of signed integers. I then added a few lines of code to compute the average of the elements in the array and then called a 2nd routine supplied by the ADC board mfgr to convert the averaged argument into a voltage. The problem occurs RARELY during the averaging of the 20 readings. The numbers being averaged are the signed integers and, when the voltage being measured is right in the center of the range, the natural jitter in the reading can cause the reported argument to vary across the boundary between +32767 and -32768 ! For example, 5 readings of a 1.25 volt signal (with gain set for 2.5 volts full-scale) might come out like this, according to QB: +32765 +32766 -32768 +32763 -32769 Even those these numbers LOOK real different they represent voltages that are very tightly grouped. However, my code just blindly averaged them together....and got a horribly wrong answer that could vary wildly depending upon how many times the signal wandered across the dividing line between + and - arguments. I had noted earlier that the "noise" usually occurred only when the system was in disequilibrium, going from one quasi-steady state to a different one. Now it is apparent why that is the case. That is when the values being measured will often cross through their midpoint. A few "code bandaids" have repaired this chronic problem with my data acquisition program and I am feeling much better now. The BLP experiment is still much the same, however. This problem did not affect the overall results obtained to date. Soon I will be reporting on Run4, a control run using Na2CO3 electrolyte. Meanwhile, no response from Mills to my request for assistance. Scott Little, EarthTech Int'l, Inc. http://www.earthtech.org Suite 300, 4030 Braker Lane West, Austin TX 78759, USA 512-342-2185 (voice), 512-346-3017 (FAX), little earthtech.org (email) From vortex-l-request eskimo.com Mon Feb 5 14:11:12 2001 Received: (from smartlst localhost) by mx1.eskimo.com (8.9.1a/8.8.8) id OAA25374; Mon, 5 Feb 2001 14:07:20 -0800 Resent-Date: Mon, 5 Feb 2001 14:07:20 -0800 X-Sender: rmuha mail Message-Id: In-Reply-To: Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Date: Mon, 5 Feb 2001 17:07:13 -0500 To: vortex-l eskimo.com From: ralph muha Subject: Re: is this for real? Resent-Message-ID: <"OGpbU1.0.MC6.NGoVw" mx1> Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/40586 X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com Status: O X-Status: this is spam. email attempts to solicit stock purchases are illegal and can be reported to the securities and exchange commission at ENFORCEMENT sec.gov, altho it may not be worth the trouble... From vortex-l-request eskimo.com Mon Feb 5 18:49:26 2001 Received: (from smartlst localhost) by mx1.eskimo.com (8.9.1a/8.8.8) id SAA27713; Mon, 5 Feb 2001 18:46:16 -0800 Resent-Date: Mon, 5 Feb 2001 18:46:16 -0800 Message-Id: <3.0.6.32.20010206104238.00877c70 cyllene.uwa.edu.au> X-Sender: jwinter cyllene.uwa.edu.au X-Mailer: QUALCOMM Windows Eudora Light Version 3.0.6 (32) Date: Tue, 06 Feb 2001 10:42:38 +0800 To: vortex-l eskimo.com From: John Winterflood Subject: Strange and unpleasant electro-magnetic(?) oppression. Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Resent-Message-ID: <"HfpTr3.0.vm6.tLsVw" mx1> Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/40587 X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com Status: RO X-Status: Recently a lady visited our physics department at the University of Western Australia complaining of strange and unpleasant effects that she was experiencing in her home. One obvious solution is to sell up and move but she doesn't want to give in and run away and is trying to find out what is going on and get something done about it. This was the reason for her visit to our department. Apparently some friends of hers were asked to mind the house while she was on holliday. They couldn't handle it for long and moved out - apparently proving that these unpleasant effects are objective and not just experienced by the one lady owner (who might have been particularly sensitive or unusual in some way). The guy who talked to her mentioned it to me and gave me a copy of a letter written by the friends that minded the house for a while. It follows below. So if anyone has any clues as to what could be causing these effects (ie nasty neighbours running their microwave with the door open after bypassing the safety switch), or what would be easy to try to protect against the effects (ie aluminium foil skull cap!?) it would be appreciated. I would also be happy to consider non-materialistic hypotheses (ie some type of poltergeist or extra-terrestrial intelligence which it may be possible to have exorcized.) I don't really want to spend the time to investigate but it seems that if one did, one wouldn't have to wait very long for the effects to present themselves:- _______________________________________________________ To Whom It May Concern: This letter is to advise of a particular phenomenon experienced by my family & I whilst we were house- minding at XxXxxxxxxXxx Padbury, Western Australia. We moved in on the 18th September, 2000 and life was quite normal until four evenings later when we were hit by what can only be described as some kind of energy force. This had us all suffering from very unusual physical sensations all at the same time. These were as follows :- Pulsating pains within internal organs, Rising pressure in the head which became full-on headaches, Pain in temples which led to migraines, Heartbeat rising rapidly, Pulsating ache in throat & spine, Bleeding nose, Constant nausea, Pulsating behind eyes leading to sinus and irritation to front of eyes. Ringing in ears, Burning/Prickly sensation to skin, Tingling to teeth and lips. These "sessions" could last from 2 hours to 10 hours at a time always leaving us without energy, ie tired & listless with nerves on edge. During the longer periods of "bombardment" one had to leave the house to escape the continuous body sufferings although the residual effects could take up to 2 - 4 hours for the body to be back to normal. After tolerating this for one & a half weeks, we were hit by an extremely strong force which had so much intensity that we had to flee the house at 1:00AM when it woke us from our sleep. It was a most painfull experience such that we took our bedding & went to my elder son's house near Quinn's Rock for relief & sleep. We were meant to look after the house & pets for 4 weeks whilst the owner was away. However we could only bear the "energy waves" for 1 1/2 weeks. I would only come down for a few hours morning & evening to take care of the pets and gardens & do some computer work. Even during these periods I had to leave the house at different times to escape the intensity. I spoke to some of my friends at University, the Navy, & Electronic Engineers. Their feedback along with my own research into this phenomenon leads us to believe it is microwave / electromagnetic fields. This is probably why we also saw waves going across the TV screen & radio blocking out with loud humm during these "zap attacks". I was advised to take this to a number of government departments which I did without much success. Even now when I visit the owner of the house it is sometimes fine to be there and at other times one feels the above mentioned sensations which I can only stand for short periods before it becomes too painfull for me to stay. The above is true, Signed xxxxxxxxxxxx 30/10/00 _______________________________________________________ From vortex-l-request eskimo.com Mon Feb 5 20:05:25 2001 Received: (from smartlst localhost) by mx1.eskimo.com (8.9.1a/8.8.8) id UAA27143; Mon, 5 Feb 2001 20:01:57 -0800 Resent-Date: Mon, 5 Feb 2001 20:01:57 -0800 X-Apparently-From: Message-Id: <4.2.0.58.20010205220247.00bf5980 postoffice.swbell.net> X-Sender: cjford1 pop.mail.yahoo.com X-Mailer: QUALCOMM Windows Eudora Pro Version 4.2.0.58 Date: Mon, 05 Feb 2001 22:12:11 -0600 To: vortex-l eskimo.com From: Charles Ford Subject: Re: Strange and unpleasant electro-magnetic(?) oppression. In-Reply-To: <3.0.6.32.20010206104238.00877c70 cyllene.uwa.edu.au> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"; format=flowed Resent-Message-ID: <"Vq37R.0.xd6.rStVw" mx1> Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/40588 X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com Status: RO X-Status: Other effects may be sonic (subsonic) also but the TV and humming radio thing smacks of high power RF. This may be accidental or deliberate. Is there someone who would like this woman to move? I don't know about AU but in the US there is a HUGE fine and JAIL sentence for deliberately causing destructive interference (this would qualify) Look for large Radio antennas. There may be an unintentional hot spot generated by a large transmitter. If it is unintentional the owner of this equipment will likely be willing to help find the cause and may even offer a solution. Once the cause is determined then a solution can be better discussed. At 10:42 AM 2/6/01 +0800, you wrote: >Recently a lady visited our physics department at the >University of Western Australia complaining of strange >and unpleasant effects that she was experiencing in >her home. One obvious solution is to sell up and move >but she doesn't want to give in and run away and is >trying to find out what is going on and get something >done about it. This was the reason for her visit to >our department. > >Apparently some friends of hers were asked to mind the >house while she was on holliday. They couldn't handle >it for long and moved out - apparently proving that >these unpleasant effects are objective and not just >experienced by the one lady owner (who might have been >particularly sensitive or unusual in some way). >The guy who talked to her mentioned it to me and gave >me a copy of a letter written by the friends that >minded the house for a while. It follows below. > >So if anyone has any clues as to what could be >causing these effects (ie nasty neighbours running >their microwave with the door open after bypassing the >safety switch), or what would be easy to try to >protect against the effects (ie aluminium foil skull >cap!?) it would be appreciated. I would also be happy >to consider non-materialistic hypotheses (ie some type >of poltergeist or extra-terrestrial intelligence which >it may be possible to have exorcized.) > >I don't really want to spend the time to investigate >but it seems that if one did, one wouldn't have to >wait very long for the effects to present themselves:- >_______________________________________________________ >To Whom It May Concern: > >This letter is to advise of a particular phenomenon >experienced by my family & I whilst we were house- >minding at XxXxxxxxxXxx Padbury, Western Australia. > >We moved in on the 18th September, 2000 and life was >quite normal until four evenings later when we were >hit by what can only be described as some kind of >energy force. This had us all suffering from very >unusual physical sensations all at the same time. >These were as follows :- > >Pulsating pains within internal organs, >Rising pressure in the head which became full-on > headaches, >Pain in temples which led to migraines, >Heartbeat rising rapidly, >Pulsating ache in throat & spine, >Bleeding nose, >Constant nausea, >Pulsating behind eyes leading to > sinus and irritation to front of eyes. >Ringing in ears, >Burning/Prickly sensation to skin, >Tingling to teeth and lips. > >These "sessions" could last from 2 hours to 10 hours >at a time always leaving us without energy, ie tired >& listless with nerves on edge. During the longer >periods of "bombardment" one had to leave the house >to escape the continuous body sufferings although the >residual effects could take up to 2 - 4 hours for the >body to be back to normal. > >After tolerating this for one & a half weeks, we were >hit by an extremely strong force which had so much >intensity that we had to flee the house at 1:00AM when >it woke us from our sleep. It was a most painfull >experience such that we took our bedding & went to my >elder son's house near Quinn's Rock for relief & sleep. > >We were meant to look after the house & pets for 4 weeks >whilst the owner was away. However we could only bear >the "energy waves" for 1 1/2 weeks. I would only come >down for a few hours morning & evening to take care of >the pets and gardens & do some computer work. Even >during these periods I had to leave the house at >different times to escape the intensity. > >I spoke to some of my friends at University, the Navy, >& Electronic Engineers. Their feedback along with my >own research into this phenomenon leads us to believe >it is microwave / electromagnetic fields. This is >probably why we also saw waves going across the TV >screen & radio blocking out with loud humm during these >"zap attacks". > >I was advised to take this to a number of government >departments which I did without much success. > >Even now when I visit the owner of the house it is >sometimes fine to be there and at other times one feels >the above mentioned sensations which I can only stand >for short periods before it becomes too painfull for >me to stay. > >The above is true, >Signed xxxxxxxxxxxx 30/10/00 >_______________________________________________________ _________________________________________________________ Do You Yahoo!? Get your free yahoo.com address at http://mail.yahoo.com From vortex-l-request eskimo.com Mon Feb 5 20:38:36 2001 Received: (from smartlst localhost) by mx1.eskimo.com (8.9.1a/8.8.8) id UAA07818; Mon, 5 Feb 2001 20:33:16 -0800 Resent-Date: Mon, 5 Feb 2001 20:33:16 -0800 Message-ID: <001701c08e9e$7c569580$76dcc2cf louie> From: "Louie Pelletier" To: References: <3.0.6.32.20010206104238.00877c70 cyllene.uwa.edu.au> Subject: Re: Strange and unpleasant electro-magnetic(?) oppression. Date: Sun, 4 Feb 2001 03:34:47 -0800 MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-Priority: 3 X-MSMail-Priority: Normal X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook Express 5.00.2615.200 X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V5.00.2615.200 Resent-Message-ID: <"M6Z1k3.0.4w1.BwtVw" mx1> Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/40589 X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com Status: O X-Status: these house sitters were there for 4 days before expiereanceing any problems. could it be radom gas? louis . > Recently a lady visited our physics department at the > University of Western Australia complaining of strange > and unpleasant effects that she was experiencing in > her home. One obvious solution is to sell up and move > but she doesn't want to give in and run away and is > trying to find out what is going on and get something > done about it. This was the reason for her visit to > our department. > > Apparently some friends of hers were asked to mind the > house while she was on holliday. They couldn't handle > it for long and moved out - apparently proving that > these unpleasant effects are objective and not just > experienced by the one lady owner (who might have been > particularly sensitive or unusual in some way). > The guy who talked to her mentioned it to me and gave > me a copy of a letter written by the friends that > minded the house for a while. It follows below. > > So if anyone has any clues as to what could be > causing these effects (ie nasty neighbours running > their microwave with the door open after bypassing the > safety switch), or what would be easy to try to > protect against the effects (ie aluminium foil skull > cap!?) it would be appreciated. I would also be happy > to consider non-materialistic hypotheses (ie some type > of poltergeist or extra-terrestrial intelligence which > it may be possible to have exorcized.) > > I don't really want to spend the time to investigate > but it seems that if one did, one wouldn't have to > wait very long for the effects to present themselves:- > _______________________________________________________ > To Whom It May Concern: > > This letter is to advise of a particular phenomenon > experienced by my family & I whilst we were house- > minding at XxXxxxxxxXxx Padbury, Western Australia. > > We moved in on the 18th September, 2000 and life was > quite normal until four evenings later when we were > hit by what can only be described as some kind of > energy force. This had us all suffering from very > unusual physical sensations all at the same time. > These were as follows :- > > Pulsating pains within internal organs, > Rising pressure in the head which became full-on > headaches, > Pain in temples which led to migraines, > Heartbeat rising rapidly, > Pulsating ache in throat & spine, > Bleeding nose, > Constant nausea, > Pulsating behind eyes leading to > sinus and irritation to front of eyes. > Ringing in ears, > Burning/Prickly sensation to skin, > Tingling to teeth and lips. > > These "sessions" could last from 2 hours to 10 hours > at a time always leaving us without energy, ie tired > & listless with nerves on edge. During the longer > periods of "bombardment" one had to leave the house > to escape the continuous body sufferings although the > residual effects could take up to 2 - 4 hours for the > body to be back to normal. > > After tolerating this for one & a half weeks, we were > hit by an extremely strong force which had so much > intensity that we had to flee the house at 1:00AM when > it woke us from our sleep. It was a most painfull > experience such that we took our bedding & went to my > elder son's house near Quinn's Rock for relief & sleep. > > We were meant to look after the house & pets for 4 weeks > whilst the owner was away. However we could only bear > the "energy waves" for 1 1/2 weeks. I would only come > down for a few hours morning & evening to take care of > the pets and gardens & do some computer work. Even > during these periods I had to leave the house at > different times to escape the intensity. > > I spoke to some of my friends at University, the Navy, > & Electronic Engineers. Their feedback along with my > own research into this phenomenon leads us to believe > it is microwave / electromagnetic fields. This is > probably why we also saw waves going across the TV > screen & radio blocking out with loud humm during these > "zap attacks". > > I was advised to take this to a number of government > departments which I did without much success. > > Even now when I visit the owner of the house it is > sometimes fine to be there and at other times one feels > the above mentioned sensations which I can only stand > for short periods before it becomes too painfull for > me to stay. > > The above is true, > Signed xxxxxxxxxxxx 30/10/00 > _______________________________________________________ > > From vortex-l-request eskimo.com Mon Feb 5 20:52:18 2001 Received: (from smartlst localhost) by mx1.eskimo.com (8.9.1a/8.8.8) id UAA15234; Mon, 5 Feb 2001 20:49:40 -0800 Resent-Date: Mon, 5 Feb 2001 20:49:40 -0800 From: Robin van Spaandonk To: vortex-l eskimo.com Subject: Re: Strange and unpleasant electro-magnetic(?) oppression. Date: Tue, 06 Feb 2001 15:48:59 +1100 Organization: Improving Message-ID: References: <3.0.6.32.20010206104238.00877c70 cyllene.uwa.edu.au> In-Reply-To: <3.0.6.32.20010206104238.00877c70 cyllene.uwa.edu.au> X-Mailer: Forte Agent 1.8/32.548 MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit X-MIME-Autoconverted: from quoted-printable to 8bit by mx1.eskimo.com id UAA15195 Resent-Message-ID: <"CH69Y1.0.yj3.Z9uVw" mx1> Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/40590 X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com Status: O X-Status: In reply to John Winterflood's message of Tue, 06 Feb 2001 10:42:38 +0800: [snip] >We moved in on the 18th September, 2000 and life was >quite normal until four evenings later when we were >hit by what can only be described as some kind of >energy force. This had us all suffering from very [snip] Sounds like the house might be directly in the path of a powerful radar beam, or the Russian were aiming their Tesla weapons at North West Cape and missed :>. BTW Padbury is a Perth suburb. Regards, Robin van Spaandonk A Future For Humanity see: http://users.bigpond.net.au/rvanspaa/ From vortex-l-request eskimo.com Mon Feb 5 21:25:38 2001 Received: (from smartlst localhost) by mx1.eskimo.com (8.9.1a/8.8.8) id VAA28780; Mon, 5 Feb 2001 21:23:39 -0800 Resent-Date: Mon, 5 Feb 2001 21:23:39 -0800 From: Robin van Spaandonk To: vortex-l eskimo.com Subject: Re: Hydrino based CF Date: Tue, 06 Feb 2001 16:22:57 +1100 Organization: Improving Message-ID: References: <3A685402.3D0C150D ix.netcom.com> <23th6t4f4rklemsue40p6lf34nq5cu9vpi@4ax.com> <3A69C660.1CCEDCF6@pacbell.net> <3A6C9BA9.3F2EE932@ix.netcom.com> <9onp6to ob4ul639i7qbplu31frdsg4cj12 4ax.com> <3A7C3CC4.6C576A56@ix.netcom.com> <3A7C6FA4.9E2F82AA@ix.netcom.com> <3A7D6C64.80C32AF6@ix.netcom.com> In-Reply-To: <3A7D6C64.80C32AF6 ix.netcom.com> X-Mailer: Forte Agent 1.8/32.548 MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit X-MIME-Autoconverted: from quoted-printable to 8bit by mx1.eskimo.com id VAA28736 Resent-Message-ID: <"QpgO-1.0.c17.RfuVw" mx1> Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/40591 X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com Status: O X-Status: In reply to Edmund Storms's message of Sun, 04 Feb 2001 08:51:19 -0600: [snip] >> I suspect that the cracks are mostly too big. I.e. atoms get a chance to >> recombine into molecules, and the molecules have enough room to just "wander >> off". > >They can only wonder off if the void has a channel to the surface. Many voids do not >have such a channel, hence the D2 will stay put. Nevertheless, excess energy is seldom >produced. How do you know the voids exist if they don't have channels to the surface? Have you x-ray'ed cathodes? (these questions are genuine). [snip] >> There is also much more of it, and furthermore H2 (D2) that forms can be >> reabsorbed, while in an electrolysis unit, if H2 or D2 forms, it tends to >> escape as bubbles. >> (I'll probably get clobbered on this one :) > >You are correct and not clobberable. The difference is that an electrolytic cell >produces a much larger deuterium activity (concentration) than ambient gas. Simply >applying ambient gas pressure to bulk palladium does nothing while applying a very high >concentration using electrolysis occasionally produces nuclear reactions. Consequently, >something is different within the palladium-black, whether it be in the Arata or Case >environment. Could it be that in the Arata experiment, electrolysis forced the D into the cathode, which then migrated through the metal-metal contacts in the Pd black, then when it tried to leave the Pd black the whole surface comprised little cavities which catalyzed the reaction? > >> >> >> >The difference is that the surface energy of >> >palladium-black is much higher than the surface on bulk Pd. >> >> Does this have to do with the actual structure of the surface, i.e. "rough" >> at all scales perhaps (which would also help explain why it is black)? > >The black color is thought to be caused by the material being a perfect absorber because >so many "black-body" holes are present. Indeed, all metals no matter their color in the >bulk are black when finely powdered. [snip] >The PdD lattice always contains many point defects, in both the D and the Pd >sublattices. Nevertheless, samples do not always produce excess energy. But has anyone checked whether there is any correlation between energy production and preponderance of point defects? (I.e. perhaps "many" isn't enough, and there need to be "lots", or perhaps single point defects are too small, and multipoint defects are required). > Why? As for >boron upsetting the lattice, the surface always contains a rich assortment of impurities >(mainly Li and Pt) that upset the lattice, yet excess energy is seldom produced. In >addition, I have studied many alloys including ones containing boron. The excess energy >did not relate to the amount or kind of impurity. Indeed, almost all palladium contains >some boron, yet excess energy is seldom produced. The behavior simply is not consistent >with alloy formation being required. So you agree that it is a materials problem, but you don't think it has anything to do with which other elements are present. So which material properties are left? >> Does anyone know anything about the formation process of the Case cell >> catalyst? Is it possible that small amounts of C migrate into the Pd during >> production? > >Small amounts of C surely migrate into the Pd. However, C has a very low solubility in >Pd so that the amount would be very small. That's not a problem, I was just curious. There is still the possibility that the Pd lattice is a bad match for the C lattice, or even that the C lattice itself forms cavities of the right size. Regards, Robin van Spaandonk A Future For Humanity see: http://users.bigpond.net.au/rvanspaa/ From vortex-l-request eskimo.com Mon Feb 5 21:37:04 2001 Received: (from smartlst localhost) by mx1.eskimo.com (8.9.1a/8.8.8) id VAA02126; Mon, 5 Feb 2001 21:34:33 -0800 Resent-Date: Mon, 5 Feb 2001 21:34:33 -0800 From: Robin van Spaandonk To: vortex-l eskimo.com Subject: Re: Hydrino based CF Date: Tue, 06 Feb 2001 16:33:47 +1100 Organization: Improving Message-ID: References: <3A685402.3D0C150D ix.netcom.com> <23th6t4f4rklemsue40p6lf34nq5cu9vpi@4ax.com> <3A69C660.1CCEDCF6@pacbell.net> <3A6C9BA9.3F2EE932@ix.netcom.com> <9onp6to ob4ul639i7qbplu31frdsg4cj12 4ax.com> <3A7C3CC4.6C576A56@ix.netcom.com> <3A7C6FA4.9E2F82AA@ix.netcom.com> <4uhp7tchrau57caq9tl3t0bom1rcfmqmns@4ax.com> <3A7D6C9A.411C958B@ix.netcom.com> In-Reply-To: <3A7D6C9A.411C958B ix.netcom.com> X-Mailer: Forte Agent 1.8/32.548 MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit X-MIME-Autoconverted: from quoted-printable to 8bit by mx1.eskimo.com id VAA02081 Resent-Message-ID: <"TjI_w.0.2X.epuVw" mx1> Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/40592 X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com Status: O X-Status: In reply to Edmund Storms's message of Sun, 04 Feb 2001 08:52:12 -0600: [snip] >Perhaps, but pressure rises very rapidly as temperature increases. At some point the >pressure will be sufficient to rupture the lattice. You would suggest, I think, that if >I held the temperature just short of this critical value, the nuclear reaction would >have its maximum rate. I have used increased temperature to deload samples. In this >case, a temperature of 175° C will deloaded one of my plates in a few minutes. >Consequently, even if a fissure does not form, the time at temperature during which the >sample contains sufficient D would be rather short. [snip] This doesn't necessarily mean the hypothesis is incorrect, just that we haven't yet learned how to optimise the process. Gas leaving may not by itself be a bad thing, as long as it is being replaced such as to maintain the minimum required concentration. This might fit in with the experiments where the cathode forms the bottom of the cell, and vacuum is pumped on the other side. BTW scraping the surface beforehand would create lots of dislocations. Regards, Robin van Spaandonk A Future For Humanity see: http://users.bigpond.net.au/rvanspaa/ From vortex-l-request eskimo.com Tue Feb 6 04:49:34 2001 Received: (from smartlst localhost) by mx1.eskimo.com (8.9.1a/8.8.8) id EAA18226; Tue, 6 Feb 2001 04:48:26 -0800 Resent-Date: Tue, 6 Feb 2001 04:48:26 -0800 Date: Wed, 31 Jan 2001 08:58:32 -0800 From: Jones Beene Subject: Re: [theory]Case cell operation To: vortex-l eskimo.com Message-id: <3A784438.AC4E22CC pacbell.net> MIME-version: 1.0 X-Mailer: Mozilla 4.75 [en]C-CCK-MCD EBM-Compaq1 (Win98; U) Content-type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-transfer-encoding: 7bit X-Accept-Language: en References: <3A774180.77C64EB6 pacbell.net> <3A777B21.4EBC0B4B pacbell.net> <8d2f7to1o79qvlq46h0q1f0vs9su2qvskj@4ax.com> Resent-Message-ID: <"E2y1E1.0.iS4.PA_Vw" mx1> Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/40593 X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com Status: O X-Status: Robin van Spaandonk wrote: > Actually the numbers don't work out too badly. Fusion isn't likely to take > place until the hydrino/deuterino is quite small, because that's the only > way they can get close enough. The total energy release (from infinite > separation) for the p'th level is p^2 x 13.6 eV, so for 23.8 MeV, p would be > about 1323, and the radius would be about 40 F). Is this thousand step shrinkage from Mills book? Even so, if it were the logical extension of his theory, then some of those lower drops should be high energy gammas and would be very evident - no? I thought one purpose of this exercise was to build a "prima facie" case for helium production sans gammas. Jones From vortex-l-request eskimo.com Tue Feb 6 08:01:01 2001 Received: (from smartlst localhost) by mx1.eskimo.com (8.9.1a/8.8.8) id IAA32223; Tue, 6 Feb 2001 08:00:08 -0800 Resent-Date: Tue, 6 Feb 2001 08:00:08 -0800 Message-ID: <3A8011D6.60DF2DA5 ix.netcom.com> Date: Tue, 06 Feb 2001 09:01:50 -0600 From: Edmund Storms X-Mailer: Mozilla 4.5 (Macintosh; U; PPC) X-Accept-Language: en,pdf MIME-Version: 1.0 To: vortex-l eskimo.com Subject: Re: Hydrino based CF References: <3A685402.3D0C150D ix.netcom.com> <23th6t4f4rklemsue40p6lf34nq5cu9vpi@4ax.com> <3A69C660.1CCEDCF6@pacbell.net> <3A6C9BA9.3F2EE932@ix.netcom.com> <9onp6to ob4ul639i7qbplu31frdsg4cj12 4ax.com> <3A7C3CC4.6C576A56@ix.netcom.com> <3A7C6FA4.9E2F82AA@ix.netcom.com> <3A7D6C64.80C32AF6@ix.netcom.com> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii; x-mac-type="54455854"; x-mac-creator="4D4F5353" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Resent-Message-ID: <"SeO_k.0.Ht7.7-1Ww" mx1> Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/40594 X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com Status: O X-Status: Robin van Spaandonk wrote: > In reply to Edmund Storms's message of Sun, 04 Feb 2001 08:51:19 -0600: > [snip] > >> I suspect that the cracks are mostly too big. I.e. atoms get a chance to > >> recombine into molecules, and the molecules have enough room to just "wander > >> off". > > > >They can only wonder off if the void has a channel to the surface. Many voids do not > >have such a channel, hence the D2 will stay put. Nevertheless, excess energy is seldom > >produced. > > How do you know the voids exist if they don't have channels to the surface? > Have you x-ray'ed cathodes? (these questions are genuine). Such voids can be seen in cross-section photomicrographs. > > [snip] > >> There is also much more of it, and furthermore H2 (D2) that forms can be > >> reabsorbed, while in an electrolysis unit, if H2 or D2 forms, it tends to > >> escape as bubbles. > >> (I'll probably get clobbered on this one :) > > > >You are correct and not clobberable. The difference is that an electrolytic cell > >produces a much larger deuterium activity (concentration) than ambient gas. Simply > >applying ambient gas pressure to bulk palladium does nothing while applying a very high > >concentration using electrolysis occasionally produces nuclear reactions. Consequently, > >something is different within the palladium-black, whether it be in the Arata or Case > >environment. > > Could it be that in the Arata experiment, electrolysis forced the D into the > cathode, which then migrated through the metal-metal contacts in the Pd > black, then when it tried to leave the Pd black the whole surface comprised > little cavities which catalyzed the reaction? Perhaps. However, Pd-black frequently does not work, yet I expect such little cavities are always present to some degree. Clearly, this is not the only variable. > >> > >> >The difference is that the surface energy of > >> >palladium-black is much higher than the surface on bulk Pd. > >> > >> Does this have to do with the actual structure of the surface, i.e. "rough" > >> at all scales perhaps (which would also help explain why it is black)? > > > >The black color is thought to be caused by the material being a perfect absorber because > >so many "black-body" holes are present. Indeed, all metals no matter their color in the > >bulk are black when finely powdered. > [snip] > >The PdD lattice always contains many point defects, in both the D and the Pd > >sublattices. Nevertheless, samples do not always produce excess energy. > > But has anyone checked whether there is any correlation between energy > production and preponderance of point defects? > (I.e. perhaps "many" isn't enough, and there need to be "lots", or perhaps > single point defects are too small, and multipoint defects are required). Palladium is unique in that it forms defects very easily. This can be seen using electron-transmission-microcopsy. This being the case, PdD will always have a collection of such defects, yet excess power is not always seen at some level. If any combination of defects is important, some excess energy should always be detected because of the random nature of this variable. Instead of being apparently random, excess energy is either present or it is absent, with very little range between these two extremes. > > > > Why? As for > >boron upsetting the lattice, the surface always contains a rich assortment of impurities > >(mainly Li and Pt) that upset the lattice, yet excess energy is seldom produced. In > >addition, I have studied many alloys including ones containing boron. The excess energy > >did not relate to the amount or kind of impurity. Indeed, almost all palladium contains > >some boron, yet excess energy is seldom produced. The behavior simply is not consistent > >with alloy formation being required. > > So you agree that it is a materials problem, but you don't think it has > anything to do with which other elements are present. So which material > properties are left? Three basic kinds of variables exist. These are chemical such as modified by impurities, physical such as you are exploring, or a combination of other types such as phonon action, weird particles or electron energy levels. The concentration of D would be important in all cases and each major variable would be influenced by the other ones. Clearly, the required conditions are rare and difficult to achieve. Therefore, the conditions are probably a complex combination of the major variables. > > >> Does anyone know anything about the formation process of the Case cell > >> catalyst? Is it possible that small amounts of C migrate into the Pd during > >> production? > > > >Small amounts of C surely migrate into the Pd. However, C has a very low solubility in > >Pd so that the amount would be very small. > > That's not a problem, I was just curious. There is still the possibility > that the Pd lattice is a bad match for the C lattice, or even that the C > lattice itself forms cavities of the right size. Carbon has two choices, it can go into the lattice and replace D or it can combine with its self to form graphite. The graphite forms at the grain boundaries and therein weakens the lattice. Consequently, PdD containing excessive carbon will not load very well because of excessive crack formation. Regards, Ed From vortex-l-request eskimo.com Tue Feb 6 08:01:31 2001 Received: (from smartlst localhost) by mx1.eskimo.com (8.9.1a/8.8.8) id IAA32445; Tue, 6 Feb 2001 08:00:21 -0800 Resent-Date: Tue, 6 Feb 2001 08:00:21 -0800 Message-ID: <3A8011FE.96E427A4 ix.netcom.com> Date: Tue, 06 Feb 2001 09:02:29 -0600 From: Edmund Storms X-Mailer: Mozilla 4.5 (Macintosh; U; PPC) X-Accept-Language: en,pdf MIME-Version: 1.0 To: vortex-l eskimo.com Subject: Re: Hydrino based CF References: <3A685402.3D0C150D ix.netcom.com> <23th6t4f4rklemsue40p6lf34nq5cu9vpi@4ax.com> <3A69C660.1CCEDCF6@pacbell.net> <3A6C9BA9.3F2EE932@ix.netcom.com> <9onp6to ob4ul639i7qbplu31frdsg4cj12 4ax.com> <3A7C3CC4.6C576A56@ix.netcom.com> <3A7C6FA4.9E2F82AA@ix.netcom.com> <4uhp7tchrau57caq9tl3t0bom1rcfmqmns@4ax.com> <3A7D6C9A.411C958B@ix.netcom.com> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=iso-8859-1; x-mac-type="54455854"; x-mac-creator="4D4F5353" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit Resent-Message-ID: <"sPIAM1.0.tw7.L-1Ww" mx1> Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/40595 X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com Status: O X-Status: Robin van Spaandonk wrote: > In reply to Edmund Storms's message of Sun, 04 Feb 2001 08:52:12 -0600: > [snip] > >Perhaps, but pressure rises very rapidly as temperature increases. At some point the > >pressure will be sufficient to rupture the lattice. You would suggest, I think, that if > >I held the temperature just short of this critical value, the nuclear reaction would > >have its maximum rate. I have used increased temperature to deload samples. In this > >case, a temperature of 175° C will deloaded one of my plates in a few minutes. > >Consequently, even if a fissure does not form, the time at temperature during which the > >sample contains sufficient D would be rather short. > [snip] > This doesn't necessarily mean the hypothesis is incorrect, just that we > haven't yet learned how to optimise the process. > Gas leaving may not by itself be a bad thing, as long as it is being > replaced such as to maintain the minimum required concentration. This might > fit in with the experiments where the cathode forms the bottom of the cell, > and vacuum is pumped on the other side. > > BTW scraping the surface beforehand would create lots of dislocations. Increased temperature lowers the amount of D the lattice can contain. Gas goes out and never returns. That is the nature of thermodynamic equilibrium. As for optimizing, a person needs to see an effect before it can be optimized. If these variables are important, some effect should be seen at a low but variable amount because a wide range of compositions and defects are always present. The fact of the matter is that almost nothing is seen most of the time, until suddenly excess power is detected for mo obvious reason. I agree, scraping the surface will produce dislocations in the Pd sublattice in the surface region. Bending the sample will have the same effect. Both have been done with no effect. Regards, Ed From vortex-l-request eskimo.com Tue Feb 6 08:02:29 2001 Received: (from smartlst localhost) by mx1.eskimo.com (8.9.1a/8.8.8) id IAA00660; Tue, 6 Feb 2001 08:00:59 -0800 Resent-Date: Tue, 6 Feb 2001 08:00:59 -0800 Message-ID: <3A801E20.1B63167F verisoft.com.tr> Date: Tue, 06 Feb 2001 17:54:08 +0200 From: hamdi ucar X-Mailer: Mozilla 4.7 [en] (Win98; I) X-Accept-Language: en-US MIME-Version: 1.0 To: vortex-l eskimo.com Subject: Re: software "noise" References: <5.0.1.4.0.20010205124645.03944ec0 earthtech.org> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Resent-Message-ID: <"-pK4Z1.0.BA.w-1Ww" mx1> Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/40596 X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com Status: O X-Status: Hi Scott, Problem appears as handling 16 unsigned integers as you states. You can not do calculations with 16 integer variables holding unsigned 16 bit data. you should convert them to 32 bit integers. Here is a routine: FUNCTION L& (X%) IF X% < 0 THEN L& = 32767& - X% ELSE L& = X% END FUNCTION This one without of IF-THEN-ELSE, would be better: FUNCTION L& (X%) L& = X% AND &HFFFF& END FUNCTION This would correct negatives (-32768 to -1) to (32768 to 65535). Obviously, you dont need this "function" presentation that I gave. All you need is AND'ing the integer value with 65535 long (&HFFFF&). > > For example, 5 readings of a 1.25 volt signal (with gain set for 2.5 volts > full-scale) might come out like this, according to QB: > > +32765 > +32766 > -32768 > +32763 > -32769 Last value you gave (-32769) is out of range. I assume you didn't wrote intentionally. > > Even those these numbers LOOK real different they represent voltages that > are very tightly grouped. However, my code just blindly averaged them > together....and got a horribly wrong answer that could vary wildly > depending upon how many times the signal wandered across the dividing line > between + and - arguments. > I you also calculate standard deviations of sampled values. If the standard deviations is too high, you can reject the measurement. This can protect you from interference and other causes that disturbing the measurements. If standard deviation getting high, program warn you for accepting or rejecting them. Regards, hamdi ucar From vortex-l-request eskimo.com Tue Feb 6 09:19:07 2001 Received: (from smartlst localhost) by mx1.eskimo.com (8.9.1a/8.8.8) id JAA09168; Tue, 6 Feb 2001 09:13:30 -0800 Resent-Date: Tue, 6 Feb 2001 09:13:30 -0800 Message-ID: <3A80305C.57068EFE verisoft.com.tr> Date: Tue, 06 Feb 2001 19:11:56 +0200 From: hamdi ucar X-Mailer: Mozilla 4.7 [en] (Win98; I) X-Accept-Language: en-US MIME-Version: 1.0 To: vortex-l eskimo.com Subject: Re: software "noise" References: <5.0.1.4.0.20010205124645.03944ec0 earthtech.org> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Resent-Message-ID: <"SBMmC2.0.4F2.w23Ww" mx1> Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/40597 X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com Status: O X-Status: Scott, You may also avoid the negative integer problem simpler, if the acquisition software provide data on 32 bit variables (still using 0-65535 range) by using LONG INTEGER variables instead of INTEGERS. Anyway, integers (16bit or 32 bits) are not practical for scientific calculations, so you must using floating point variables in you data processing. if data provided by acq. sw is it long integer format you can directly assign them to single or double variable. if they are in 16bit format you may use this conversion: DIM acq_data AS INTEGER DIM fp_var AS DOUBLE fp_var = acq_data AND &HFFFF& Regards, hamdi ucar From vortex-l-request eskimo.com Tue Feb 6 09:37:03 2001 Received: (from smartlst localhost) by mx1.eskimo.com (8.9.1a/8.8.8) id JAA18949; Tue, 6 Feb 2001 09:32:24 -0800 Resent-Date: Tue, 6 Feb 2001 09:32:24 -0800 Message-Id: <5.0.1.4.0.20010206112701.043110f0 earthtech.org> X-Sender: little earthtech.org X-Mailer: QUALCOMM Windows Eudora Version 5.0.1 Date: Tue, 06 Feb 2001 11:28:38 -0600 To: vortex-l eskimo.com, vortex-l@eskimo.com From: Scott Little Subject: Re: software "noise" In-Reply-To: <3A801E20.1B63167F verisoft.com.tr> References: <5.0.1.4.0.20010205124645.03944ec0 earthtech.org> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"; format=flowed Resent-Message-ID: <"w84KI1.0.xd4.eK3Ww" mx1> Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/40598 X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com Status: O X-Status: At 05:54 PM 2/6/01 +0200, hamdi ucar wrote: >FUNCTION L& (X%) >IF X% < 0 THEN L& = 32767& - X% ELSE L& = X% >END FUNCTION > >This one without of IF-THEN-ELSE, would be better: > >FUNCTION L& (X%) >L& = X% AND &HFFFF& >END FUNCTION very nice, Hamdi...mine is similar to the first one. > > +32765 > > +32766 > > -32768 > > +32763 > > -32769 > >Last value you gave (-32769) is out of range. I assume you didn't wrote >intentionally. oops! you're right...I was just making up numbers and goofed. >I you also calculate standard deviations of sampled values. If the >standard deviations is too high, you can reject the measurement. This can >protect you from interference and other causes that disturbing the >measurements. > >If standard deviation getting high, program warn you for accepting or >rejecting them. Good idea...I'm not presently doing that but it sure would catch real noise interference. Scott Little, EarthTech Int'l, Inc. http://www.earthtech.org Suite 300, 4030 Braker Lane West, Austin TX 78759, USA 512-342-2185 (voice), 512-346-3017 (FAX), little earthtech.org (email) From vortex-l-request eskimo.com Tue Feb 6 09:38:20 2001 Received: (from smartlst localhost) by mx1.eskimo.com (8.9.1a/8.8.8) id JAA19420; Tue, 6 Feb 2001 09:33:16 -0800 Resent-Date: Tue, 6 Feb 2001 09:33:16 -0800 Message-Id: <5.0.1.4.0.20010206112859.04314ec0 earthtech.org> X-Sender: little earthtech.org X-Mailer: QUALCOMM Windows Eudora Version 5.0.1 Date: Tue, 06 Feb 2001 11:30:58 -0600 To: vortex-l eskimo.com, vortex-l@eskimo.com From: Scott Little Subject: Re: software "noise" In-Reply-To: <3A80305C.57068EFE verisoft.com.tr> References: <5.0.1.4.0.20010205124645.03944ec0 earthtech.org> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"; format=flowed Resent-Message-ID: <"mZ4Xf.0.Gl4.RL3Ww" mx1> Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/40599 X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com Status: O X-Status: At 07:11 PM 2/6/01 +0200, hamdi ucar wrote: >Scott, > >You may also avoid the negative integer problem simpler, if the >acquisition software provide data on 32 bit variables (still using 0-65535 >range) by using LONG INTEGER variables instead of INTEGERS. That's the first thing I tried, Hamdi...unfortunately, the routines provided by the ADC board mfgr insist on returning the 16 bit result in a 16 bit INTEGER. When you pass it a LONG INTEGER (32 bit) it returns "Data type mismatch" error.... Thanks again. Scott Little, EarthTech Int'l, Inc. http://www.earthtech.org Suite 300, 4030 Braker Lane West, Austin TX 78759, USA 512-342-2185 (voice), 512-346-3017 (FAX), little earthtech.org (email) From vortex-l-request eskimo.com Tue Feb 6 09:40:54 2001 Received: (from smartlst localhost) by mx1.eskimo.com (8.9.1a/8.8.8) id JAA19696; Tue, 6 Feb 2001 09:34:10 -0800 Resent-Date: Tue, 6 Feb 2001 09:34:10 -0800 Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" X-Sender: mjones pop.jump.net Message-Id: In-Reply-To: <3.0.6.32.20010206104238.00877c70 cyllene.uwa.edu.au> Date: Tue, 6 Feb 2001 11:32:12 -0600 To: vortex-l eskimo.com From: Mitchell Jones Subject: Re: Strange and unpleasant electro-magnetic(?) oppression. Resent-Message-ID: <"yJ_6-2.0.gp4.IM3Ww" mx1> Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/40600 X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com Status: O X-Status: >Recently a lady visited our physics department at the >University of Western Australia complaining of strange >and unpleasant effects that she was experiencing in >her home. One obvious solution is to sell up and move >but she doesn't want to give in and run away and is >trying to find out what is going on and get something >done about it. This was the reason for her visit to >our department. > >Apparently some friends of hers were asked to mind the >house while she was on holliday. They couldn't handle >it for long and moved out - apparently proving that >these unpleasant effects are objective and not just >experienced by the one lady owner (who might have been >particularly sensitive or unusual in some way). >The guy who talked to her mentioned it to me and gave >me a copy of a letter written by the friends that >minded the house for a while. It follows below. > >So if anyone has any clues as to what could be >causing these effects (ie nasty neighbours running >their microwave with the door open after bypassing the >safety switch), or what would be easy to try to >protect against the effects (ie aluminium foil skull >cap!?) it would be appreciated. I would also be happy >to consider non-materialistic hypotheses (ie some type >of poltergeist or extra-terrestrial intelligence which >it may be possible to have exorcized.) > >I don't really want to spend the time to investigate >but it seems that if one did, one wouldn't have to >wait very long for the effects to present themselves:- >_______________________________________________________ >To Whom It May Concern: > >This letter is to advise of a particular phenomenon >experienced by my family & I whilst we were house- >minding at XxXxxxxxxXxx Padbury, Western Australia. > >We moved in on the 18th September, 2000 and life was >quite normal until four evenings later when we were >hit by what can only be described as some kind of >energy force. This had us all suffering from very >unusual physical sensations all at the same time. >These were as follows :- > >Pulsating pains within internal organs, >Rising pressure in the head which became full-on > headaches, >Pain in temples which led to migraines, >Heartbeat rising rapidly, >Pulsating ache in throat & spine, >Bleeding nose, >Constant nausea, >Pulsating behind eyes leading to > sinus and irritation to front of eyes. >Ringing in ears, >Burning/Prickly sensation to skin, >Tingling to teeth and lips. > >These "sessions" could last from 2 hours to 10 hours >at a time always leaving us without energy, ie tired >& listless with nerves on edge. During the longer >periods of "bombardment" one had to leave the house >to escape the continuous body sufferings although the >residual effects could take up to 2 - 4 hours for the >body to be back to normal. > >After tolerating this for one & a half weeks, we were >hit by an extremely strong force which had so much >intensity that we had to flee the house at 1:00AM when >it woke us from our sleep. It was a most painfull >experience such that we took our bedding & went to my >elder son's house near Quinn's Rock for relief & sleep. > >We were meant to look after the house & pets for 4 weeks >whilst the owner was away. However we could only bear >the "energy waves" for 1 1/2 weeks. I would only come >down for a few hours morning & evening to take care of >the pets and gardens & do some computer work. Even >during these periods I had to leave the house at >different times to escape the intensity. > >I spoke to some of my friends at University, the Navy, >& Electronic Engineers. Their feedback along with my >own research into this phenomenon leads us to believe >it is microwave / electromagnetic fields. This is >probably why we also saw waves going across the TV >screen & radio blocking out with loud humm during these >"zap attacks". ***{Given that the above is true, locating the source should be a no-brainer: borrow or purchase a receiver that you can tune to the main frequency of the signal via a directional antenna. Go to a nearby location outside the house, rotate the antenna until you determine the direction of the signal, and draw a line on a map extending from that position in the direction of the signal. (Use GPS to determine your location.) Then move to one or two other locations and repeat the process. Result: the point on the map where the lines intersect will contain the transmitter. (This is called radio direction finding.) If it turns out that the transmitter is in the house, then wait until there is an episode, and, while listening on the radio to the static, turn the main breaker to the "off" position. If the signal stops, then you know the signal is running off of the houshold power. In that case, flip the main breaker back to the "on" position, and turn off the other breakers, one by one, until you narrow the location down to a specific area of the house. Once you do that, then turn off the appliances in that area one by one until you find the source. And if that fails, then remove wall paneling and begin disconnecting wires until you narrow the source to a particular part of the room. And so on. By such a procedure, any manmade source should be easily located. --MJ}*** > >I was advised to take this to a number of government >departments which I did without much success. > >Even now when I visit the owner of the house it is >sometimes fine to be there and at other times one feels >the above mentioned sensations which I can only stand >for short periods before it becomes too painfull for >me to stay. > >The above is true, >Signed xxxxxxxxxxxx 30/10/00 >_______________________________________________________ ________________ Quote of the month: "Law is what the authorities use to ride the country." --Anatoly Schransky From vortex-l-request eskimo.com Tue Feb 6 10:45:46 2001 Received: (from smartlst localhost) by mx1.eskimo.com (8.9.1a/8.8.8) id KAA21843; Tue, 6 Feb 2001 10:41:18 -0800 Resent-Date: Tue, 6 Feb 2001 10:41:18 -0800 Date: Tue, 6 Feb 2001 13:47:22 -0500 (EST) From: John Schnurer To: Scott Little cc: vortex-l eskimo.com, vortex-l@eskimo.com Subject: Re: software "noise" In-Reply-To: <5.0.1.4.0.20010206112859.04314ec0 earthtech.org> Message-ID: MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: TEXT/PLAIN; charset=US-ASCII Resent-Message-ID: <"rfLmW1.0.DL5.EL4Ww" mx1> Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/40601 X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com Status: O X-Status: Scott: A trick with A-D conversion... after you have dealt with ALL noise sources and the A-D is !!! completely galvanically isolated ...THEN: Assign a grounnd that you generate and leave bottom room (the invesre of headroom) of... say... 50 milli Volts .... and leave 50 Milli Volts at the top.... using a voltage reference YOU generate... not an internal-to-the-chip-reference.... If you do this then you can be preffty sure the signal is ther real signal... I am noot saying it will be clean or nice.... but you should be able to know what is signal, and what is not. J On Tue, 6 Feb 2001, Scott Little wrote: > At 07:11 PM 2/6/01 +0200, hamdi ucar wrote: > > >Scott, > > > >You may also avoid the negative integer problem simpler, if the > >acquisition software provide data on 32 bit variables (still using 0-65535 > >range) by using LONG INTEGER variables instead of INTEGERS. > > That's the first thing I tried, Hamdi...unfortunately, the routines > provided by the ADC board mfgr insist on returning the 16 bit result in a > 16 bit INTEGER. When you pass it a LONG INTEGER (32 bit) it returns "Data > type mismatch" error.... > > Thanks again. > > > > Scott Little, EarthTech Int'l, Inc. http://www.earthtech.org > Suite 300, 4030 Braker Lane West, Austin TX 78759, USA > 512-342-2185 (voice), 512-346-3017 (FAX), little earthtech.org (email) > From vortex-l-request eskimo.com Tue Feb 6 10:48:23 2001 Received: (from smartlst localhost) by mx1.eskimo.com (8.9.1a/8.8.8) id KAA23273; Tue, 6 Feb 2001 10:43:45 -0800 Resent-Date: Tue, 6 Feb 2001 10:43:45 -0800 Date: Tue, 6 Feb 2001 13:49:50 -0500 (EST) From: John Schnurer To: vortex-l eskimo.com Subject: Re: Strange and unpleasant electro-magnetic(?) oppression. In-Reply-To: Message-ID: MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: TEXT/PLAIN; charset=US-ASCII Resent-Message-ID: <"G5xTo3.0.Uh5.XN4Ww" mx1> Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/40602 X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com Status: O X-Status: n The symptoms of this contribution are similar to high power ultra sonic mechanical, sound, waves. These have been studied in many years past for "non lethal" ... and lethal too.... warfare. J From vortex-l-request eskimo.com Tue Feb 6 11:05:47 2001 Received: (from smartlst localhost) by mx1.eskimo.com (8.9.1a/8.8.8) id KAA29807; Tue, 6 Feb 2001 10:59:29 -0800 Resent-Date: Tue, 6 Feb 2001 10:59:29 -0800 Message-ID: <001501c09077$716dc0a0$ce8f85ce fjsparber> Reply-To: "Frederick Sparber" From: "Frederick Sparber" To: Subject: Re: Electrostatic Migration of Protons-Deuterons into Pd or Ni Film Date: Tue, 6 Feb 2001 11:58:52 -0800 MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-Priority: 3 X-MSMail-Priority: Normal X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook Express 5.00.2615.200 X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V5.00.2615.200 Resent-Message-ID: <"mA6ay1.0.fH7.Gc4Ww" mx1> Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/40603 X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com Status: O X-Status: If one uses ceramic disk capacitors or hard anodized aluminum "electrodes" with a coating of Pd or Ni over the insulating layer dipped into an electrolysis cell with a high potential applied, will there be enough migration of protons or deuterons to the film surface where they can pick up a "free" electron from the metal film and diffuse into the film, will there be enough of these to create detectable OU heat and/or Helium? Aluminum strips can be hard anodized instantly by apply a few hundred volts to an aluminum strip 6061 T6 (the + electrode) and slowly dipping it into an aqueous H2SO4 electrolyte in a metal can (the - electrode). I have done this with aluminum and the hard anodized film can withstand several thousand volts. The capacitors or anodized strip can then be coated with a metal of choice and used as an "Electrostatic Cathode" in an electrolysis cell. Regards, Frederick From vortex-l-request eskimo.com Tue Feb 6 11:12:04 2001 Received: (from smartlst localhost) by mx1.eskimo.com (8.9.1a/8.8.8) id LAA01108; Tue, 6 Feb 2001 11:07:17 -0800 Resent-Date: Tue, 6 Feb 2001 11:07:17 -0800 Date: Tue, 6 Feb 2001 14:13:22 -0500 (EST) From: John Schnurer To: vortex-l eskimo.com Subject: Re: is this for real? In-Reply-To: Message-ID: MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: TEXT/PLAIN; charset=US-ASCII Resent-Message-ID: <"fW8Vn3.0.8H.bj4Ww" mx1> Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/40604 X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com Status: O X-Status: Dear Frank, This looked like some battery data.... does this strike you as odd in any way? From vortex-l-request eskimo.com Tue Feb 6 13:44:33 2001 Received: (from smartlst localhost) by mx1.eskimo.com (8.9.1a/8.8.8) id NAA13766; Tue, 6 Feb 2001 13:37:15 -0800 Resent-Date: Tue, 6 Feb 2001 13:37:15 -0800 Message-Id: <5.0.2.1.2.20010206162116.02d126e0 pop.mindspring.com> X-Sender: jedrothwell pop.mindspring.com X-Mailer: QUALCOMM Windows Eudora Version 5.0.2 Date: Tue, 06 Feb 2001 16:37:05 -0500 To: vortex-L eskimo.com From: Jed Rothwell Subject: Wind versus nuclear power Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"; format=flowed Resent-Message-ID: <"TjS833.0.zM3.Bw6Ww" mx1> Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/40605 X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com Status: O X-Status: I downloaded some tables from www.worldwatch.org and www.awea.org. I transferred them to a spreadsheet, and made the following projections. Installed wind power worldwide is 13.4 GW. It is growing at 2 GW per year, and the rate of growth has been increasing 27% for the past five years or so. Installed nuclear power peaked at 328 GW in 1990, or 17% of worldwide electric power consumption. It is now declining slightly. Assuming it does not decline significantly, and the Chinese finish up the nuclear plants they are working on, and assuming that wind power continues to grow at present rates, wind power will overtake nuclear power around 2025. There is enough potential wind power in China's northern provinces and the Gobi Desert to supply twice as much electricity as China now consumes. The potential wind power from North Dakota, Texas, Kansas, South Dakota and Montana would be more than enough to supply all of the electricity in North America, taking into account environmental restrictions, land devoted to national parks and so on. (As I have mentioned here previously, the difficulty, and main expense, would be transmitting the power to population centers.) Worldwatch summarizes the problem with conventional fission power: "Nuclear power's biggest problems are economic: it is simply no longer competitive with other, newer forms of power generation. The final 20 U.S. reactors cost $3 to $4 billion to build, or some $3,000 to $4,000 per kilowatt of capacity. By contrast, new gas-fired combined cycle plants using the latest jet engine technology cost $400-$600 per kilowatt, and wind turbines are being installed at less than $1,000 per kilowatt." - Jed From vortex-l-request eskimo.com Tue Feb 6 14:22:12 2001 Received: (from smartlst localhost) by mx1.eskimo.com (8.9.1a/8.8.8) id OAA01229; Tue, 6 Feb 2001 14:14:01 -0800 Resent-Date: Tue, 6 Feb 2001 14:14:01 -0800 Message-Id: <5.0.2.1.2.20010206170721.02d126e0 pop.mindspring.com> X-Sender: jedrothwell pop.mindspring.com X-Mailer: QUALCOMM Windows Eudora Version 5.0.2 Date: Tue, 06 Feb 2001 17:13:54 -0500 To: vortex-L eskimo.com From: Jed Rothwell Subject: Computer power consumption overestimated Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"; format=flowed Resent-Message-ID: <"czmTO1.0.7J.eS7Ww" mx1> Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/40606 X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com Status: O X-Status: Here is something from Wired (http://www.wired.com/news/print/0,1294,41623,00.html) When I read the Forbes article mentioned herein, I thought it was screwy. The authors estimated computer power consumption at 1,000 watts. My ammeter says it is much lower than that. Most computer power consumption goes to the CRT. Increased use of LCD flat screens will greatly reduce this power consumption. CRT and LCD screens also provide lighting, which reduces the need for overhead fluorescent lights. - Jed Computers Are Green After All Environment News Service 11:00 a.m. Feb. 5, 2001 PST BERKELEY, California -- A new study of the power consumed by office computers and Internet equipment by a group at the Lawrence Berkeley National Laboratory has found that this equipment uses about 2 percent of the total electricity use in the United States. The finding contradicts a 1999 study by Mark Mills for the Greening Earth Society, which claimed that electricity use associated with the Internet totaled about 8 percent of all U.S. electricity use in 1998, and that it would grow to half of all electricity use in the next two decades. They examined the assumptions and conclusions of the Mills report, and found possible overestimates of the power used by particular kinds of equipment. The report, "The Internet Begins with Coal," has been summarized in Forbes magazine. "Mills assumes, for example, that the active power of a personal computer plus monitor is 1000 watts, when the measured data for a Pentium III PC with a 17-inch monitor show total active power use of 135 watts. Of course, most PCs and monitors bear the Energy Star label, which further reduces the power use when the computer is in standby mode," the Berkeley Lab group wrote. . . . From vortex-l-request eskimo.com Tue Feb 6 14:26:35 2001 Received: (from smartlst localhost) by mx1.eskimo.com (8.9.1a/8.8.8) id OAA05787; Tue, 6 Feb 2001 14:23:18 -0800 Resent-Date: Tue, 6 Feb 2001 14:23:18 -0800 From: Robin van Spaandonk To: vortex-l eskimo.com Subject: gravity Date: Wed, 07 Feb 2001 09:22:40 +1100 Organization: Improving Message-ID: X-Mailer: Forte Agent 1.8/32.548 MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit X-MIME-Autoconverted: from quoted-printable to 8bit by mx1.eskimo.com id OAA05738 Resent-Message-ID: <"af6zh1.0.KQ1.Mb7Ww" mx1> Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/40607 X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com Status: O X-Status: Hi, If gravity is really a pushing force, rather than an attractive force (objects are "attracted" as a consequence of shielding), then wouldn't the net effect on the universe as a whole be one of accelerating expansion? Regards, Robin van Spaandonk A Future For Humanity see: http://users.bigpond.net.au/rvanspaa/ From vortex-l-request eskimo.com Tue Feb 6 15:44:37 2001 Received: (from smartlst localhost) by mx1.eskimo.com (8.9.1a/8.8.8) id PAA11505; Tue, 6 Feb 2001 15:37:49 -0800 Resent-Date: Tue, 6 Feb 2001 15:37:49 -0800 From: Robin van Spaandonk To: vortex-l eskimo.com Subject: Re: Strange and unpleasant electro-magnetic(?) oppression. Date: Wed, 07 Feb 2001 10:37:14 +1100 Organization: Improving Message-ID: <4k218tku0sanchhl4hd1g13tdjr9e7uqb6 4ax.com> References: In-Reply-To: X-Mailer: Forte Agent 1.8/32.548 MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit X-MIME-Autoconverted: from quoted-printable to 8bit by mx1.eskimo.com id PAA11457 Resent-Message-ID: <"TluYN.0.fp2.Dh8Ww" mx1> Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/40608 X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com Status: RO X-Status: In reply to John Schnurer's message of Tue, 6 Feb 2001 13:49:50 -0500 (EST): >n > > > The symptoms of this contribution are similar to high power ultra >sonic mechanical, sound, waves. These have been studied in many years >past for "non lethal" ... and lethal too.... warfare. > > J Excellent point John. I wonder if there is any correlation with wind speed? Regards, Robin van Spaandonk A Future For Humanity see: http://users.bigpond.net.au/rvanspaa/ From vortex-l-request eskimo.com Tue Feb 6 15:54:09 2001 Received: (from smartlst localhost) by mx1.eskimo.com (8.9.1a/8.8.8) id PAA17172; Tue, 6 Feb 2001 15:50:01 -0800 Resent-Date: Tue, 6 Feb 2001 15:50:01 -0800 From: Robin van Spaandonk To: vortex-l eskimo.com Subject: Re: [theory]Case cell operation Date: Wed, 07 Feb 2001 10:49:26 +1100 Organization: Improving Message-ID: <3u218tcg5ojs1eocb100796dnjm40tho65 4ax.com> References: <3A774180.77C64EB6@pacbell.net> <3A777B21.4EBC0B4B@pacbell.net> <8d2f7to1o79qvlq46h0q1f0vs9su2qvskj@4ax.com> <3A784438.AC4E22CC@pacbell.net> In-Reply-To: <3A784438.AC4E22CC pacbell.net> X-Mailer: Forte Agent 1.8/32.548 MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit X-MIME-Autoconverted: from quoted-printable to 8bit by mx1.eskimo.com id PAA17130 Resent-Message-ID: <"ByeEt.0.EC4.fs8Ww" mx1> Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/40609 X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com Status: O X-Status: In reply to Jones Beene's message of Wed, 31 Jan 2001 08:58:32 -0800: >Robin van Spaandonk wrote: > >> Actually the numbers don't work out too badly. Fusion isn't likely to take >> place until the hydrino/deuterino is quite small, because that's the only >> way they can get close enough. The total energy release (from infinite >> separation) for the p'th level is p^2 x 13.6 eV, so for 23.8 MeV, p would be >> about 1323, and the radius would be about 40 F). > >Is this thousand step shrinkage from Mills book? No. Mills tends to say things which I find to be self contradictory when the size gets very small (see equations 5.72-5.74 in his book and the section that they are in). > Even so, >if it were the logical extension of his theory, then some of >those lower drops should be high energy gammas and would be >very evident - no? Not sure. The last steps would be about 36 keV x-rays. Would these be very evident? [snip] Regards, Robin van Spaandonk A Future For Humanity see: http://users.bigpond.net.au/rvanspaa/ From vortex-l-request eskimo.com Tue Feb 6 16:14:00 2001 Received: (from smartlst localhost) by mx1.eskimo.com (8.9.1a/8.8.8) id QAA27762; Tue, 6 Feb 2001 16:08:15 -0800 Resent-Date: Tue, 6 Feb 2001 16:08:15 -0800 Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" X-Sender: mjones pop.jump.net Message-Id: In-Reply-To: <4k218tku0sanchhl4hd1g13tdjr9e7uqb6 4ax.com> References: Date: Tue, 6 Feb 2001 18:07:18 -0600 To: vortex-l eskimo.com From: Mitchell Jones Subject: Re: Strange and unpleasant electro-magnetic(?) oppression. Resent-Message-ID: <"IkI6F1.0.in6.k79Ww" mx1> Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/40610 X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com Status: O X-Status: >In reply to John Schnurer's message of Tue, 6 Feb 2001 13:49:50 -0500 >(EST): > >>n >> >> >> The symptoms of this contribution are similar to high power ultra >>sonic mechanical, sound, waves. These have been studied in many years >>past for "non lethal" ... and lethal too.... warfare. >> >> J >Excellent point John. I wonder if there is any correlation with wind speed? ***{The original post contained the following paragraph: >I spoke to some of my friends at University, the Navy, >& Electronic Engineers. Their feedback along with my >own research into this phenomenon leads us to believe >it is microwave / electromagnetic fields. This is >probably why we also saw waves going across the TV >screen & radio blocking out with loud humm during these >"zap attacks". How does ultrasound affect the picture on the TV and cause a loud hum on the radio? By the way: since you live just around the corner from this place, why don't you head over there and check this report out? :-) --Mitchell Jones}*** > > >Regards, > >Robin van Spaandonk > >A Future For Humanity see: http://users.bigpond.net.au/rvanspaa/ ________________ Quote of the month: "Law is what the authorities use to ride the country." --Anatoly Schransky From vortex-l-request eskimo.com Tue Feb 6 19:04:13 2001 Received: (from smartlst localhost) by mx1.eskimo.com (8.9.1a/8.8.8) id SAA17893; Tue, 6 Feb 2001 18:53:02 -0800 Resent-Date: Tue, 6 Feb 2001 18:53:02 -0800 From: Robin van Spaandonk To: vortex-l eskimo.com Subject: Re: Strange and unpleasant electro-magnetic(?) oppression. Date: Wed, 07 Feb 2001 13:52:26 +1100 Organization: Improving Message-ID: References: <4k218tku0sanchhl4hd1g13tdjr9e7uqb6@4ax.com> In-Reply-To: X-Mailer: Forte Agent 1.8/32.548 MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit X-MIME-Autoconverted: from quoted-printable to 8bit by mx1.eskimo.com id SAA17817 Resent-Message-ID: <"iD_iQ3.0.QN4.EYBWw" mx1> Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/40611 X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com Status: O X-Status: In reply to Mitchell Jones's message of Tue, 6 Feb 2001 18:07:18 -0600: [snip] >How does ultrasound affect the picture on the TV and cause a loud hum on >the radio? A loose wire causing a spark when rattled by the wind? > >By the way: since you live just around the corner from this place, why >don't you head over there and check this report out? :-) That's like suggesting to someone in New York that they just head over to LA to check something out :). Regards, Robin van Spaandonk A Future For Humanity see: http://users.bigpond.net.au/rvanspaa/ From vortex-l-request eskimo.com Tue Feb 6 19:24:39 2001 Received: (from smartlst localhost) by mx1.eskimo.com (8.9.1a/8.8.8) id TAA31127; Tue, 6 Feb 2001 19:19:03 -0800 Resent-Date: Tue, 6 Feb 2001 19:19:03 -0800 X-Apparently-From: Message-Id: <4.2.0.58.20010206211537.00bbe280 postoffice.swbell.net> X-Sender: cjford1 pop.mail.yahoo.com X-Mailer: QUALCOMM Windows Eudora Pro Version 4.2.0.58 Date: Tue, 06 Feb 2001 21:22:21 -0600 To: vortex-l eskimo.com From: Charles Ford Subject: Re: Strange and unpleasant electro-magnetic(?) oppression. In-Reply-To: References: Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"; format=flowed Resent-Message-ID: <"9HgHZ1.0.Ec7.cwBWw" mx1> Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/40613 X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com Status: O X-Status: Yes I had suspected this because of the nausea... This is not typical of high power RF There are also some subsonic things. There was a factory in France I heard about. (I do not know the details or even if this is true) The workers had similar symptoms and some went on to suffer from further symptoms that resembled radiation sickness (loss of hair and incontinence) In this factory a large belt driven ventilation system was used. It seems that the large fans rotated at an RPM that caused them to radiate a subsonic into the factory of about 7 Hz Since the system was replaced the problem was solved. At 01:49 PM 2/6/01 -0500, you wrote: >n > > > The symptoms of this contribution are similar to high power ultra >sonic mechanical, sound, waves. These have been studied in many years >past for "non lethal" ... and lethal too.... warfare. > > J _________________________________________________________ Do You Yahoo!? Get your free yahoo.com address at http://mail.yahoo.com From vortex-l-request eskimo.com Tue Feb 6 19:24:46 2001 Received: (from smartlst localhost) by mx1.eskimo.com (8.9.1a/8.8.8) id TAA30999; Tue, 6 Feb 2001 19:18:46 -0800 Resent-Date: Tue, 6 Feb 2001 19:18:46 -0800 X-Apparently-From: Message-Id: <4.2.0.58.20010206212344.00bb7300 postoffice.swbell.net> X-Sender: cjford1 pop.mail.yahoo.com X-Mailer: QUALCOMM Windows Eudora Pro Version 4.2.0.58 Date: Tue, 06 Feb 2001 21:29:02 -0600 To: vortex-l eskimo.com From: Charles Ford Subject: Re: Strange and unpleasant electro-magnetic(?) oppression. In-Reply-To: References: <4k218tku0sanchhl4hd1g13tdjr9e7uqb6 4ax.com> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"; format=flowed Resent-Message-ID: <"y-CE21.0.Ca7.MwBWw" mx1> Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/40612 X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com Status: O X-Status: I honestly think we need someone who can make some measurements out there. Does anybody know any HAM operators in that aria. A HAM would be able to make relatively competent signal measurements, They are usually good problem solvers, and they are typically willing to help a damsel in distress... At 01:52 PM 2/7/01 +1100, you wrote: >In reply to Mitchell Jones's message of Tue, 6 Feb 2001 18:07:18 -0600: >[snip] > >How does ultrasound affect the picture on the TV and cause a loud hum on > >the radio? > >A loose wire causing a spark when rattled by the wind? > > > > >By the way: since you live just around the corner from this place, why > >don't you head over there and check this report out? :-) > >That's like suggesting to someone in New York that they just head over to LA >to check something out :). > > >Regards, > >Robin van Spaandonk > >A Future For Humanity see: http://users.bigpond.net.au/rvanspaa/ _________________________________________________________ Do You Yahoo!? Get your free yahoo.com address at http://mail.yahoo.com From vortex-l-request eskimo.com Wed Feb 7 04:16:10 2001 Received: (from smartlst localhost) by mx1.eskimo.com (8.9.1a/8.8.8) id EAA09430; Wed, 7 Feb 2001 04:15:35 -0800 Resent-Date: Wed, 7 Feb 2001 04:15:35 -0800 From: "xplorer" To: Subject: Help a needy lawyer, Ban something today! Date: Wed, 7 Feb 2001 19:15:23 +0700 Message-ID: MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-Priority: 3 (Normal) X-MSMail-Priority: Normal X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook IMO, Build 9.0.2416 (9.0.2910.0) Importance: Normal X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V4.72.3110.3 In-Reply-To: <4.2.0.58.20010206212344.00bb7300 postoffice.swbell.net> Resent-Message-ID: <"JqfLB1.0.6J2.cnJWw" mx1> Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/40614 X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com Status: O X-Status: Any figures on how much power it would take to stop a criminal attacker with a microwave beam ? Say you had a 100 kilo 2 meter tall goon coming at you with a knife, and you pulled out your trusty mwave beamer... How many kwatts for how many seconds would you need to stop him, assuming the beam could be tight enough to focus (approx 20 cm dia.) on the torso ? Perhaps the knees or pelvis would be a better target?) cheers From vortex-l-request eskimo.com Wed Feb 7 09:07:38 2001 Received: (from smartlst localhost) by mx1.eskimo.com (8.9.1a/8.8.8) id JAA09891; Wed, 7 Feb 2001 09:00:41 -0800 Resent-Date: Wed, 7 Feb 2001 09:00:41 -0800 From: Steve Krivit To: "smtp:vortex-l eskimo.com" Subject: Re: Strange and unpleasant electro-magne Date: Wed, 7 Feb 2001 08:39:00 -0800 X-Mailer: MailBeamer v3.24 (Win98) Message-ID: <224154200.1731321938.4294664675 Butthead.linkline.com> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Resent-Message-ID: <"tlAit.0.TQ2.vyNWw" mx1> Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/40615 X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com Status: O X-Status: I have heard (no reference, sorry) of a military test that operated sub-sonic (approx 10 hz) speakers in an attempt to disarm an enemy. One effect they repeatedly observed was that 10 hz would automatically trigger discontinence in the human body. Steve From vortex-l-request eskimo.com Wed Feb 7 10:14:52 2001 Received: (from smartlst localhost) by mx1.eskimo.com (8.9.1a/8.8.8) id KAA24270; Wed, 7 Feb 2001 10:12:31 -0800 Resent-Date: Wed, 7 Feb 2001 10:12:31 -0800 X-Apparently-From: Message-Id: <4.2.0.58.20010207114105.00947ef0 postoffice.swbell.net> X-Sender: cjford1 pop.mail.yahoo.com X-Mailer: QUALCOMM Windows Eudora Pro Version 4.2.0.58 Date: Wed, 07 Feb 2001 11:46:33 -0600 To: vortex-l eskimo.com From: Charles Ford Subject: Re: Help a needy lawyer, Ban something today! In-Reply-To: References: <4.2.0.58.20010206212344.00bb7300 postoffice.swbell.net> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"; format=flowed Resent-Message-ID: <"v6cHd.0.1x5.F0PWw" mx1> Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/40616 X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com Status: O X-Status: Danger Will Robenson... The problem is not so much stopping the attacker as it is not incarcerating yourself or other people and or items in the immediate vicinity with the reflected beam. The reason a microwave actually cooks the food is that the power inside the chamber builds up until something uses it. Wether that be the food or the walls of the chamber. If you start your nuke-o-wave empty it will simply heat up the chamber walls and eventually destroy itself with induced heat. Not an effective stopping weapon. At 07:15 PM 2/7/01 +0700, you wrote: >Any figures on how much power it would take > to stop a criminal attacker with a microwave beam ? > >Say you had a 100 kilo 2 meter tall goon coming at you with > a knife, and you pulled out your trusty mwave beamer... >How many kwatts for how many seconds would you need > to stop him, assuming the beam could be tight enough > to focus (approx 20 cm dia.) on the torso ? >Perhaps the knees or pelvis would be a better target?) > >cheers Charlie Ford KC5-OWZ cjford1 yahoo.com cjford1 swbell.net _________________________________________________________ Do You Yahoo!? Get your free yahoo.com address at http://mail.yahoo.com From vortex-l-request eskimo.com Wed Feb 7 10:35:22 2001 Received: (from smartlst localhost) by mx1.eskimo.com (8.9.1a/8.8.8) id KAA04149; Wed, 7 Feb 2001 10:29:41 -0800 Resent-Date: Wed, 7 Feb 2001 10:29:41 -0800 From: Steve Krivit To: "vortex-l eskimo.com" Subject: Strange and unpleasant electro-magnetic( Date: Wed, 7 Feb 2001 10:08:00 -0800 X-Mailer: MailBeamer v3.24 (Win98) Message-ID: <224159542.1736665154.4294664675 Butthead.linkline.com> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Resent-Message-ID: <"4tEm72.0.l01.LGPWw" mx1> Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/40617 X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com Status: O X-Status: correction: incontinence, not discontenance From vortex-l-request eskimo.com Wed Feb 7 12:08:19 2001 Received: (from smartlst localhost) by mx1.eskimo.com (8.9.1a/8.8.8) id MAA28084; Wed, 7 Feb 2001 12:01:36 -0800 Resent-Date: Wed, 7 Feb 2001 12:01:36 -0800 Message-ID: <3A81AB6A.9D00C92 bellsouth.net> Date: Wed, 07 Feb 2001 15:09:14 -0500 From: Terry Blanton X-Mailer: Mozilla 4.73 [en] (WinNT; U) X-Accept-Language: en MIME-Version: 1.0 To: vortex-l eskimo.com Subject: Kamen on 60 Minutes II Tonight Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Resent-Message-ID: <"dzg8f2.0.fs6.VcQWw" mx1> Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/40618 X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com Status: O X-Status: See the article at: http://cbsnews.com/now/story/0,1597,269165-412,00.shtml Terry From vortex-l-request eskimo.com Wed Feb 7 12:18:13 2001 Received: (from smartlst localhost) by mx1.eskimo.com (8.9.1a/8.8.8) id MAA04480; Wed, 7 Feb 2001 12:16:57 -0800 Resent-Date: Wed, 7 Feb 2001 12:16:57 -0800 Message-ID: <3A81AF02.CE35533B bellsouth.net> Date: Wed, 07 Feb 2001 15:24:34 -0500 From: Terry Blanton X-Mailer: Mozilla 4.73 [en] (WinNT; U) X-Accept-Language: en MIME-Version: 1.0 To: vortex-l eskimo.com Subject: Re: Kamen on 60 Minutes II Tonight References: <3A81AB6A.9D00C92 bellsouth.net> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Resent-Message-ID: <"c7CXy.0.v51.uqQWw" mx1> Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/40619 X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com Status: O X-Status: Terry Blanton wrote: > > See the article at: > > http://cbsnews.com/now/story/0,1597,269165-412,00.shtml An interesting quote from the article: "I always wanted to defy gravity and just to be able to hang in space, to be on a magic carpet. They don't make magic carpets, but that's as close as you can get," he says. From vortex-l-request eskimo.com Wed Feb 7 12:34:17 2001 Received: (from smartlst localhost) by mx1.eskimo.com (8.9.1a/8.8.8) id MAA10378; Wed, 7 Feb 2001 12:29:58 -0800 Resent-Date: Wed, 7 Feb 2001 12:29:58 -0800 Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" X-Sender: mjones pop.jump.net Message-Id: In-Reply-To: References: <4k218tku0sanchhl4hd1g13tdjr9e7uqb6 4ax.com> Date: Wed, 7 Feb 2001 14:28:02 -0600 To: vortex-l eskimo.com From: Mitchell Jones Subject: Re: Strange and unpleasant electro-magnetic(?) oppression. Resent-Message-ID: <"6598S3.0.4Y2.51RWw" mx1> Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/40620 X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com Status: O X-Status: >In reply to Mitchell Jones's message of Tue, 6 Feb 2001 18:07:18 -0600: >[snip] >>How does ultrasound affect the picture on the TV and cause a loud hum on >>the radio? > >A loose wire causing a spark when rattled by the wind? ***{Um, not too plausible, in my opinion. I was about to ask if you knew of any concrete examples where ultrasound was inadvertently produced, and had effects similar to those described, but then Charles Ford posted an example from a factory in France. Does anybody know of any household equipment that might behave in such a manner? It occurs to me that a lot of the old dryers and washers have belt drives. Could belt slippage in an old washer do this? Anybody? --MJ}*** >>By the way: since you live just around the corner from this place, why >>don't you head over there and check this report out? :-) > >That's like suggesting to someone in New York that they just head over to LA >to check something out :). ***{I was just jerking your chain, Robin. I like to give Aussies an opportunity to talk about how BIG their county is now and then. Like Texans, they seldom let an opportunity pass. (Your response was surprisingly restrained, though. Did you suspect that I was baiting you? :-) --MJ}*** >Regards, > >Robin van Spaandonk > >A Future For Humanity see: http://users.bigpond.net.au/rvanspaa/ ________________ Quote of the month: "Law is what the authorities use to ride the country." --Anatoly Schransky From vortex-l-request eskimo.com Wed Feb 7 12:48:25 2001 Received: (from smartlst localhost) by mx1.eskimo.com (8.9.1a/8.8.8) id MAA11446; Wed, 7 Feb 2001 12:32:36 -0800 Resent-Date: Wed, 7 Feb 2001 12:32:36 -0800 Message-Id: Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Date: Wed, 7 Feb 2001 11:42:06 -0900 To: vortex-l eskimo.com From: hheffner mtaonline.net (Horace Heffner) Subject: Re: Kamen on 60 Minutes II Tonight Resent-Message-ID: <"deQcd.0.go2.Z3RWw" mx1> Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/40621 X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com Status: O X-Status: At 3:09 PM 2/7/1, Terry Blanton wrote: >See the article at: > >http://cbsnews.com/now/story/0,1597,269165-412,00.shtml > >Terry The show aired here in Alaska last night. Nothing was revealed about IT. It was a nifty documentary on Kamen though. Regards, Horace Heffner From vortex-l-request eskimo.com Wed Feb 7 12:58:06 2001 Received: (from smartlst localhost) by mx1.eskimo.com (8.9.1a/8.8.8) id MAA22792; Wed, 7 Feb 2001 12:52:52 -0800 Resent-Date: Wed, 7 Feb 2001 12:52:52 -0800 Message-ID: <3A81B770.E6204E13 bellsouth.net> Date: Wed, 07 Feb 2001 16:00:32 -0500 From: Terry Blanton X-Mailer: Mozilla 4.73 [en] (WinNT; U) X-Accept-Language: en MIME-Version: 1.0 To: vortex-l eskimo.com Subject: Re: Kamen on 60 Minutes II Tonight References: Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Resent-Message-ID: <"VJiAI2.0.zZ5.aMRWw" mx1> Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/40622 X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com Status: O X-Status: Horace Heffner wrote: > > At 3:09 PM 2/7/1, Terry Blanton wrote: > >See the article at: > > > >http://cbsnews.com/now/story/0,1597,269165-412,00.shtml > > > >Terry > > The show aired here in Alaska last night. Nothing was revealed about IT. > It was a nifty documentary on Kamen though. Aaargh! The only thing I hate more than my watch being slow is my calendar being slow. Sorry, Vorts, it *was* last night's show. Thanks, Horace! Terry From vortex-l-request eskimo.com Wed Feb 7 13:11:28 2001 Received: (from smartlst localhost) by mx1.eskimo.com (8.9.1a/8.8.8) id NAA32402; Wed, 7 Feb 2001 13:07:23 -0800 Resent-Date: Wed, 7 Feb 2001 13:07:23 -0800 Mime-Version: 1.0 Message-Id: In-Reply-To: <5.0.1.4.0.20010112100701.038b96c0 earthtech.org> References: <5.0.1.4.0.20010111074819.03aed7d0 earthtech.org> <5.0.2.1.0.20010110201135.02208598 earthtech.org> <5.0.2.1.0.20010107075917.022802e8 earthtech.org> <5.0.2.1.0.20010110201135.02208598 earthtech.org> <5.0.1.4.0.20010111074819.03aed7d0 earthtech.org> <5.0.1.4.0.20010112100701.038b96c0 earthtech.org> Date: Wed, 7 Feb 2001 15:04:27 -0600 To: vortex-l eskimo.com From: thomas malloy Subject: Re: Cook's Drive Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" ; format="flowed" Resent-Message-ID: <"RJaZT2.0.6w7.BaRWw" mx1> Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/40623 X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com Status: O X-Status: > On January 12 Scott Little wrote; in response to my previous posting on the Cook Inertial Propulsion system (CIP) >Cook's claim is so obviously in violation of Conservation of >Momentum that theoretical consideration is useless. What I mean is >that any theoretical consideration of this device is doomed to show >that it cannot work...either that or you are making a mistake in >your analysis. According to Robert Cook, tests run at Boeing confirm that his machine works. I just love it when the experiemental results conflict with theory. > >On the other hand, I would be most interested in a rigorous >experiment which demonstrated that the device does work. Such an >experiment should not be taken lightly as it is EASY to introduce >artifacts when working with a rotating, eccentric-weight mechanism. >Any test wherein the device is sitting on a surface and moving along >is suspect because of the "stiction" situation. >An excellent test of such a device is to suspend it from a rope, >turn it on, and see if it can displace itself to one side and >maintain the rope at a significant angle off vertical. Hal Puthoff suggested the same thing. I asked Norm Baker, who was then Cook's financial backer about this test and he told me that they had done this test and the machine moved over so that the entire machine was beyond the string supporting the plumb bob. > > >Scott Little, EarthTech Int'l, Inc. http://www.earthtech.org >Suite 300, 4030 Braker Lane West, Austin TX 78759, USA >512-342-2185 (voice), 512-346-3017 (FAX), little earthtech.org (email) From vortex-l-request eskimo.com Wed Feb 7 13:28:28 2001 Received: (from smartlst localhost) by mx1.eskimo.com (8.9.1a/8.8.8) id NAA10757; Wed, 7 Feb 2001 13:25:26 -0800 Resent-Date: Wed, 7 Feb 2001 13:25:26 -0800 From: Robin van Spaandonk To: vortex-l eskimo.com Subject: Re: Strange and unpleasant electro-magnetic(?) oppression. Date: Thu, 08 Feb 2001 08:24:50 +1100 Organization: Improving Message-ID: <91f38t815qu0s0hnhunu63ue50hevt0856 4ax.com> References: <4k218tku0sanchhl4hd1g1 3tdjr9e7uqb6 4ax.com> In-Reply-To: X-Mailer: Forte Agent 1.8/32.548 MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit X-MIME-Autoconverted: from quoted-printable to 8bit by mx1.eskimo.com id NAA10718 Resent-Message-ID: <"uW1AO1.0.rd2.6rRWw" mx1> Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/40624 X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com Status: RO X-Status: In reply to Mitchell Jones's message of Wed, 7 Feb 2001 14:28:02 -0600: [snip] >from a factory in France. Does anybody know of any household equipment that >might behave in such a manner? It occurs to me that a lot of the old dryers >and washers have belt drives. Could belt slippage in an old washer do this? >Anybody? --MJ}*** I was thinking more along the lines of wind whistling through holes under the eves, causing the whole roof to vibrate (or perhaps only parts of it). A loose wire connected to that part of the structure would then vibrate right along with it. > >>>By the way: since you live just around the corner from this place, why >>>don't you head over there and check this report out? :-) >> >>That's like suggesting to someone in New York that they just head over to LA >>to check something out :). > >***{I was just jerking your chain, Robin. I like to give Aussies an >opportunity to talk about how BIG their county is now and then. Like >Texans, they seldom let an opportunity pass. (Your response was >surprisingly restrained, though. Did you suspect that I was baiting you? >:-) --MJ}*** Well the :-) was a bit of a give-away don't you think? Regards, Robin van Spaandonk A Future For Humanity see: http://users.bigpond.net.au/rvanspaa/ From vortex-l-request eskimo.com Wed Feb 7 13:55:02 2001 Received: (from smartlst localhost) by mx1.eskimo.com (8.9.1a/8.8.8) id NAA30372; Wed, 7 Feb 2001 13:52:06 -0800 Resent-Date: Wed, 7 Feb 2001 13:52:06 -0800 Mime-Version: 1.0 X-Sender: rick mail.highsurf.com Message-Id: In-Reply-To: References: Date: Wed, 7 Feb 2001 11:51:50 -1000 To: vortex-l eskimo.com From: Rick Monteverde Subject: Re: Kamen on 60 Minutes II Tonight Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" ; format="flowed" Resent-Message-ID: <"kgTrU3.0.OQ7.5ESWw" mx1> Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/40625 X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com Status: O X-Status: Horace - >The show aired here in Alaska last night. Nothing was revealed about IT. >It was a nifty documentary on Kamen though. > >Regards, > >Horace Heffner After seeing Kamen's inventions on the video, I'm more convinced now that IT's a wireless remote bot with a bottom part based on an electric wheelchair, a tower with a camera and a manipulator arm. Seeing that chair with the little joystick control reminded me that the wires to the servos could be any length - basically go over TCP/IP with the right software, etc. Steve Jobs has "Airport", the 150'range wireless router, perfect for the purpose. This idea fits very well to all the requirements proposed by the leaked story. The tech exists and has been around a while, it's just that no visionary inventor has connected all the dots and put the pieces together in a slick machine that's affordable, general purpose, mobile and wireless, and easy to operate. But maybe that has changed. This could be a whole second wave to the internet and the PC. Here's another way to look at how important such a gizmo would be. Aside from industrial controls or ongoing input from an operator, webcam, whatever, the whole PC/Internet world is mostly based on what's sitting on a given computer's hard disk at any given time. Bits and pixels. A ubiquitou,s affordable, personal internet capable bot adds molecules to bits and pixels. How huge is that? The importance of the PC and internet in our society is sometimes illustrated by having it interfered with, as in hacked. So look at it from the perspective of a hacker. All the cybercriminal can basically do is access and move bits and pixels. But think for a moment about the level of havoc that could be had by hacking an office, home, store, or factory bot! Mind boggling, and dangerous. It must be very powerful tech to be all of that. Sculpt society and cities around it? Have "authorities" and other groups step in to restrict it? Yup. Interest the likes of Jobs, Bezos, and Silicon Valley VCs with a motorized chair or scooter? I don't think so! If IT isn't Internet Telepresence, it certainly should be. - Rick Monteverde Honolulu, HI From vortex-l-request eskimo.com Wed Feb 7 14:05:54 2001 Received: (from smartlst localhost) by mx1.eskimo.com (8.9.1a/8.8.8) id OAA03326; Wed, 7 Feb 2001 14:01:44 -0800 Resent-Date: Wed, 7 Feb 2001 14:01:44 -0800 Mime-Version: 1.0 X-Sender: rick mail.highsurf.com Message-Id: In-Reply-To: References: <5.0.1.4.0.20010111074819.03aed7d0 earthtech.org> <5.0.2.1.0.20010110201135.02208598 earthtech.org> <5.0.2.1.0.20010107075917.022802e8 earthtech.org> <5.0.2.1.0.20010110201135.02208598 earthtech.org> <5.0.1.4.0.20010111074819.03aed7d0 earthtech.org> <5.0.1.4.0.20010112100701.038b96c0 earthtech.org> Date: Wed, 7 Feb 2001 12:01:23 -1000 To: vortex-l eskimo.com From: Rick Monteverde Subject: Re: Cook's Drive Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" ; format="flowed" Resent-Message-ID: <"3e3PN2.0.tp.8NSWw" mx1> Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/40626 X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com Status: O X-Status: Thomas - >Hal Puthoff suggested the same thing. I asked Norm Baker, who was >then Cook's financial backer about this test and he told me that they >had done this test and the machine moved over so that the entire >machine was beyond the string supporting the plumb bob. Wow! If that's true, it's OVER. The "laws of motion" as taught are WRONG, and we have a space drive and just don't collectively know it yet. The entire machine has to be beyond plumb as they said it did, and also not be whirling around the plumbline axis, because even a simple gyro can do that. If it just hung there relatively still and totally beyond plumb ...bam. - Rick Monteverde Honolulu, HI From vortex-l-request eskimo.com Wed Feb 7 14:19:41 2001 Received: (from smartlst localhost) by mx1.eskimo.com (8.9.1a/8.8.8) id OAA11331; Wed, 7 Feb 2001 14:15:23 -0800 Resent-Date: Wed, 7 Feb 2001 14:15:23 -0800 X-Apparently-From: Message-Id: <4.2.0.58.20010207161150.00950f00 postoffice.swbell.net> X-Sender: cjford1 pop.mail.yahoo.com X-Mailer: QUALCOMM Windows Eudora Pro Version 4.2.0.58 Date: Wed, 07 Feb 2001 16:15:17 -0600 To: vortex-l eskimo.com From: Charles Ford Subject: Re: Cook's Drive In-Reply-To: References: <5.0.1.4.0.20010111074819.03aed7d0 earthtech.org> <5.0.2.1.0.20010110201135.02208598 earthtech.org> <5.0.2.1.0.20010107075917.022802e8 earthtech.org> <5.0.2.1.0.20010110201135.02208598 earthtech.org> <5.0.1.4.0.20010111074819.03aed7d0 earthtech.org> <5.0.1.4.0.20010112100701.038b96c0 earthtech.org> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"; format=flowed Resent-Message-ID: <"Cecgc3.0.sm2.wZSWw" mx1> Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/40627 X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com Status: O X-Status: I have seen a swinging weights configuration where the weight swings to the outside of a smaller diameter at one end of the larger diameter and the inside at the other. This machine hung on a string to demonstrate the force. It tipped the string about 10% on the average but it shook things up so bad as to be usless in practice. At 12:01 PM 2/7/01 -1000, you wrote: >Thomas - > >>Hal Puthoff suggested the same thing. I asked Norm Baker, who was >>then Cook's financial backer about this test and he told me that they >>had done this test and the machine moved over so that the entire >>machine was beyond the string supporting the plumb bob. > >Wow! > >If that's true, it's OVER. The "laws of motion" as taught are WRONG, and >we have a space drive and just don't collectively know it yet. > >The entire machine has to be beyond plumb as they said it did, and also >not be whirling around the plumbline axis, because even a simple gyro can >do that. If it just hung there relatively still and totally beyond >plumb ...bam. > >- Rick Monteverde >Honolulu, HI Charlie Ford KC5-OWZ cjford1 yahoo.com cjford1 swbell.net _________________________________________________________ Do You Yahoo!? Get your free yahoo.com address at http://mail.yahoo.com From vortex-l-request eskimo.com Wed Feb 7 14:24:23 2001 Received: (from smartlst localhost) by mx1.eskimo.com (8.9.1a/8.8.8) id OAA14143; Wed, 7 Feb 2001 14:21:00 -0800 Resent-Date: Wed, 7 Feb 2001 14:21:00 -0800 Message-ID: <003c01c0915c$c0fb7e60$718f85ce fjsparber> Reply-To: "Frederick Sparber" From: "Frederick Sparber" To: Cc: Subject: Re: Woody Allen's "Orgasmatron" has arrived! Date: Wed, 7 Feb 2001 15:21:17 -0800 MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: multipart/mixed; boundary="----=_NextPart_000_0005_01C09119.9E38B3E0" X-Priority: 3 X-MSMail-Priority: Normal X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook Express 5.00.2615.200 X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V5.00.2615.200 Resent-Message-ID: <"-Qhre3.0.pS3.BfSWw" mx1> Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/40628 X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com Status: RO X-Status: This is a multi-part message in MIME format. ------=_NextPart_000_0005_01C09119.9E38B3E0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit http://www.cnn.com/2001/HEALTH/02/07/orgasm.device/index.html ------=_NextPart_000_0005_01C09119.9E38B3E0 Content-Type: application/octet-stream; name="CNN.com - Health - Implant could help women with sexual dysfunction - February 7, 2001.url" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Content-Disposition: attachment; filename="CNN.com - Health - Implant could help women with sexual dysfunction - February 7, 2001.url" [DEFAULT] BASEURL=http://www.cnn.com/2001/HEALTH/02/07/orgasm.device/index.html [InternetShortcut] URL=http://www.cnn.com/2001/HEALTH/02/07/orgasm.device/index.html Modified=209AF95A5C91C001BB ------=_NextPart_000_0005_01C09119.9E38B3E0-- From vortex-l-request eskimo.com Wed Feb 7 17:12:02 2001 Received: (from smartlst localhost) by mx1.eskimo.com (8.9.1a/8.8.8) id RAA08227; Wed, 7 Feb 2001 17:06:45 -0800 Resent-Date: Wed, 7 Feb 2001 17:06:45 -0800 Mime-Version: 1.0 X-Sender: rick mail.highsurf.com Message-Id: In-Reply-To: <4.2.0.58.20010207161150.00950f00 postoffice.swbell.net> References: <5.0.1.4.0.20010111074819.03aed7d0 earthtech.org> <5.0.2.1.0.20010110201135.02208598 earthtech.org> <5.0.2.1.0.20010107075917.022802e8 earthtech.org> <5.0.2.1.0.20010110201135.02208598 earthtech.org> <5.0.1.4.0.20010111074819.03aed7d0 earthtech.org> <5.0.1.4.0.20010112100701.038b96c0 earthtech.org> <4.2.0.58.20010207161150.00950f00 postoffice.swbell.net> Date: Wed, 7 Feb 2001 15:06:32 -1000 To: vortex-l eskimo.com From: Rick Monteverde Subject: Re: Cook's Drive Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" ; format="flowed" Resent-Message-ID: <"0Mqqd2.0.T02.a4VWw" mx1> Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/40629 X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com Status: O X-Status: Charles - >I have seen a swinging weights configuration where the weight >swings to the outside of a smaller diameter at one end of the larger >diameter and the inside at the other. What was that again? >This machine hung on a string to demonstrate the force. It tipped >the string about 10% on the average [...] Sorry, what does tipping the string 10% mean? Ten degrees? Did the entire device stand clear of the plumb line? >[...] but it shook things up so bad as to be usless in practice. - Rick Monteverde Honolulu, HI From vortex-l-request eskimo.com Wed Feb 7 17:32:16 2001 Received: (from smartlst localhost) by mx1.eskimo.com (8.9.1a/8.8.8) id RAA20517; Wed, 7 Feb 2001 17:29:27 -0800 Resent-Date: Wed, 7 Feb 2001 17:29:27 -0800 Message-ID: <3A81F56F.74D8A55C enter.net> Date: Wed, 07 Feb 2001 20:25:03 -0500 From: David Rosignoli X-Mailer: Mozilla 4.73 [en] (Win98; I) X-Accept-Language: en MIME-Version: 1.0 To: vortex-l eskimo.com Subject: Re: Cook's Drive References: <5.0.1.4.0.20010111074819.03aed7d0 earthtech.org> <5.0.2.1.0.20010110201135.02208598 earthtech.org> <5.0.2.1.0.20010107075917.022802e8 earthtech.org> <5.0.2.1.0.20010110201135.02208598 earthtech.org> <5.0.1.4.0.20010111074819.03aed7d0 earthtech.org> <5.0.1.4.0.20010112100701.038b96c0 earthtech.org> <4.2.0.58.20010207161150.00950f00@postoffice.swbell.net> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Resent-Message-ID: <"-XAkP.0.V05.sPVWw" mx1> Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/40630 X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com Status: O X-Status: At the Force Field Propulsion Conference a couple of weeks ago, Tony Cuthbert mentioned he developed a device that when suspended like a pendulum would oscillated back and force from the base to 1" from the plum line, but never crossed the plum line. Charles Ford wrote: > > I have seen a swinging weights configuration where the weight swings to > the outside of a smaller diameter at one end of the larger diameter and the > inside at the other. This machine hung on a string to demonstrate the > force. It tipped the string about 10% on the average but it shook things > up so bad as to be usless in practice. > > At 12:01 PM 2/7/01 -1000, you wrote: > >Thomas - > > > >>Hal Puthoff suggested the same thing. I asked Norm Baker, who was > >>then Cook's financial backer about this test and he told me that they > >>had done this test and the machine moved over so that the entire > >>machine was beyond the string supporting the plumb bob. > > > >Wow! > > > >If that's true, it's OVER. The "laws of motion" as taught are WRONG, and > >we have a space drive and just don't collectively know it yet. > > > >The entire machine has to be beyond plumb as they said it did, and also > >not be whirling around the plumbline axis, because even a simple gyro can > >do that. If it just hung there relatively still and totally beyond > >plumb ...bam. > > > >- Rick Monteverde > >Honolulu, HI > > Charlie Ford > > KC5-OWZ > cjford1 yahoo.com > cjford1 swbell.net > > _________________________________________________________ > Do You Yahoo!? > Get your free yahoo.com address at http://mail.yahoo.com From vortex-l-request eskimo.com Wed Feb 7 19:38:19 2001 Received: (from smartlst localhost) by mx1.eskimo.com (8.9.1a/8.8.8) id TAA10869; Wed, 7 Feb 2001 19:35:13 -0800 Resent-Date: Wed, 7 Feb 2001 19:35:13 -0800 Message-Id: Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Date: Wed, 7 Feb 2001 18:44:52 -0900 To: vortex-l eskimo.com From: hheffner mtaonline.net (Horace Heffner) Subject: Re: Cook's Drive Resent-Message-ID: <"guZmC3.0.kf2.mFXWw" mx1> Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/40631 X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com Status: O X-Status: At 3:04 PM 2/7/1, thomas malloy wrote: >Hal Puthoff suggested the same thing. I asked Norm Baker, who was >then Cook's financial backer about this test and he told me that they >had done this test and the machine moved over so that the entire >machine was beyond the string supporting the plumb bob. That is not a suffcient test. The entire machine must move beyond the center of gravity AND REMAIN THERE. Also, obviously, the plumb bob can't be swinging about. 8^) Regards, Horace Heffner From vortex-l-request eskimo.com Wed Feb 7 20:45:20 2001 Received: (from smartlst localhost) by mx1.eskimo.com (8.9.1a/8.8.8) id UAA07316; Wed, 7 Feb 2001 20:41:35 -0800 Resent-Date: Wed, 7 Feb 2001 20:41:35 -0800 X-Apparently-From: Message-Id: <4.2.0.58.20010207221007.00ad7340 postoffice.swbell.net> X-Sender: cjford1 pop.mail.yahoo.com X-Mailer: QUALCOMM Windows Eudora Pro Version 4.2.0.58 Date: Wed, 07 Feb 2001 22:34:52 -0600 To: vortex-l eskimo.com From: Charles Ford Subject: Re: Cook's Drive In-Reply-To: References: <4.2.0.58.20010207161150.00950f00 postoffice.swbell.net> <5.0.1.4.0.20010111074819.03aed7d0 earthtech.org> <5.0.2.1.0.20010110201135.02208598 earthtech.org> <5.0.2.1.0.20010107075917.022802e8 earthtech.org> <5.0.2.1.0.20010110201135.02208598 earthtech.org> <5.0.1.4.0.20010111074819.03aed7d0 earthtech.org> <5.0.1.4.0.20010112100701.038b96c0 earthtech.org> <4.2.0.58.20010207161150.00950f00 postoffice.swbell.net> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"; format=flowed Resent-Message-ID: <"3jJEY2.0.Ao1.-DYWw" mx1> Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/40632 X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com Status: O X-Status: Rick: At 03:06 PM 2/7/01 -1000, you wrote: >Charles - > >>I have seen a swinging weights configuration where the weight swings to >>the outside of a smaller diameter at one end of the larger diameter and >>the inside at the other. > >What was that again? Bad explanation... There where two weights on rotating gears. The gears spun around a geared shaft like a planetary gear set. The gears were synchronized in such a way that the weights swing further from the center shaft on one side and closer on the other. >>This machine hung on a string to demonstrate the force. It tipped the >>string about 10% on the average [...] > >Sorry, what does tipping the string 10% mean? Ten degrees? Did the entire >device stand clear of the plumb line? 10% (a guess from memory) the device extended horizontally 10% of the length of the string. Since it is a guess then 10 degrees is probably close enough. >>[...] but it shook things up so bad as to be usless in practice. > >- Rick Monteverde >Honolulu, HI Also a note on the rope test... It is not a very good test. If a device can provide an unbalance of force it still might not pass. The rope its self invalidates the test conditions simply by being there. The device would have to provide its own horizontal stabilization to prevent the rope from causing it to turn around or become unbalanced against the tether. This unbalance will cause spinning just like a helicopter loosing its stabilizer. A simple zero friction table would suffice to prove an unbalance of forces. The rope test could only be passed after plenty of engineering is put into making it into a stable vehicle. At that point why bother? The point could be better proven by operating it as a vehicle. Also the requirement that the entire device pass beyond the centerline of the plumb simply amplifies the de-stabilization. I believe this test is overly critical. _________________________________________________________ Do You Yahoo!? Get your free yahoo.com address at http://mail.yahoo.com From vortex-l-request eskimo.com Wed Feb 7 21:36:17 2001 Received: (from smartlst localhost) by mx1.eskimo.com (8.9.1a/8.8.8) id VAA28501; Wed, 7 Feb 2001 21:34:35 -0800 Resent-Date: Wed, 7 Feb 2001 21:34:35 -0800 Message-Id: Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Date: Wed, 7 Feb 2001 20:44:05 -0900 To: vortex-l eskimo.com From: hheffner mtaonline.net (Horace Heffner) Subject: Re: Cook's Drive Resent-Message-ID: <"WweTk.0.Ez6.h_YWw" mx1> Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/40633 X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com Status: O X-Status: At 10:34 PM 2/7/1, Charles Ford wrote: > >Also a note on the rope test... It is not a very good test. If a device >can provide an unbalance of force it still might not pass. The rope its >self invalidates the test conditions simply by being there. The device >would have to provide its own horizontal stabilization to prevent the rope >from causing it to turn around or become unbalanced against the >tether. This unbalance will cause spinning just like a helicopter loosing >its stabilizer. > >A simple zero friction table would suffice to prove an unbalance of >forces. The rope test could only be passed after plenty of engineering is >put into making it into a stable vehicle. At that point why bother? The >point could be better proven by operating it as a vehicle. > >Also the requirement that the entire device pass beyond the centerline of >the plumb simply amplifies the de-stabilization. I believe this test is >overly critical. You can avoid the technical difficulties by using a triangular pendulum: B B \ / \ / \ / \ / \ / \ / TT B - bearings \,/ - supports T - device being tested The main problem is making the pendulum long enough that the device can fit totally outside the vertical line when the pendulum is deflected. The supports are best made rigid, but making only the bottom portion rigid is probably enough to sufficiently retard rotation about a veritcal axis. In addition, the fact the pendulum is a triangle limits the pendulum swing to a single plane. Regards, Horace Heffner From vortex-l-request eskimo.com Wed Feb 7 21:55:39 2001 Received: (from smartlst localhost) by mx1.eskimo.com (8.9.1a/8.8.8) id VAA08346; Wed, 7 Feb 2001 21:54:36 -0800 Resent-Date: Wed, 7 Feb 2001 21:54:36 -0800 X-Apparently-From: Message-Id: <4.2.0.58.20010208000147.00bb4b50 postoffice.swbell.net> X-Sender: cjford1 pop.mail.yahoo.com X-Mailer: QUALCOMM Windows Eudora Pro Version 4.2.0.58 Date: Thu, 08 Feb 2001 00:04:56 -0600 To: vortex-l eskimo.com From: Charles Ford Subject: Re: Cook's Drive In-Reply-To: Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"; format=flowed Resent-Message-ID: <"jF0hX3.0.F22.SIZWw" mx1> Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/40634 X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com Status: O X-Status: Horace: Thanks! an approach I did not realize. I am not a mechanical engineer In this venue I lack experience. Charlie At 08:44 PM 2/7/01 -0900, you wrote: >At 10:34 PM 2/7/1, Charles Ford wrote: > > > > >Also a note on the rope test... It is not a very good test. If a device > >can provide an unbalance of force it still might not pass. The rope its > >self invalidates the test conditions simply by being there. The device > >would have to provide its own horizontal stabilization to prevent the rope > >from causing it to turn around or become unbalanced against the > >tether. This unbalance will cause spinning just like a helicopter loosing > >its stabilizer. > > > >A simple zero friction table would suffice to prove an unbalance of > >forces. The rope test could only be passed after plenty of engineering is > >put into making it into a stable vehicle. At that point why bother? The > >point could be better proven by operating it as a vehicle. > > > >Also the requirement that the entire device pass beyond the centerline of > >the plumb simply amplifies the de-stabilization. I believe this test is > >overly critical. > > >You can avoid the technical difficulties by using a triangular pendulum: > > > > B B > \ / > \ / > \ / > \ / > \ / > \ / > TT > > > B - bearings > \,/ - supports > T - device being tested > >The main problem is making the pendulum long enough that the device can fit >totally outside the vertical line when the pendulum is deflected. The >supports are best made rigid, but making only the bottom portion rigid is >probably enough to sufficiently retard rotation about a veritcal axis. In >addition, the fact the pendulum is a triangle limits the pendulum swing to >a single plane. > >Regards, > >Horace Heffner _________________________________________________________ Do You Yahoo!? Get your free yahoo.com address at http://mail.yahoo.com From vortex-l-request eskimo.com Wed Feb 7 22:03:39 2001 Received: (from smartlst localhost) by mx1.eskimo.com (8.9.1a/8.8.8) id WAA11922; Wed, 7 Feb 2001 22:02:41 -0800 Resent-Date: Wed, 7 Feb 2001 22:02:41 -0800 Mime-Version: 1.0 Message-Id: In-Reply-To: References: <5.0.1.4.0.20010111074819.03aed7d0 earthtech.org> <5.0.2.1.0.20010110201135.02208598 earthtech.org> <5.0.2.1.0.20010107075917.022802e8 earthtech.org> <5.0.2.1.0.20010110201135.02208598 earthtech.org> <5.0.1.4.0.20010111074819.03aed7d0 earthtech.org> <5.0.1.4.0.20010112100701.038b96c0 earthtech.org> Date: Thu, 8 Feb 2001 00:01:11 -0600 To: vortex-l eskimo.com From: thomas malloy Subject: Re: Cook's Drive Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" ; format="flowed" Resent-Message-ID: <"9LLvB1.0.Cw2.0QZWw" mx1> Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/40635 X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com Status: O X-Status: >Thomas - > >>Hal Puthoff suggested the same thing. I asked Norm Baker, who was >>then Cook's financial backer about this test and he told me that they >>had done this test and the machine moved over so that the entire >>machine was beyond the string supporting the plumb bob. > >Wow! > >If that's true, it's OVER. The "laws of motion" as taught are WRONG, >and we have a space drive and just don't collectively know it yet. > >The entire machine has to be beyond plumb as they said it did, and >also not be whirling around the plumbline axis, because even a >simple gyro can do that. If it just hung there relatively still and >totally beyond plumb ...bam. > >- Rick Monteverde >Honolulu, HI Thank you Rick, I've been attempting to get one of you to realize the significance of what Cook is saying . When I talked to Robert last fall he said that when he finished the latest version of his machine he would republish his book. What we need to do is get people who are mathematicians to read it. According to Cook, it isn't just the laws of motion that need to be rewritten, it's the Newtonian universe. and since Einstein built his relativistic model on Newton, that all falls in a pile too. Sincerely Thomas From vortex-l-request eskimo.com Wed Feb 7 23:45:22 2001 Received: (from smartlst localhost) by mx1.eskimo.com (8.9.1a/8.8.8) id XAA24248; Wed, 7 Feb 2001 23:43:03 -0800 Resent-Date: Wed, 7 Feb 2001 23:43:03 -0800 Message-Id: <3.0.1.32.20010208083454.006945dc pop3.club-internet.fr> X-Sender: jplentin pop3.club-internet.fr X-Mailer: Windows Eudora Light Version 3.0.1 (32) Date: Thu, 08 Feb 2001 08:34:54 +0100 To: vortex-l eskimo.com From: Jean-Pierre Lentin Subject: Re: Strange and unpleasant electro-magnetic(?) oppression. In-Reply-To: <4.2.0.58.20010206211537.00bbe280 postoffice.swbell.net> References: Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Resent-Message-ID: <"bc7E71.0.nw5.4uaWw" mx1> Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/40636 X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com Status: O X-Status: Hi all >There are also some subsonic things. There was a factory in >France I heard about. (I do not know the details or even if this is >true) The workers had similar symptoms and some went on to suffer from >further symptoms that resembled radiation sickness (loss of hair and >incontinence) In this factory a large belt driven ventilation system was >used. It seems that the large fans rotated at an RPM that caused them to >radiate a subsonic into the factory of about 7 Hz >Since the system was replaced the problem was solved. That is a somewhat garbled account of Pr Vladimir Gavreau's story. See the chapter on Gavreau in Gerry Vassilatos' book "Lost science". (Incidentally, I talked years ago to Henry Saul, assistant of the late Gavreau, and he confirmed the beginning of the story. He also vehemently denied the secret military research part, but who knows...). The real story : in the 1950s,Gavreau, a physicist and acoustician in Marseilles, suffered from nausea, headache, oppression, in his office, until he found out a 7 Hz infra-sound from the belt ventilation system situated on top of the building. He published about the deleterious effect of 7 Hz infrasound, and was approached by the army and police for non-lethal weapon development. Saul's version : nothing came of it, as Gavreau quickly pointed out that infrasound was non-directional, i.e. useless as a weapon. Vassilatos' version : secret research overcame this directional problem and infrasound weapons were built and tested with spectacular results. >I have heard (no reference, sorry) of a military test that operated >sub-sonic (approx 10 hz) speakers in an attempt to disarm an enemy. >One effect they repeatedly observed was that 10 hz would automatically >trigger incontinence in the human body. I heard repeatedly this rumor about non-lethal weapons causing incontinence and involuntary bowel movement. It was supposedly used by the US army in the Iraq/Kuwait war. Some say it was infrasound, others claim it was microwaves. Now, from my own documentation on EM weapons, I would surmise that the strange unpleasant effects reported in the house is typical microwave effect (as suffered, for instance, by US Embassy employees in Moscow in the 1960s and 1970s). So I would check for an army base or radar installation, or even big radio/TV transmitter, in the vicinity. From vortex-l-request eskimo.com Wed Feb 7 23:51:56 2001 Received: (from smartlst localhost) by mx1.eskimo.com (8.9.1a/8.8.8) id XAA25186; Wed, 7 Feb 2001 23:47:40 -0800 Resent-Date: Wed, 7 Feb 2001 23:47:40 -0800 Mime-Version: 1.0 X-Sender: rick mail.highsurf.com Message-Id: In-Reply-To: References: Date: Wed, 7 Feb 2001 21:47:29 -1000 To: vortex-l eskimo.com From: Rick Monteverde Subject: Re: Cook's Drive Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" ; format="flowed" Resent-Message-ID: <"zmb9S.0.S96.RyaWw" mx1> Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/40637 X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com Status: O X-Status: Horace - >That is not a suffcient test. >The entire machine must move beyond the >center of gravity AND REMAIN THERE. Isn't that what he meant actually happened in the test? I could be wrong, but I took it to mean that's what happened. If really true - is there anything we're overlooking about such a test? Either: 1) It didn't happen that way 2) Our string test has a loophole in it 3) Toss Newton Given the magnitude of #3, the other two seem likely. ...Gee Rick, extraordinary claims require extraordinary evidence? Gaahh! - Rick Monteverde Honolulu, HI From vortex-l-request eskimo.com Thu Feb 8 00:34:44 2001 Received: (from smartlst localhost) by mx1.eskimo.com (8.9.1a/8.8.8) id AAA03947; Thu, 8 Feb 2001 00:31:57 -0800 Resent-Date: Thu, 8 Feb 2001 00:31:57 -0800 Message-Id: Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Date: Wed, 7 Feb 2001 23:41:37 -0900 To: vortex-l eskimo.com From: hheffner mtaonline.net (Horace Heffner) Subject: Ebola in Canada? Resent-Message-ID: <"UYM8u.0.Vz.xbbWw" mx1> Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/40638 X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com Status: O X-Status: I saw something about this on local news yesterday, but not a mention anywhere else until now. I figured maybe I got it wrong. Let's hope this is a false alarm. At 2:09 AM 2/8/1, in ProMED-mail: [snip] >Date: Tue 6 Feb 2001 13:26:43 -0500 >From: Patricia Doyle, PhD >Source: Toronto Globe and Mail, Tue 6 Feb 2001 [edited] > > > >Suspected Hemorrhagic Fever Patient Travelled to Canada via New York >--------------------------------------------------------------------- >HAMILTON: A woman who travelled from Africa and is now in a Hamilton >(Ontario) hospital may be North America's first human case of infection >with the dreaded Ebola virus. Health Canada confirmed last night it has >sent a blood sample from the woman, who is in serious condition, to a >laboratory in Winnipeg that tests for and studies [dangerous pathogens], >including Ebola virus [which is associated with lethal hemorrhagic fever in >Africa]. It will take until Thursday [8 Feb 2001] for the laboratory to >confirm whether the woman, who recently arrived in the Hamilton area from >the Democratic Republic of Congo, has Ebola [fever], another viral >hemorrhagic fever, or severe meningitis. > >Infectious diseases expert Mark Loeb said at a hastily convened press >conference at the Henderson Hospital that the immigration services are >trying to track down everyone who was in close contact with the >unidentified woman. Viral hemorrhagic fevers are spread through human >excretions such as blood, semen, saliva, and mucus, but are not as >contagious as [some] other diseases such as tuberculosis, which is spread >by airborne water droplets. "It's not as if everybody on the plane would >have been exposed," Donald Low, chief of microbiology at Mount Sinai >Hospital, said from his home last night. "It's direct contact that's the >risk -- people who have made contact with the body fluids. The virus is not >going to jump through your skin". > >Dr Douglas MacPherson, a Health Canada infectious disease specialist who is >in Hamilton monitoring the situation, said yesterday he didn't know yet how >many people were on the plane from Congo to New York nor from New York to >Pearson Airport in Toronto. "There are national and international health >care concerns, and national immigration services in the States have been >notified," he said. Meanwhile, the Hamilton Health Sciences Corporation is >tracking down health care workers and patients who may have been in the >emergency room when the patient arrived there at 7:30 pm on Sunday 4 Feb >2001. The Hamilton Public Health Unit is attempting to locate anyone who >may have been in close contact with the woman before her arrival at >Henderson [Hospital]. Health Canada's search for contacts begins at Pearson >Airport and "goes backwards" from there, Dr MacPherson said. > >The woman flew from Congo and arrived in New York City on Friday, where she >stayed overnight. She flew from New York to Toronto, and, as far as >officials know, went directly from there to Hamilton. On Sunday evening, >she arrived at the emergency room of the Henderson Hospital and was >immediately admitted with symptoms doctors soon suspected were the result >of a tropical fever. Dr Loeb confirmed she has been isolated in a room with >negative air pressure and all medical personnel are taking extra >precautions while caring for her. >[Byline: Ken Kilpatrick and Krista Foss] [snip] >[Similar reports that appeared on Tue 6 Feb 2001 in the Hamilton Spectator >(), Reuters Health >Online, CNN (Hamilton), and Canadian Press [snip] Regards, Horace Heffner From vortex-l-request eskimo.com Thu Feb 8 00:49:31 2001 Received: (from smartlst localhost) by mx1.eskimo.com (8.9.1a/8.8.8) id AAA09034; Thu, 8 Feb 2001 00:46:47 -0800 Resent-Date: Thu, 8 Feb 2001 00:46:47 -0800 Message-Id: <3.0.6.32.20010208164315.00a832b0 cyllene.uwa.edu.au> X-Sender: jwinter cyllene.uwa.edu.au X-Mailer: QUALCOMM Windows Eudora Light Version 3.0.6 (32) Date: Thu, 08 Feb 2001 16:43:15 +0800 To: vortex-l eskimo.com From: John Winterflood Subject: Re: Cook's Drive In-Reply-To: Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Resent-Message-ID: <"cdaOT2.0.4D2.tpbWw" mx1> Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/40639 X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com Status: O X-Status: >Thomas Malloy wrote: > >>Hal Puthoff suggested the same thing. I asked Norm Baker, who was >>then Cook's financial backer about this test and he told me that they >>had done this test and the machine moved over so that the entire >>machine was beyond the string supporting the plumb bob. Horace Heffner replied: >That is not a suffcient test. The entire machine must move beyond the >center of gravity AND REMAIN THERE. I think I disagree Horace. Your condition may prove it beyond any doubt, but is unnecessarily rigorous. Suppose we suspend some object on a long flexible string so that the point where the object is attached is also a very flexible joint. It is common knowledge that if the object is stationary then the line of the string passes through the centre of mass of the object (and the object attachment point of course also lies plumb under the point where the string is attached to the ceiling). So if this point of flexible attachment between the string and the object moves even very slightly to one side (on a long term average), then this shows that the centre of mass has been offset and proves that inertial drive works (and almost all of physics has to be re-thought etc..) Of course this point can move to one side as with a pendulum swinging, but this motion will average to zero. It can also move in a circle - either at the normal swing rate as a conical pendulum, or at a much lowered turning rate as a precessing gyro. However in this case also if we average the motion (multiplied by the time it spends at each offset) then this must also average to zero (ie no net force). This must also be the case with any more complex motion. Obviously one has to check for other effects such as the object generating wind - in which case it needs to be enclosed in a containter which is suspended as part of it etc, but it is my belief that if even a very small average offset could be demonstrated at this attachment point, then real scientists (whatever a "real" scientist is!) would get very excited. >>...I asked Norm Baker, who was then Cook's financial backer >>about this test and he told me that they had done this test >>and the machine moved over so that the entire machine was >>beyond the string supporting the plumb bob. The question is not how far over it goes, but whether it stays consistently offset to ONE side more than another. Circling around very slowly fails the test. Did Norm Baker watch long enough to see whether it circled around very slowly or stayed still? From vortex-l-request eskimo.com Thu Feb 8 00:52:54 2001 Received: (from smartlst localhost) by mx1.eskimo.com (8.9.1a/8.8.8) id AAA10848; Thu, 8 Feb 2001 00:51:43 -0800 Resent-Date: Thu, 8 Feb 2001 00:51:43 -0800 Message-Id: Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Date: Thu, 8 Feb 2001 00:01:23 -0900 To: vortex-l eskimo.com From: hheffner mtaonline.net (Horace Heffner) Subject: Re: Cook's Drive Resent-Message-ID: <"y3OSr.0.Qf2.UubWw" mx1> Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/40640 X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com Status: O X-Status: At 9:47 PM 2/7/1, Rick Monteverde wrote: >Horace - > >>That is not a suffcient test. >>The entire machine must move beyond the >>center of gravity AND REMAIN THERE. > >Isn't that what he meant actually happened in the test? I could be >wrong, but I took it to mean that's what happened. If really true - >is there anything we're overlooking about such a test? Either: > > 1) It didn't happen that way > 2) Our string test has a loophole in it > 3) Toss Newton > >Given the magnitude of #3, the other two seem likely. Let me review: At 3:04 PM 2/7/1, thomas malloy wrote: >Hal Puthoff suggested the same thing. I asked Norm Baker, who was >then Cook's financial backer about this test and he told me that they >had done this test and the machine moved over so that the entire >machine was beyond the string supporting the plumb bob. And now hopefully fully write what I mean with more clarity: That is not a suffcient test. The entire machine must move beyond the center of gravity AND REMAIN THERE. It is not enough that the machine oscillate back and forth, only momentarily going fully beyond the centerline. A person on a swing can achieve that by pulling on the rope periodically when off center, thus applying lateral force to the supports. The key is that the device REMAIN off center. Further, it can not remain off center merely by rotating about the vertical axis of the rope, with the rope making a conical motion. This too, a person on a swing can achieve. I am taking issue with the words attributed to Norm Baker, not actually knocking the test itself. It seems to me that the words could describe EITHER a result that passes or a result that fails, depending on what precisely the words mean. In any case, I think the suggested triangular pendulum test is a much better test and an easier test to get right if the net force is large enough. If the net force is very small then I think a multi-turn torsion pendulum approach is the way to go. Regards, Horace Heffner From vortex-l-request eskimo.com Thu Feb 8 00:53:25 2001 Received: (from smartlst localhost) by mx1.eskimo.com (8.9.1a/8.8.8) id AAA11033; Thu, 8 Feb 2001 00:52:23 -0800 Resent-Date: Thu, 8 Feb 2001 00:52:23 -0800 Message-ID: <00ac01c091b4$f2c03f00$718f85ce fjsparber> Reply-To: "Frederick Sparber" From: "Frederick Sparber" To: Subject: Re: Ebola in Canada? Date: Thu, 8 Feb 2001 01:52:20 -0800 MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: multipart/mixed; boundary="----=_NextPart_000_0005_01C09171.C66DF200" X-Priority: 3 X-MSMail-Priority: Normal X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook Express 5.00.2615.200 X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V5.00.2615.200 Resent-Message-ID: <"_06ht2.0.Ji2.6vbWw" mx1> Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/40641 X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com Status: O X-Status: This is a multi-part message in MIME format. ------=_NextPart_000_0005_01C09171.C66DF200 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit http://www.cnn.com/2001/HEALTH/02/07/ebola.canada.02/index.html ------=_NextPart_000_0005_01C09171.C66DF200 Content-Type: application/octet-stream; name="CNN.com - Health - Early Ebola tests on patient in Canada negative - February 7, 2001.url" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Content-Disposition: attachment; filename="CNN.com - Health - Early Ebola tests on patient in Canada negative - February 7, 2001.url" [DEFAULT] BASEURL=http://www.cnn.com/2001/HEALTH/02/07/ebola.canada.02/index.html [InternetShortcut] URL=http://www.cnn.com/2001/HEALTH/02/07/ebola.canada.02/index.html Modified=60FCE0A5B491C001E7 ------=_NextPart_000_0005_01C09171.C66DF200-- From vortex-l-request eskimo.com Thu Feb 8 01:07:30 2001 Received: (from smartlst localhost) by mx1.eskimo.com (8.9.1a/8.8.8) id BAA14551; Thu, 8 Feb 2001 01:07:07 -0800 Resent-Date: Thu, 8 Feb 2001 01:07:07 -0800 Message-Id: Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Date: Thu, 8 Feb 2001 00:16:47 -0900 To: vortex-l eskimo.com From: hheffner mtaonline.net (Horace Heffner) Subject: Re: Cook's Drive Resent-Message-ID: <"0k3Nk2.0.CZ3.x6cWw" mx1> Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/40642 X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com Status: O X-Status: At 4:43 PM 2/8/1, John Winterflood wrote: >>Thomas Malloy wrote: >> >>>Hal Puthoff suggested the same thing. I asked Norm Baker, who was >>>then Cook's financial backer about this test and he told me that they >>>had done this test and the machine moved over so that the entire >>>machine was beyond the string supporting the plumb bob. > >Horace Heffner replied: >>That is not a suffcient test. The entire machine must move beyond the >>center of gravity AND REMAIN THERE. > >I think I disagree Horace. Your condition may prove it beyond >any doubt, but is unnecessarily rigorous. > >Suppose we suspend some object on a long flexible string so that >the point where the object is attached is also a very flexible >joint. It is common knowledge that if the object is stationary >then the line of the string passes through the centre of mass >of the object (and the object attachment point of course also >lies plumb under the point where the string is attached to the >ceiling). That assumes that the mass is fully stationary, including all its components. > >So if this point of flexible attachment between the string and >the object moves even very slightly to one side (on a long >term average), then this shows that the centre of mass has >been offset and proves that inertial drive works (and almost >all of physics has to be re-thought etc..) No, that only shows that the center of mass has moved. > >Of course this point can move to one side as with a pendulum >swinging, but this motion will average to zero. No, not is the center of mass has moved, or even just moved on average, within the object. >It can also >move in a circle - either at the normal swing rate as a conical >pendulum, or at a much lowered turning rate as a precessing >gyro. However in this case also if we average the motion >(multiplied by the time it spends at each offset) then this >must also average to zero (ie no net force). This must also >be the case with any more complex motion. No, this is not true. As a teenager, I have swung on a rope in a circular (or at least oval) fashion myself from a standing stop. I thought this was interesting in light of Newton's laws. The reason this is possible is that body motion can momentarily place the rope off center and at that moment a pull on the rope, shortening it, applies lateral force along the rope to its support. This can be achieved in either axis in the ground plane and thus circular motion can be achieved. It makes no difference that the connections with the rope are flexible or even free to swivel. > >Obviously one has to check for other effects such as the object >generating wind - in which case it needs to be enclosed in a >containter which is suspended as part of it etc, but it is my >belief that if even a very small average offset could be >demonstrated at this attachment point, then real scientists >(whatever a "real" scientist is!) would get very excited. I have had so many false alarms myself that when one occurs I take a deep breath and say to myself "what have I done wrong this time!" > >>>...I asked Norm Baker, who was then Cook's financial backer >>>about this test and he told me that they had done this test >>>and the machine moved over so that the entire machine was >>>beyond the string supporting the plumb bob. > >The question is not how far over it goes, but whether it >stays consistently offset to ONE side more than another. No - the motion of the object may change the center of gravity, thus causing the ILLUSION that the device has moved off center. >Circling around very slowly fails the test. Yes, circling around at all fails the test. >Did Norm Baker >watch long enough to see whether it circled around very >slowly or stayed still? I get the imperssion that the thing was a blurr of vibrating, and, if true, that would mean the results were inconclusinve unless the blurr went totally off center in one direction and stayed there. Regards, Horace Heffner From vortex-l-request eskimo.com Thu Feb 8 01:38:43 2001 Received: (from smartlst localhost) by mx1.eskimo.com (8.9.1a/8.8.8) id BAA22184; Thu, 8 Feb 2001 01:38:17 -0800 Resent-Date: Thu, 8 Feb 2001 01:38:17 -0800 Mime-Version: 1.0 X-Sender: rick mail.highsurf.com Message-Id: In-Reply-To: <3.0.6.32.20010208164315.00a832b0 cyllene.uwa.edu.au> References: <3.0.6.32.20010208164315.00a832b0 cyllene.uwa.edu.au> Date: Wed, 7 Feb 2001 23:38:10 -1000 To: vortex-l eskimo.com From: Rick Monteverde Subject: Re: Cook's Drive Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" ; format="flowed" Resent-Message-ID: <"LRr0D1.0.YQ5.9acWw" mx1> Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/40643 X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com Status: O X-Status: John - At 4:43 PM +0800 2/8/01, John Winterflood wrote: >So if this point of flexible attachment between the string and >the object moves even very slightly to one side (on a long >term average), then this shows that the centre of mass has >been offset and proves that inertial drive works (and almost >all of physics has to be re-thought etc..) That's definitely not a good enough test, I agree with Horace completely. A gyroscope can shift its entire center of mass right out the very end if its axis on a rigid support. Hang a spinning gyro sideways on a string tied to the tip of the spin axis to see this effect. The endpoint can be right on the plumb line, with the entire device sticking out to the side of the plumb line, except for just that tiny bit at the end. And as it begins to move in precession, it will generate centrifugal force and eventually move out beyond the plumbline, but its travel around and outside the plumbline is conventional and negates the apparent victory. You can whirl any weight on the end of a string around a plumbline. If a candidate device *clears completely* and *stays* out there without gyrating back and forth across or around the plumbline, then that's rather convincing proof that a true reactionless drive is at work. Now in some circumstances, a true reactionless drive just might not have enough oompf to push it out from under the shadow of the plumbline, but that's just too bad for that device. In that case the string suspension proof isn't appropriate because it doesn't separate the effect properly from an illusion of the effect that conventional gyrating machinery can duplicate. - Rick Monteverde Honolulu, HI From vortex-l-request eskimo.com Thu Feb 8 06:29:27 2001 Received: (from smartlst localhost) by mx1.eskimo.com (8.9.1a/8.8.8) id GAA03244; Thu, 8 Feb 2001 06:28:12 -0800 Resent-Date: Thu, 8 Feb 2001 06:28:12 -0800 X-Apparently-From: Message-Id: <4.2.0.58.20010208081843.0095d990 postoffice.swbell.net> X-Sender: cjford1 pop.mail.yahoo.com X-Mailer: QUALCOMM Windows Eudora Pro Version 4.2.0.58 Date: Thu, 08 Feb 2001 08:27:27 -0600 To: vortex-l eskimo.com From: Charles Ford Subject: Re: Cook's Drive In-Reply-To: References: <3.0.6.32.20010208164315.00a832b0 cyllene.uwa.edu.au> <3.0.6.32.20010208164315.00a832b0 cyllene.uwa.edu.au> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"; format=flowed Resent-Message-ID: <"9EA7B2.0.co.xpgWw" mx1> Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/40645 X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com Status: O X-Status: And the same people wonder if I am nuts when I tell them that they are no measuring there input power properly. It becomes obvious at this point that even the apparently simplest tests must be managed by people that are aware of all of the ways to trick the test. So if I take a PVC pipe and stick a big lead slug in it then balance (at the center of mass) my new device on a test tether (rope test) then activate a servo inside the tube that slides the slug to the opposite end of the tube this will move the center of mass and tilt the tether. This proves only that simply tilting the thing is an inadequate test. I also saw only problems with this test at first. Once you understand how to trick the thing you see that deflection beyond the center line is nessarry. At 11:38 PM 2/7/01 -1000, you wrote: >John - > >At 4:43 PM +0800 2/8/01, John Winterflood wrote: >>So if this point of flexible attachment between the string and >>the object moves even very slightly to one side (on a long >>term average), then this shows that the centre of mass has >>been offset and proves that inertial drive works (and almost >>all of physics has to be re-thought etc..) > >That's definitely not a good enough test, I agree with Horace completely. > >A gyroscope can shift its entire center of mass right out the very end if >its axis on a rigid support. Hang a spinning gyro sideways on a string >tied to the tip of the spin axis to see this effect. The endpoint can be >right on the plumb line, with the entire device sticking out to the side >of the plumb line, except for just that tiny bit at the end. And as it >begins to move in precession, it will generate centrifugal force and >eventually move out beyond the plumbline, but its travel around and >outside the plumbline is conventional and negates the apparent victory. >You can whirl any weight on the end of a string around a plumbline. > >If a candidate device *clears completely* and *stays* out there without >gyrating back and forth across or around the plumbline, then that's rather >convincing proof that a true reactionless drive is at work. Now in some >circumstances, a true reactionless drive just might not have enough oompf >to push it out from under the shadow of the plumbline, but that's just too >bad for that device. In that case the string suspension proof isn't >appropriate because it doesn't separate the effect properly from an >illusion of the effect that conventional gyrating machinery can duplicate. > >- Rick Monteverde >Honolulu, HI Charlie Ford KC5-OWZ cjford1 yahoo.com cjford1 swbell.net _________________________________________________________ Do You Yahoo!? Get your free yahoo.com address at http://mail.yahoo.com From vortex-l-request eskimo.com Thu Feb 8 06:29:34 2001 Received: (from smartlst localhost) by mx1.eskimo.com (8.9.1a/8.8.8) id GAA02757; Thu, 8 Feb 2001 06:26:56 -0800 Resent-Date: Thu, 8 Feb 2001 06:26:56 -0800 Date: Thu, 08 Feb 2001 08:11:40 -0600 From: Scott Little Subject: Re: Cook's Drive In-reply-to: X-Sender: little earthtech.org To: vortex-l eskimo.com, vortex-l@eskimo.com Message-id: <5.0.2.1.0.20010208081000.034a0a18 earthtech.org> MIME-version: 1.0 X-Mailer: QUALCOMM Windows Eudora Version 5.0.2 Content-type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"; format=flowed References: Resent-Message-ID: <"Tv2yb2.0.xg.mogWw" mx1> Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/40644 X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com Status: O X-Status: At 09:47 PM 2/7/2001 -1000, Rick Monteverde wrote: >...Gee Rick, extraordinary claims require extraordinary evidence? Gaahh! How about some ordinary evidence? Let's see a paper describing the experiment written by the engineers at Boeing that performed it. Scott Little EarthTech International, Inc. 4030 Braker Lane West, Suite 300 Austin TX 78759 512-342-2185 512-346-3017 (FAX) http://www.earthtech.org From vortex-l-request eskimo.com Thu Feb 8 06:51:54 2001 Received: (from smartlst localhost) by mx1.eskimo.com (8.9.1a/8.8.8) id GAA14349; Thu, 8 Feb 2001 06:50:15 -0800 Resent-Date: Thu, 8 Feb 2001 06:50:15 -0800 Date: Thu, 08 Feb 2001 08:44:32 -0600 From: Scott Little Subject: Re: Cook's Drive In-reply-to: <4.2.0.58.20010208081843.0095d990 postoffice.swbell.net> X-Sender: little earthtech.org To: vortex-l eskimo.com, vortex-l@eskimo.com Message-id: <5.0.2.1.0.20010208083608.02428b10 earthtech.org> MIME-version: 1.0 X-Mailer: QUALCOMM Windows Eudora Version 5.0.2 Content-type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"; format=flowed References: <3.0.6.32.20010208164315.00a832b0 cyllene.uwa.edu.au> <3.0.6.32.20010208164315.00a832b0 cyllene.uwa.edu.au> Resent-Message-ID: <"Bo6CT2.0.7W3.c8hWw" mx1> Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/40646 X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com Status: O X-Status: At 08:27 AM 2/8/2001 -0600, Charles Ford wrote: >And the same people wonder if I am nuts when I tell them that they are no >measuring there input power properly. It becomes obvious at this point >that even the apparently simplest tests must be managed by people that are >aware of all of the ways to trick the test. Indeed! >So if I take a PVC pipe and stick a big lead slug in it then balance (at >the center of mass) my new device on a test tether (rope test) then >activate a servo inside the tube that slides the slug to the opposite end >of the tube this will move the center of mass and tilt the tether. No, with a non-rotating mass inside your pipe, the rope will remain precisely vertical (after oscillations die down) regardless of where the mass is placed inside the pipe. What will change is the tilt of the pipe. John Winterflood was right about this. However, I believe Rick is correct that a gyroscope inside the device could make the rope hang at an angle. Don't you agree, John? So I think the rigorous test is this: hang the device from a single flexible rope and require it to displace steadily sideways enough that every part of the device is beyond a vertical plane through the rope's upper attachment point. This would rule out any internal gyroscope action. Scott Little EarthTech International, Inc. 4030 Braker Lane West, Suite 300 Austin TX 78759 512-342-2185 512-346-3017 (FAX) http://www.earthtech.org From vortex-l-request eskimo.com Thu Feb 8 10:21:47 2001 Received: (from smartlst localhost) by mx1.eskimo.com (8.9.1a/8.8.8) id KAA02045; Thu, 8 Feb 2001 10:16:39 -0800 Resent-Date: Thu, 8 Feb 2001 10:16:39 -0800 Mime-Version: 1.0 X-Sender: rick mail.highsurf.com Message-Id: In-Reply-To: <5.0.2.1.0.20010208083608.02428b10 earthtech.org> References: <3.0.6.32.20010208164315.00a832b0 cyllene.uwa.edu.au> <3.0.6.32.20010208164315.00a832b0 cyllene.uwa.edu.au> <5.0.2.1.0.20010208083608.02428b10 earthtech.org> Date: Thu, 8 Feb 2001 08:16:11 -1000 To: vortex-l eskimo.com From: Rick Monteverde Subject: Re: Cook's Drive Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" ; format="flowed" Resent-Message-ID: <"2zSVn1.0.tV.7AkWw" mx1> Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/40647 X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com Status: O X-Status: Scott - >However, I believe Rick is correct that a gyroscope inside the >device could make the rope hang at an angle. Don't you agree, John? Am I? Now I'm not so sure. A gyro can hang sideways off the end of a string this: | | | | | | | |<-String | | | _ | | | --- --- <-Gyro, from side. Horizontal line is gyro spin axis. | | - I think I've only seen the string go off vertical when precession sets in and it begins to rotate around the string plumbline axis. And in the drawing above, the gyro moves out to the *right* in that case. Further confusion, a la Laithwaite - does that centrifugal thrust from precession exert an equal and opposite reaction against the system somewhere? I'm sure confused. Tell me again how a flexible string can hang at an angle in a steady non-whirling state and not be from true thrust of some kind? Maybe John *is* right. - Rick Monteverde Honolulu, HI From vortex-l-request eskimo.com Thu Feb 8 10:34:53 2001 Received: (from smartlst localhost) by mx1.eskimo.com (8.9.1a/8.8.8) id KAA09194; Thu, 8 Feb 2001 10:29:13 -0800 Resent-Date: Thu, 8 Feb 2001 10:29:13 -0800 Message-Id: Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Date: Thu, 8 Feb 2001 09:38:41 -0900 To: vortex-l eskimo.com From: hheffner mtaonline.net (Horace Heffner) Subject: Re: Cook's Drive Resent-Message-ID: <"5sqAq.0.SF2.vLkWw" mx1> Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/40648 X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com Status: O X-Status: At 8:44 AM 2/8/1, Scott Little wrote: >No, with a non-rotating mass inside your pipe, the rope will remain >precisely vertical (after oscillations die down) regardless of where the >mass is placed inside the pipe. What will change is the tilt of the >pipe. This is not correct. It is only correct if there is no motion in the device AT ALL. For, example. suppose there is a heavy mass in the center of the pipe and the pipe is horizontal. If the mass is moved suddenly to one end, then the pipe reacts toward the other, bringing the string with it. If then the mass is immediately brought back to the center, the pipe returns, and the rope returns to center. On (time) average, the rope has moved off center. I suspect this is not too far from what is happening with the epicycloid or hypocycloid center of mass path from the wheel within a wheel design. The thing gyrates in a blurr, but, in the critical direction, the linear motion offsets the average rope position while producing no net thrust. Regards, Horace Heffner From vortex-l-request eskimo.com Thu Feb 8 10:49:48 2001 Received: (from smartlst localhost) by mx1.eskimo.com (8.9.1a/8.8.8) id KAA18198; Thu, 8 Feb 2001 10:44:43 -0800 Resent-Date: Thu, 8 Feb 2001 10:44:43 -0800 Message-Id: Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Date: Thu, 8 Feb 2001 09:54:21 -0900 To: vortex-l eskimo.com From: hheffner mtaonline.net (Horace Heffner) Subject: Re: Cook's Drive Resent-Message-ID: <"Yfzfy1.0.GS4.RakWw" mx1> Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/40649 X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com Status: O X-Status: At 8:16 AM 2/8/1, Rick Monteverde wrote: >I'm sure confused. Tell me again how a flexible string can hang at an >angle in a steady non-whirling state and not be from true thrust of >some kind? Maybe John *is* right. The problem lies in defining steady state. None of the mechanincal devices I know of are suggested to produce thrust and remain absolutely still. As soon as repetitive motion is involved, the time averaged string position can be off center in a single direction. If the entire device remains beyond the centerline then you know you have something, assuming aerodynamics are not involved too. Perhaps a better and less difficult criteria is that the string position remain AT ALL TIMES off center in a single direction, not just the time averaged string postition. If the string at any time returns to the vertical, the test fails. At any rate, the I think the ordinary pendulum test is pretty flakey. It is a much better and much more sensitive test to use a multi-turn torsion pendulum. If the drive can push the torsion pendulum (or an armature) around a full turn and maintain thrust, then you know you have a genuine net thrust. Regards, Horace Heffner From vortex-l-request eskimo.com Thu Feb 8 11:01:55 2001 Received: (from smartlst localhost) by mx1.eskimo.com (8.9.1a/8.8.8) id KAA26335; Thu, 8 Feb 2001 10:57:38 -0800 Resent-Date: Thu, 8 Feb 2001 10:57:38 -0800 Mime-Version: 1.0 X-Sender: rick mail.highsurf.com Message-Id: In-Reply-To: References: Date: Thu, 8 Feb 2001 08:57:23 -1000 To: vortex-l eskimo.com From: Rick Monteverde Subject: Re: Cook's Drive Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" ; format="flowed" Resent-Message-ID: <"FaU-u2.0.NR6.WmkWw" mx1> Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/40650 X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com Status: O X-Status: Horace - I see what you mean now about a steady state, but: >At any rate, the I think the ordinary pendulum test is pretty flakey. It >is a much better and much more sensitive test to use a multi-turn torsion >pendulum. If the drive can push the torsion pendulum (or an armature) >around a full turn and maintain thrust, then you know you have a genuine >net thrust. In a test device on the end of an armature or torsion pendulum, a motor spinning up (increasing RPM) a wheel coaxial with the axis of the torsion pendulum would produce a counter torque that would propel the torsion device, wouldn't it? - Rick Monteverde Honolulu, HI From vortex-l-request eskimo.com Thu Feb 8 11:10:45 2001 Received: (from smartlst localhost) by mx1.eskimo.com (8.9.1a/8.8.8) id LAA32373; Thu, 8 Feb 2001 11:09:09 -0800 Resent-Date: Thu, 8 Feb 2001 11:09:09 -0800 Mime-Version: 1.0 X-Sender: rick mail.highsurf.com Message-Id: Date: Thu, 8 Feb 2001 09:08:54 -1000 To: vortex-l eskimo.com From: Rick Monteverde Subject: Re: Cook's Drive Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" ; format="flowed" Resent-Message-ID: <"8pZyI2.0.lv7.LxkWw" mx1> Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/40651 X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com Status: O X-Status: Just a note here to lurkers and anyone in general: Despite their apparent simplicity, gyroscopes are infuriatingly complex and counterintuitive devices that can make monkeys out of even trained physicists when trying to understand and discuss their characteristics. When a rank amateur like me (a fringe-science believer-monkey to begin with) tries it, it gets ugly pretty quickly. Sorry! - Rick Monteverde Honolulu, HI From vortex-l-request eskimo.com Thu Feb 8 11:32:52 2001 Received: (from smartlst localhost) by mx1.eskimo.com (8.9.1a/8.8.8) id LAA10076; Thu, 8 Feb 2001 11:24:58 -0800 Resent-Date: Thu, 8 Feb 2001 11:24:58 -0800 X-Apparently-From: Message-Id: <4.2.0.58.20010208131649.00964c40 postoffice.swbell.net> X-Sender: cjford1 pop.mail.yahoo.com X-Mailer: QUALCOMM Windows Eudora Pro Version 4.2.0.58 Date: Thu, 08 Feb 2001 13:24:53 -0600 To: vortex-l eskimo.com From: Charles Ford Subject: Re: Cook's Drive In-Reply-To: <5.0.2.1.0.20010208083608.02428b10 earthtech.org> References: <4.2.0.58.20010208081843.0095d990 postoffice.swbell.net> <3.0.6.32.20010208164315.00a832b0 cyllene.uwa.edu.au> <3.0.6.32.20010208164315.00a832b0 cyllene.uwa.edu.au> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"; format=flowed Resent-Message-ID: <"NH9mn.0.GT2.AAlWw" mx1> Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/40652 X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com Status: O X-Status: Yes Eliminate the possibility of any parlor tricks passing the test. Weather deliberate or stumbled into is then no longer an issue. Only the sensitivity of the test (length of the rope) and wither or not the device could maintain force in a single direction. I do not see any harm in a two rope based test to offer the device stability onto a single plane. At least for a device that cannot stabilize its self. At 08:44 AM 2/8/01 -0600, you wrote: >At 08:27 AM 2/8/2001 -0600, Charles Ford wrote: > >>And the same people wonder if I am nuts when I tell them that they are no >>measuring there input power properly. It becomes obvious at this point >>that even the apparently simplest tests must be managed by people that >>are aware of all of the ways to trick the test. > >Indeed! > >>So if I take a PVC pipe and stick a big lead slug in it then balance (at >>the center of mass) my new device on a test tether (rope test) then >>activate a servo inside the tube that slides the slug to the opposite end >>of the tube this will move the center of mass and tilt the tether. > >No, with a non-rotating mass inside your pipe, the rope will remain >precisely vertical (after oscillations die down) regardless of where the >mass is placed inside the pipe. What will change is the tilt of the >pipe. John Winterflood was right about this. > >However, I believe Rick is correct that a gyroscope inside the device >could make the rope hang at an angle. Don't you agree, John? > >So I think the rigorous test is this: hang the device from a single >flexible rope and require it to displace steadily sideways enough that >every part of the device is beyond a vertical plane through the rope's >upper attachment point. > >This would rule out any internal gyroscope action. > > >Scott Little >EarthTech International, Inc. >4030 Braker Lane West, Suite 300 >Austin TX 78759 >512-342-2185 >512-346-3017 (FAX) >http://www.earthtech.org Charlie Ford KC5-OWZ cjford1 yahoo.com cjford1 swbell.net _________________________________________________________ Do You Yahoo!? Get your free yahoo.com address at http://mail.yahoo.com From vortex-l-request eskimo.com Thu Feb 8 12:28:17 2001 Received: (from smartlst localhost) by mx1.eskimo.com (8.9.1a/8.8.8) id MAA17864; Thu, 8 Feb 2001 12:25:02 -0800 Resent-Date: Thu, 8 Feb 2001 12:25:02 -0800 Message-Id: Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Date: Thu, 8 Feb 2001 11:34:41 -0900 To: vortex-l eskimo.com From: hheffner mtaonline.net (Horace Heffner) Subject: Re: Cook's Drive Resent-Message-ID: <"y0asU.0.2N4.S2mWw" mx1> Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/40653 X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com Status: O X-Status: At 8:57 AM 2/8/1, Rick Monteverde wrote: >Horace - > >I see what you mean now about a steady state, but: > >>At any rate, the I think the ordinary pendulum test is pretty flakey. It >>is a much better and much more sensitive test to use a multi-turn torsion >>pendulum. If the drive can push the torsion pendulum (or an armature) >>around a full turn and maintain thrust, then you know you have a genuine >>net thrust. > >In a test device on the end of an armature or torsion pendulum, a >motor spinning up (increasing RPM) a wheel coaxial with the axis of >the torsion pendulum would produce a counter torque that would propel >the torsion device, wouldn't it? > Yes, you are right and I overlooked the accelerating angular momentum due to my having applied torsion pendulums exclusively to electronic devices. However, in any case, if the device can maintain thrust long term without exploding you can be very sure it is not doing so via accelerating angular momentum. Regards, Horace Heffner From vortex-l-request eskimo.com Thu Feb 8 14:11:02 2001 Received: (from smartlst localhost) by mx1.eskimo.com (8.9.1a/8.8.8) id OAA15444; Thu, 8 Feb 2001 14:07:55 -0800 Resent-Date: Thu, 8 Feb 2001 14:07:55 -0800 Mime-Version: 1.0 X-Sender: rick mail.highsurf.com Message-Id: In-Reply-To: References: Date: Thu, 8 Feb 2001 12:07:37 -1000 To: vortex-l eskimo.com From: Rick Monteverde Subject: Re: Cook's Drive Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" ; format="flowed" Resent-Message-ID: <"QpSBL2.0.9n3.xYnWw" mx1> Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/40654 X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com Status: O X-Status: Horace - >However, in any case, if the device can maintain thrust long term without >exploding you can be very sure it is not doing so via accelerating angular >momentum. Well, that was just a first pass. :) Version 1.1 The device at the end of the armature contains a gyro fixed to a battery powered turntable, tumbling the gyro's axis continuously. The counter torque from the constant precession thus generated causes the armature to turn continuously. It can maintain thrust long term (as long as the batteries last) without exploding. - Rick Monteverde Honolulu, HI From vortex-l-request eskimo.com Thu Feb 8 16:33:49 2001 Received: (from smartlst localhost) by mx1.eskimo.com (8.9.1a/8.8.8) id QAA20095; Thu, 8 Feb 2001 16:25:16 -0800 Resent-Date: Thu, 8 Feb 2001 16:25:16 -0800 Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" X-Sender: mjones pop.jump.net Message-Id: In-Reply-To: References: <5.0.2.1.0.20010208083608.02428b10 earthtech.org> <3.0.6.32.20010208164315.00a832b0 cyllene.uwa.edu.au> <3.0.6.32.20010208164315.00a832b0 cyllene.uwa.edu.au> <5.0.2.1.0.20010208083608.02428b10 earthtech.org> Date: Thu, 8 Feb 2001 18:18:53 -0600 To: vortex-l eskimo.com From: Mitchell Jones Subject: Re: Cook's Drive Resent-Message-ID: <"PAO1W.0.vv4.hZpWw" mx1> Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/40655 X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com Status: O X-Status: >Scott - > >>However, I believe Rick is correct that a gyroscope inside the >>device could make the rope hang at an angle. Don't you agree, John? > >Am I? Now I'm not so sure. > >A gyro can hang sideways off the end of a string this: > >| >| >| >| >| >| >| >|<-String >| >| >| _ >| | | >--- --- <-Gyro, from side. Horizontal line is gyro spin axis. > | | > - > >I think I've only seen the string go off vertical when precession >sets in and it begins to rotate around the string plumbline axis. And >in the drawing above, the gyro moves out to the *right* in that case. >Further confusion, a la Laithwaite - does that centrifugal thrust >from precession exert an equal and opposite reaction against the >system somewhere? > >I'm sure confused. Tell me again how a flexible string can hang at an >angle in a steady non-whirling state and not be from true thrust of >some kind? Maybe John *is* right. ***{Think in terms of the force vectors. If the string deviates from straight down, then the pull along the string can be resolved into two components, one vertical and one horizontal. Result: unless there is a force opposing the horizontal component, it will produce an oscillation. (On the other hand, if the string points straight down, the horizontal component is zero.) Bottom line: if you see an object hanging from a string that is *not* oscillating about the vertical, and is *not* hanging straight down, then you know a force is being applied to it, either in the form of an internal force (thrust) or in the form of an external force (e.g., a magnetic field, the wind, or whatever). --Mitchell Jones}*** >- Rick Monteverde >Honolulu, HI ________________ Quote of the month: "Law is what the authorities use to ride the country." --Anatoly Schransky From vortex-l-request eskimo.com Thu Feb 8 16:35:45 2001 Received: (from smartlst localhost) by mx1.eskimo.com (8.9.1a/8.8.8) id QAA20832; Thu, 8 Feb 2001 16:27:11 -0800 Resent-Date: Thu, 8 Feb 2001 16:27:11 -0800 Message-Id: Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Date: Thu, 8 Feb 2001 15:35:11 -0900 To: vortex-l eskimo.com From: hheffner mtaonline.net (Horace Heffner) Subject: Re: Cook's Drive Resent-Message-ID: <"uvQlX3.0.Q55.UbpWw" mx1> Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/40656 X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com Status: O X-Status: At 12:07 PM 2/8/1, Rick Monteverde wrote: >Horace - > >>However, in any case, if the device can maintain thrust long term without >>exploding you can be very sure it is not doing so via accelerating angular >>momentum. > >Well, that was just a first pass. :) > >Version 1.1 >The device at the end of the armature contains a gyro fixed to a >battery powered turntable, tumbling the gyro's axis continuously. The >counter torque from the constant precession thus generated causes the >armature to turn continuously. It can maintain thrust long term (as >long as the batteries last) without exploding. This is of course false! The torsion pendulum presents a controlled but finite resistance to turning. If the gyro precessing could apply more than 2 times its own angular momentum (by reversing its own angular momentum vector) then angular momentum is not conserved, thus it could ACCELERATE the the angular momentum of the pendulum, or some other thing greared to the pendulum, and thus create free energy. Any turning acheived by precession would have a very limited lifetime on the torsion pendulum. Out in space, however, the turning of the spaceraft can be maintained indefinitely, even without continual precession, provided the momentum applied to the spacecraft by momentarily precessing the gyro is also is within the 2 times angular momentum applied to the gyro at startup (which I assume was opposed by orientation control rockets during startup.) Regards, Horace Heffner From vortex-l-request eskimo.com Thu Feb 8 17:42:33 2001 Received: (from smartlst localhost) by mx1.eskimo.com (8.9.1a/8.8.8) id RAA14068; Thu, 8 Feb 2001 17:28:43 -0800 Resent-Date: Thu, 8 Feb 2001 17:28:43 -0800 From: Robin van Spaandonk To: vortex-l eskimo.com Subject: Re: Hydrino based CF Date: Fri, 09 Feb 2001 12:27:41 +1100 Organization: Improving Message-ID: References: <23th6t4f4rklemsue40p6lf34nq5cu9vpi 4ax.com> <3A69C660.1CCEDCF6@pacbell.net> <3A6C9BA9.3F2EE932@ix.netcom.com> <9onp6toob4ul639i7qbplu31frdsg4cj12@4ax.com> <3A7C3CC4.6C576A56@ix.netcom.com> <3A7C6FA4.9E2F82AA@ix.netcom.com> <3A7D6C64.80C32AF6@ix.netcom.com> <3A8011D6.60DF2DA5@ix.netcom.com> In-Reply-To: <3A8011D6.60DF2DA5 ix.netcom.com> X-Mailer: Forte Agent 1.8/32.548 MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit X-MIME-Autoconverted: from quoted-printable to 8bit by mx1.eskimo.com id RAA13977 Resent-Message-ID: <"aKG2i3.0.kR3.BVqWw" mx1> Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/40657 X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com Status: O X-Status: In reply to Edmund Storms's message of Tue, 06 Feb 2001 09:01:50 -0600: [snip] >> Could it be that in the Arata experiment, electrolysis forced the D into the >> cathode, which then migrated through the metal-metal contacts in the Pd >> black, then when it tried to leave the Pd black the whole surface comprised >> little cavities which catalyzed the reaction? > >Perhaps. However, Pd-black frequently does not work, Do you mean that Arata style experiments frequently fail (i.e. hollow cathode), or do you mean that Pd black in other configurations fail? >yet I expect such little cavities are >always present to some degree. Clearly, this is not the only variable. Is it possible that all experiments work to some extent, but that you reject those where the "signal" is buried in the noise? What I mean is this. Is it possible that the experiments do indeed rely upon a highly variable parameter, and consequently also produce highly variable results, and that you simply reject as failures those in which the results don't meet your criteria for "success"? IOW that the "work/don't work" criterion is not a property of the experiment, but a criterion which you impose upon it? What I am getting at is that you can't really reject cavities as a critical property of the material until proper measurements have been undertaken of the cavity sizes and numbers, and the results compared to excess heat measurements. AFAIK, this hasn't been done yet. [snip] >Palladium is unique in that it forms defects very easily. This can be seen using >electron-transmission-microcopsy. This being the case, PdD will always have a collection of >such defects, yet excess power is not always seen at some level. If any combination of >defects is important, some excess energy should always be detected because of the random >nature of this variable. Instead of being apparently random, excess energy is either >present or it is absent, with very little range between these two extremes. This could be partly explained by a "threshold" mechanism. I.e. a feedback mechanism which results in the reactions themselves helping to maintain the environment which leads to those reactions. Such a mechanism can be brought about by Mills shrinkages, when the UV released ionises helium (from deuterinos have already fused), such that the helium also becomes a catalyst. If this is so, then cathodes that have just produced considerable excess heat and are still full of helium should "start up" again quickly, while those that have been heated to remove their helium, should be almost returned to their initial state, and should once again take longer before generating excess heat bursts, as they did when first loaded. (I.e. long loading times before the first heat burst could be at least partially related to the requirement to build up a certain concentration of helium in the cavities). Furthermore, if the resultant heat release and pressure build up result in destruction of the cavity, and release of the helium, then it could again be quite a while before enough helium builds up for another heat burst. [snip] >> So you agree that it is a materials problem, but you don't think it has >> anything to do with which other elements are present. So which material >> properties are left? > >Three basic kinds of variables exist. These are chemical such as modified by impurities, >physical such as you are exploring, or a combination of other types such as phonon action, >weird particles or electron energy levels. The concentration of D would be important in all >cases and each major variable would be influenced by the other ones. Clearly, the required >conditions are rare and difficult to achieve. Therefore, the conditions are probably a >complex combination of the major variables. Which process do you consider to be most likely to be responsible, and why? > >> >> >> Does anyone know anything about the formation process of the Case cell >> >> catalyst? Is it possible that small amounts of C migrate into the Pd during >> >> production? >> > >> >Small amounts of C surely migrate into the Pd. However, C has a very low solubility in >> >Pd so that the amount would be very small. > >> >> That's not a problem, I was just curious. There is still the possibility >> that the Pd lattice is a bad match for the C lattice, or even that the C >> lattice itself forms cavities of the right size. > >Carbon has two choices, it can go into the lattice and replace D or it can combine with its >self to form graphite. The graphite forms at the grain boundaries and therein weakens the >lattice. Consequently, PdD containing excessive carbon will not load very well because of >excessive crack formation. How about using ion implantation, rather than simple smelting? The idea being, to get single atoms of C into the Pd matrix, rather than allowing it to form graphite, as it might prefer to do. Regards, Robin van Spaandonk A Future For Humanity see: http://users.bigpond.net.au/rvanspaa/ From vortex-l-request eskimo.com Thu Feb 8 18:10:26 2001 Received: (from smartlst localhost) by mx1.eskimo.com (8.9.1a/8.8.8) id SAA01138; Thu, 8 Feb 2001 18:08:48 -0800 Resent-Date: Thu, 8 Feb 2001 18:08:48 -0800 From: Robin van Spaandonk To: vortex-l eskimo.com Subject: Re: Hydrino based CF Date: Fri, 09 Feb 2001 13:08:09 +1100 Organization: Improving Message-ID: References: <23th6t4f4rklemsue40p6lf34nq5cu9vpi 4ax.com> <3A69C660.1CCEDCF6@pacbell.net> <3A6C9BA9.3F2EE932@ix.netcom.com> <9onp6toob4ul639i7qbplu31frdsg4cj12@4ax.com> <3A7C3CC4.6C576A56@ix.netcom.com> <3A7C6FA4.9E2F82AA@ix.netcom.com> <4uhp7tchrau57caq9tl3t0bom1rcfmqmns@4ax.com> <3A7D6C9A.411C958B@ix.netcom.com> <3A8011FE.96E427A4@ix.netcom.com> In-Reply-To: <3A8011FE.96E427A4 ix.netcom.com> X-Mailer: Forte Agent 1.8/32.548 MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit X-MIME-Autoconverted: from quoted-printable to 8bit by mx1.eskimo.com id SAA01089 Resent-Message-ID: <"zlsST1.0.dH.l4rWw" mx1> Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/40658 X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com Status: O X-Status: In reply to Edmund Storms's message of Tue, 06 Feb 2001 09:02:29 -0600: [snip] >I agree, scraping the surface will produce dislocations in the Pd sublattice in the surface >region. Bending the sample will have the same effect. Both have been done with no effect. Yet, there are reports of this being effective with gold and nickel? > >Regards, > Ed > Regards, Robin van Spaandonk A Future For Humanity see: http://users.bigpond.net.au/rvanspaa/ From vortex-l-request eskimo.com Thu Feb 8 18:14:46 2001 Received: (from smartlst localhost) by mx1.eskimo.com (8.9.1a/8.8.8) id SAA02165; Thu, 8 Feb 2001 18:11:48 -0800 Resent-Date: Thu, 8 Feb 2001 18:11:48 -0800 Date: Thu, 08 Feb 2001 20:12:55 -0600 From: Scott Little Subject: Re: Cook's Drive In-reply-to: X-Sender: little earthtech.org To: vortex-l eskimo.com, vortex-l@eskimo.com Message-id: <5.0.2.1.0.20010208200748.0243bbb8 earthtech.org> MIME-version: 1.0 X-Mailer: QUALCOMM Windows Eudora Version 5.0.2 Content-type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"; format=flowed References: <5.0.2.1.0.20010208083608.02428b10 earthtech.org> <3.0.6.32.20010208164315.00a832b0 cyllene.uwa.edu.au> <3.0.6.32.20010208164315.00a832b0 cyllene.uwa.edu.au> <5.0.2.1.0.20010208083608.02428b10 earthtech.org> Resent-Message-ID: <"gvzzT.0.lX.a7rWw" mx1> Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/40659 X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com Status: O X-Status: At 06:18 PM 2/8/2001 -0600, Mitchell Jones wrote: >| > >| > >| > >| > >| > >| > >| > >|<-String > >| > >| > >| _ > >| | | > >--- --- <-Gyro, from side. Horizontal line is gyro spin axis. > > | | > > - >***{Think in terms of the force vectors. If the string deviates from >straight down, then the pull along the string can be resolved into two >components, one vertical and one horizontal. Result: unless there is a >force opposing the horizontal component, it will produce an oscillation. ...or a permanent horizontal displacement. I guess you're right, Mitchell, the gyroscope's string will hang precisely straight down. The obvious torque created by its CM sitting away from the string attachment point is counteracted by the gyro action. Horace, your oscillating mass within the PVC pipe will just (eventually) produce a string angle that oscillates about the vertical. So, I'm back with John Winterflood now. All you have to do is hang the device from a single perfectly flexible strand. If the device can maintain a non-zero time averaged angular displacement of the strand from the vertical, it's got something magic going on inside. Scott Little EarthTech International, Inc. 4030 Braker Lane West, Suite 300 Austin TX 78759 512-342-2185 512-346-3017 (FAX) http://www.earthtech.org From vortex-l-request eskimo.com Thu Feb 8 18:22:40 2001 Received: (from smartlst localhost) by mx1.eskimo.com (8.9.1a/8.8.8) id SAA04536; Thu, 8 Feb 2001 18:16:38 -0800 Resent-Date: Thu, 8 Feb 2001 18:16:38 -0800 Mime-Version: 1.0 X-Sender: rick mail.highsurf.com Message-Id: In-Reply-To: References: Date: Thu, 8 Feb 2001 16:16:28 -1000 To: vortex-l eskimo.com From: Rick Monteverde Subject: Re: Cook's Drive Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" ; format="flowed" Resent-Message-ID: <"zQZ5z1.0.o61.5CrWw" mx1> Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/40660 X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com Status: O X-Status: Horace - At 3:35 PM -0900 2/8/01, Horace Heffner wrote: >If the gyro precessing could apply more than >2 times its own angular momentum (by reversing its own angular momentum >vector) then angular momentum is not conserved, thus it could ACCELERATE >the the angular momentum of the pendulum, or some other thing greared to >the pendulum, and thus create free energy. I'm confused again. I don't see any free energy, I see a battery powered motor turning against a gyro's resistance to being turned, thus turning the frame (the torsion beam) that the motor's attached to. The turning torsion beam would accelerate to the motor's geared speed to where the friction maxed out due to its power. There it would level off in speed, but maintain. At least that's how it would seem. - Rick Monteverde Honolulu, HI From vortex-l-request eskimo.com Thu Feb 8 19:58:06 2001 Received: (from smartlst localhost) by mx1.eskimo.com (8.9.1a/8.8.8) id TAA12010; Thu, 8 Feb 2001 19:54:48 -0800 Resent-Date: Thu, 8 Feb 2001 19:54:48 -0800 X-Apparently-From: Message-Id: <4.2.0.58.20010208204656.00be4430 postoffice.swbell.net> X-Sender: cjford1 pop.mail.yahoo.com X-Mailer: QUALCOMM Windows Eudora Pro Version 4.2.0.58 Date: Thu, 08 Feb 2001 20:57:16 -0600 To: vortex-l eskimo.com From: Charles Ford Subject: Re: Cook's Drive In-Reply-To: References: <5.0.2.1.0.20010208083608.02428b10 earthtech.org> <3.0.6.32.20010208164315.00a832b0 cyllene.uwa.edu.au> <3.0.6.32.20010208164315.00a832b0 cyllene.uwa.edu.au> <5.0.2.1.0.20010208083608.02428b10 earthtech.org> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"; format=flowed Resent-Message-ID: <"1kfpC3.0.Zx2.7esWw" mx1> Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/40661 X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com Status: O X-Status: OK.. Lest face it a gyro will do things that seem (or maybe are) very "non-Newtonian" It cannot help but add confusion and frustration to the problem. I am sorry I even mentioned the idea. because now I agree with Horace the device must extend completely beyond plumb and stay there. It is not overly rigorous because you can change the sensitivity (gain) of the measurement to match the expected force of the device... Simply make the tether longer to increase the gain. It should be simple enough to derive a formula to calculate the minimum required liength of the cord. At 06:18 PM 2/8/01 -0600, you wrote: > >Scott - > > > >>However, I believe Rick is correct that a gyroscope inside the > >>device could make the rope hang at an angle. Don't you agree, John? > > > >Am I? Now I'm not so sure. > > > >A gyro can hang sideways off the end of a string this: > > > >| > >| > >| > >| > >| > >| > >| > >|<-String > >| > >| > >| _ > >| | | > >--- --- <-Gyro, from side. Horizontal line is gyro spin axis. > > | | > > - > > > >I think I've only seen the string go off vertical when precession > >sets in and it begins to rotate around the string plumbline axis. And > >in the drawing above, the gyro moves out to the *right* in that case. > >Further confusion, a la Laithwaite - does that centrifugal thrust > >from precession exert an equal and opposite reaction against the > >system somewhere? > > > >I'm sure confused. Tell me again how a flexible string can hang at an > >angle in a steady non-whirling state and not be from true thrust of > >some kind? Maybe John *is* right. > >***{Think in terms of the force vectors. If the string deviates from >straight down, then the pull along the string can be resolved into two >components, one vertical and one horizontal. Result: unless there is a >force opposing the horizontal component, it will produce an oscillation. >(On the other hand, if the string points straight down, the horizontal >component is zero.) > >Bottom line: if you see an object hanging from a string that is *not* >oscillating about the vertical, and is *not* hanging straight down, then >you know a force is being applied to it, either in the form of an internal >force (thrust) or in the form of an external force (e.g., a magnetic field, >the wind, or whatever). > >--Mitchell Jones}*** > > >- Rick Monteverde > >Honolulu, HI > >________________ >Quote of the month: > >"Law is what the authorities use to ride the country." --Anatoly Schransky _________________________________________________________ Do You Yahoo!? Get your free yahoo.com address at http://mail.yahoo.com From vortex-l-request eskimo.com Thu Feb 8 20:12:02 2001 Received: (from smartlst localhost) by mx1.eskimo.com (8.9.1a/8.8.8) id UAA18038; Thu, 8 Feb 2001 20:09:55 -0800 Resent-Date: Thu, 8 Feb 2001 20:09:55 -0800 Message-Id: Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Date: Thu, 8 Feb 2001 19:19:30 -0900 To: vortex-l eskimo.com From: hheffner mtaonline.net (Horace Heffner) Subject: Re: Cook's Drive Resent-Message-ID: <"UV-UE2.0.mP4.JssWw" mx1> Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/40663 X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com Status: O X-Status: At 8:12 PM 2/8/1, Scott Little wrote: >Horace, your oscillating mass within the PVC pipe will just (eventually) >produce a string angle that oscillates about the vertical. I believe this is simply not true in all cases. It did not happen to me when in a swing. It is my belief (memory) that I could pull on the rope and maintain a non-zero average rope position. I could also reinforce or damp the swing by timing the pull. If there is one counter-example to a theory, then the theory is no good. It would be an interesting problem to design a gadget to continually maintain a non-zero average angle given air resistance and the fact that no string is completely flexible. I suppose one could sit in the swing and pull back on the rope once a day. 8^) Regards, Horace Heffner From vortex-l-request eskimo.com Thu Feb 8 20:12:13 2001 Received: (from smartlst localhost) by mx1.eskimo.com (8.9.1a/8.8.8) id UAA18012; Thu, 8 Feb 2001 20:09:53 -0800 Resent-Date: Thu, 8 Feb 2001 20:09:53 -0800 Message-Id: Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Date: Thu, 8 Feb 2001 19:19:34 -0900 To: vortex-l eskimo.com From: hheffner mtaonline.net (Horace Heffner) Subject: Re: Cook's Drive Resent-Message-ID: <"R7kKQ2.0.HP4.HssWw" mx1> Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/40662 X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com Status: O X-Status: At 4:16 PM 2/8/1, Rick Monteverde wrote: >Horace - > >At 3:35 PM -0900 2/8/01, Horace Heffner wrote: >>If the gyro precessing could apply more than >>2 times its own angular momentum (by reversing its own angular momentum >>vector) then angular momentum is not conserved, thus it could ACCELERATE >>the the angular momentum of the pendulum, or some other thing greared to >>the pendulum, and thus create free energy. > >I'm confused again. I don't see any free energy, I see a battery >powered motor turning against a gyro's resistance Angular momentum can only be applied to the torsion pendulum by the gyro precession being such that the vertical component of its angular momenum vector increases or decreases. Since the vertical component of the angular momentum vector must stop increasing or decreasing when the gyro reaches vertical, there is a limit to the angular momentum that can be transfered to the pendulum by the gyro (or any set of gyros.) After that, when the gyro is (or gyros are all) vertical, any work done on the torsion beam will be reversed by further forced precession. The force on the torsion beam therefore becomes cyclic. >to being turned, >thus turning the frame (the torsion beam) that the motor's attached >to. The turning torsion beam would accelerate to the motor's geared >speed to where the friction maxed out due to its power. There it >would level off in speed, but maintain. At least that's how it would >seem. I suggest you try this. 8^) I think the notion that that gyro will simply spin in a horizontal plane putting up a resistance that can be "pushed upon" applying torque to the torsion pendulum is not founded in reality. I think the gyro will find an outlet for precessing into the veritcal, most likely in the form of flipping the pendulum about its horzontal beam axis. If the gyro can not precess into the veritcal, then no angular momentum can be applied to the pendulum main axis. Once the gyro is veritcal, the only thing that can happen is to reverse the momentum applied. I must say though, it IS an interesting experiment idea! I can also say that I once had the enjoyable experience of sitting on a swivelling bar stool at a local science exhibit and playing with a big gyro. It was not possible for me to do the thing you are suggesting, because the gyro always precessed out of the plane in which you suggest the gyro be rotated. There was nothing I could do to force it to stay in that plane. It would be interesting to see what happens to the bearings etc. in a robustly built experiment. 8^) Regards, Horace Heffner From vortex-l-request eskimo.com Fri Feb 9 01:46:34 2001 Received: (from smartlst localhost) by mx1.eskimo.com (8.9.1a/8.8.8) id BAA07632; Fri, 9 Feb 2001 01:45:25 -0800 Resent-Date: Fri, 9 Feb 2001 01:45:25 -0800 Mime-Version: 1.0 X-Sender: rick mail.highsurf.com Message-Id: In-Reply-To: References: Date: Thu, 8 Feb 2001 23:45:15 -1000 To: vortex-l eskimo.com From: Rick Monteverde Subject: Re: Cook's Drive Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" ; format="flowed" Resent-Message-ID: <"DdkQf1.0._s1.qmxWw" mx1> Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/40664 X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com Status: O X-Status: Horace - At 7:19 PM -0900 2/8/01, Horace Heffner wrote: >Angular momentum can only be applied to the torsion pendulum by the gyro >precession being such that the vertical component of its angular momenum >vector increases or decreases. Since the vertical component of the angular >momentum vector must stop increasing or decreasing when the gyro reaches >vertical, there is a limit to the angular momentum that can be transfered >to the pendulum by the gyro (or any set of gyros.) After that, when the >gyro is (or gyros are all) vertical, any work done on the torsion beam will >be reversed by further forced precession. The force on the torsion beam >therefore becomes cyclic. I think you are correct. Horizontal precession force on a vertically tumbling axis does indeed switch direction every 180 degrees. At least we get AC mass-flow, maybe it induces torsion waves or something. - Rick Monteverde Honolulu, HI From vortex-l-request eskimo.com Fri Feb 9 02:33:52 2001 Received: (from smartlst localhost) by mx1.eskimo.com (8.9.1a/8.8.8) id CAA29647; Fri, 9 Feb 2001 02:33:13 -0800 Resent-Date: Fri, 9 Feb 2001 02:33:13 -0800 Message-Id: Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Date: Fri, 9 Feb 2001 00:02:50 -0900 To: vortex-l eskimo.com From: hheffner mtaonline.net (Horace Heffner) Subject: Conservation of angular momentum Resent-Message-ID: <"wDECv.0.9F7.eTyWw" mx1> Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/40665 X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com Status: O X-Status: Here is a confession of sorts regarding my present apparent faith in conservation of angular momentum by gyros. In 1960-61 I personally experienced repeatedly what I thought was a violation of conservation of angular momentum. In 1995, some vorts convinced me it was anecdotal and merely observational error, which may well be correct, but I still wonder about that from time to time. The cases of the gyros used were about 9" in diameter if I recall correctly, and were light tan in color. The gyros rested in multiple gimbals with brushes. It would likely be expensive and difficlt to impossible to reproduce the experiment because the bearings were hidden inside the case and their operation may have been critical to the flips I witnessed. Below are the relevant portions of my comments on vortex in 1995. - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - At 10:17 AM 11/1/95, Horace Heffner wrote: [snip] "If you have ever played with a gyroscope, you are first amazed at how much resistance to torque a good gyro has. However, if you play with a gyro on gimbals, it is amazing that, if the gimbals are freewheeling, a small touch can flip a gyro over. The resistance to rotation of the poles (axis) of a gyro is present only if rotation of the axis in a direction perpendicular to the applied torque is suppressed. If precession is freewheeling it takes almost no torque or energy to flip the gyro over 180 deg. However, this fact seems to preclude conservation of angular momentum." [SNIP] - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - The comment above shows the clear misunderstanding of the nature of gyros with which I came away from the experiments. - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - At 8:26 AM 11/3/95, Horace Heffner wrote: [SNIP] "The assumed fact that a small touch can flip a gyro over is from personal experience of over 30 years ago. There were war surplus motorized gyros for sale for almost zero cost. When playing with these sometimes they would suddenly just flip over in the gimbals. When spinning in the z axis, if you applied a small force in say the x axis, a flip would occur in the y axis if the gyro was freewheeling in the y axis. I am not sure, but I think the wobble correcting nature of the bearings had something to do with the effect. I belive there is a name for this effect, but I don't recall what it is." [SNIP] - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - It is tantallizingly true that if conservation of angular momentum can be violated that free energy can be obtained. However, it is also true that I have become convinced that no key to free energy exists in a purely mechanical system, but maybe that thought needs some further examination. Regards, Horace Heffner From vortex-l-request eskimo.com Fri Feb 9 06:46:19 2001 Received: (from smartlst localhost) by mx1.eskimo.com (8.9.1a/8.8.8) id GAA11171; Fri, 9 Feb 2001 06:44:14 -0800 Resent-Date: Fri, 9 Feb 2001 06:44:14 -0800 Date: Fri, 09 Feb 2001 08:43:42 -0600 From: Scott Little Subject: Re: Cook's Drive In-reply-to: X-Sender: little earthtech.org To: vortex-l eskimo.com, vortex-l@eskimo.com Message-id: <5.0.2.1.0.20010209083720.00aa8bc8 earthtech.org> MIME-version: 1.0 X-Mailer: QUALCOMM Windows Eudora Version 5.0.2 Content-type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"; format=flowed References: Resent-Message-ID: <"vNhed2.0.Jk2.y80Xw" mx1> Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/40666 X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com Status: O X-Status: At 11:45 PM 2/8/2001 -1000, Rick Monteverde wrote: >Horace - > >At 7:19 PM -0900 2/8/01, Horace Heffner wrote: >>Angular momentum can only be applied to the torsion pendulum by the gyro >>precession being such that the vertical component of its angular momenum >>vector increases or decreases. Since the vertical component of the angular >>momentum vector must stop increasing or decreasing when the gyro reaches >>vertical, there is a limit to the angular momentum that can be transfered >>to the pendulum by the gyro (or any set of gyros.) After that, when the >>gyro is (or gyros are all) vertical, any work done on the torsion beam will >>be reversed by further forced precession. The force on the torsion beam >>therefore becomes cyclic. > >I think you are correct. Horizontal precession force on a vertically >tumbling axis does indeed switch direction every 180 degrees. At least we >get AC mass-flow, maybe it induces torsion waves or something. Gosh, Rick, I was just getting ready to defend your position...and you caved in...:) I'm imagining Rick's gyro to have a horizontal axis. Its cage is mounted to the output shaft (vertically oriented) of the DC gearmotor, which motor is fixed to the arm of the torsion pendulum so its shaft remains vertical as the pendulum rotates. The gearmotor forces the gyro cage to rotate slowly but does not allow the gyro axis to leave the horizontal plane. Won't that cause the torsion pendulum to wind up steadily (at the same rpm as the DC gearmotor) in the opposite direction until the torsion restoring force equals the precession force generated by the gyro? Scott Little EarthTech International, Inc. 4030 Braker Lane West, Suite 300 Austin TX 78759 512-342-2185 512-346-3017 (FAX) http://www.earthtech.org From vortex-l-request eskimo.com Fri Feb 9 07:23:56 2001 Received: (from smartlst localhost) by mx1.eskimo.com (8.9.1a/8.8.8) id HAA29316; Fri, 9 Feb 2001 07:22:16 -0800 Resent-Date: Fri, 9 Feb 2001 07:22:16 -0800 Message-ID: <004d01c092b4$8f75bb40$1e8f85ce fjsparber> Reply-To: "Frederick Sparber" From: "Frederick Sparber" To: Cc: , , Subject: Re: Jumping Bean Space Drive Date: Fri, 9 Feb 2001 08:20:01 -0800 MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-Priority: 3 X-MSMail-Priority: Normal X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook Express 5.00.2615.200 X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V5.00.2615.200 Resent-Message-ID: <"ukeUt3.0.-97.ei0Xw" mx1> Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/40667 X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com Status: O X-Status: Perhaps Scott, Horace, Rick, and all the rest of the "Cook's Drive" propulsion system experts, should petition NASA to take a large colony of viable Mexican Jumping Beans up to the ISS "Skylab" and use them for vectoring it. Problem is, keeping the Space Shuttle on course to get there. :-) Regards, Frederick From vortex-l-request eskimo.com Fri Feb 9 07:48:15 2001 Received: (from smartlst localhost) by mx1.eskimo.com (8.9.1a/8.8.8) id HAA09116; Fri, 9 Feb 2001 07:46:54 -0800 Resent-Date: Fri, 9 Feb 2001 07:46:54 -0800 Message-ID: <004701c092c9$4fbf6900$f279ccd1 asus> From: "Mike Carrell" To: References: <23th6t4f4rklemsue40p6lf34nq5cu9vpi 4ax.com> <3A69C660.1CCEDCF6@pacbell.net> <3A6C9BA9.3F2EE932@ix.netcom.com> <9onp6toob4ul639i7qbplu31frdsg4cj12@4ax.com> <3A7C3CC4.6C576A56@ix.netcom.com> <3A7C6FA4.9E2F82AA@ix.netcom.com> <3A7D6C64.80C32AF6@ix.netcom.com> <3A8011D6.60DF2DA5@ix.netcom.com> Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com Subject: Unidentified subject! Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/40669 X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com Status: O X-Status: plldobes 4ax.com> Subject: Re: Hydrino based CF Date: Fri, 9 Feb 2001 07:35:02 -0800 MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-Priority: 3 X-MSMail-Priority: Normal X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook Express 5.50.4522.1200 X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V5.50.4522.1200 I haven't been following this thread intensively, but I note that it has wandered into discussions of the Arata and Case cells, both of which have been tested by McKubre with positive results. There is now an attempt to tie these results to speculations about Mills' hydrinos as the energy yielding process. A few years I studied Arata's papers carefully and wrote about his work for IE. There followed a long debate with Rich Murray about details. Let me state some impressions. The common factor in the Arata and Case cells is that the Pd surface is fractured in the extreme, to the extent that both could be said to be 'palladium black' processes. I don't understand Ed Storm's comment that Pd black 'doesn't work' when these cells do work in proper hands. In both cases the Pd black is gas loaded. For the Arata cell, D+ is driven into the outer Pd shell by electrolysis. It diffuses into the inner cavity, which is packed with Pd nanopowder and there migrates across the highly fractured surfaces of the contacting particles, diffusing into the particles, most only a few hundred atoms across. Somehow the reactions occur, the exact conditions unknown. 4He is produced and dissolved within the particles and must be driven out by heating in the special mass spectrometers Arata built. Arata was able to start and stop the cells repeatedly over a period of months. In the Case cell, the Pd is directly gas loaded without electrolysis. It seems reasonable that the ultimate processes are similar. It's a lottery, we still don't know exactly what is necessary, only that if you produce a lot of highly fractured Pd particles that enough of them will have active sites for the reaction products to become visible on a macroscopic scale. I believe the McKubre reports that with his Case cell experiments that the 4He production is commensurate with the heat production, to the extent that one can say with some confidence that DD fusion is taking place. The energy density of this reaction is greater than that claimed by Mills for the BLP reaction, and Mills claims no He production. It is inviting to see shrunken hydrogen atoms as approaching neutron-like properties and so facilitating CF reactions. In early patents, Mills stakes out a claim in CF territory along these lines. IMHO, we don't know nearly enough about both either set of phenomena to see deep connections. They probably exist, but I think for the present we should not strain too hard to connect them, but accept their coexistence as a kind of 'wave-particle duality'. What we earnestly need is progress toward replicable power systems and commercial development. Mike Carrell From vortex-l-request eskimo.com Fri Feb 9 07:48:26 2001 Received: (from smartlst localhost) by mx1.eskimo.com (8.9.1a/8.8.8) id HAA08356; Fri, 9 Feb 2001 07:45:05 -0800 Resent-Date: Fri, 9 Feb 2001 07:45:05 -0800 Message-ID: <005601c092b7$c299be60$1e8f85ce fjsparber> Reply-To: "Frederick Sparber" From: "Frederick Sparber" To: Subject: Re: Jumping Bean Space Drive Date: Fri, 9 Feb 2001 08:45:39 -0800 MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: multipart/mixed; boundary="----=_NextPart_000_0005_01C09274.AE250FE0" X-Priority: 3 X-MSMail-Priority: Normal X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook Express 5.00.2615.200 X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V5.00.2615.200 Resent-Message-ID: <"f2-Ze1.0.P22.021Xw" mx1> Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/40668 X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com Status: O X-Status: This is a multi-part message in MIME format. ------=_NextPart_000_0005_01C09274.AE250FE0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit At one million beans per cubic meter, what will be the Boltzman Temperature of this "Bean Gas" in zero gravity, Scott? Normally in a closed system; "The Sum of Fx + Fy + Fz = 0". However? :-) http://www.jbean.com/wht_mks_jmp.htm Regards, Frederick ------=_NextPart_000_0005_01C09274.AE250FE0 Content-Type: application/octet-stream; name="Home Page.url" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Content-Disposition: attachment; filename="Home Page.url" [DEFAULT] BASEURL=http://www.jbean.com/wht_mks_jmp.htm [InternetShortcut] URL=http://www.jbean.com/wht_mks_jmp.htm Modified=409416C8B692C001BB ------=_NextPart_000_0005_01C09274.AE250FE0-- From vortex-l-request eskimo.com Fri Feb 9 08:03:20 2001 Received: (from smartlst localhost) by mx1.eskimo.com (8.9.1a/8.8.8) id IAA20306; Fri, 9 Feb 2001 08:00:45 -0800 Resent-Date: Fri, 9 Feb 2001 08:00:45 -0800 From: FZNIDARSIC aol.com Message-ID: <2b.10d648ee.27b56dff aol.com> Date: Fri, 9 Feb 2001 10:59:59 EST Subject: Re: Unidentified subject! To: vortex-l eskimo.com MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="US-ASCII" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-Mailer: AOL 5.0 for Windows sub 128 Resent-Message-ID: <"s4VIQ2.0.Cz4.iG1Xw" mx1> Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/40670 X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com Status: O X-Status: In a message dated 2/9/01 10:48:34 AM Eastern Standard Time, mikec snip.net writes: << For the Arata cell, D+ is driven into the outer Pd shell by electrolysis. It diffuses into the inner cavity, which is packed with Pd nanopowder and there migrates across the highly fractured surfaces of the contacting particles, diffusing into the particles, most only a few hundred atoms across. Somehow the reactions occur, the exact conditions unknown. 4He is produced and dissolved within the particles and must be driven out by heating in the special mass spectrometers Arata built. Arata was able to start and stop the cells repeatedly over a period of months. >> Mike good observation. That's what I spoke about at ANS Washington. The 50nm size. The constants of the motion tend toward the electromagnetic in a Bose condensate that is excited at a frequency of one megahertz-meter. In the Case cell 50nm times 10xp14 hertz thermal equals one megahertz-meter. In Podletknov's experiment a 1/3 meter disk driven at 3 mega hertz produces the gravitational anomaly. Again the frequency is one megahertz meter (Znidarsic's constant) Frank Znidarsic From vortex-l-request eskimo.com Fri Feb 9 08:54:34 2001 Received: (from smartlst localhost) by mx1.eskimo.com (8.9.1a/8.8.8) id IAA16916; Fri, 9 Feb 2001 08:53:29 -0800 Resent-Date: Fri, 9 Feb 2001 08:53:29 -0800 Message-ID: <3A8412F2.A1690733 ix.netcom.com> Date: Fri, 09 Feb 2001 09:55:38 -0600 From: Edmund Storms X-Mailer: Mozilla 4.5 (Macintosh; U; PPC) X-Accept-Language: en,pdf MIME-Version: 1.0 To: vortex-l eskimo.com Subject: Re: Hydrino based CF References: <23th6t4f4rklemsue40p6lf34nq5cu9vpi 4ax.com> <3A69C660.1CCEDCF6@pacbell.net> <3A6C9BA9.3F2EE932@ix.netcom.com> <9onp6toob4ul639i7qbplu31frdsg4cj12@4ax.com> <3A7C3CC4.6C576A56@ix.netcom.com> <3A7C6FA4.9E2F82AA@ix.netcom.com> <3A7D6C64.80C32AF6@ix.netcom.com> <3A8011D6.60DF2DA5@ix.netcom.com> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=iso-8859-1; x-mac-type="54455854"; x-mac-creator="4D4F5353" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit Resent-Message-ID: <"t_eoj1.0.C84.822Xw" mx1> Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/40671 X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com Status: O X-Status: Robin van Spaandonk wrote: > In reply to Edmund Storms's message of Tue, 06 Feb 2001 09:01:50 -0600: > [snip] > >> Could it be that in the Arata experiment, electrolysis forced the D into the > >> cathode, which then migrated through the metal-metal contacts in the Pd > >> black, then when it tried to leave the Pd black the whole surface comprised > >> little cavities which catalyzed the reaction? > > > >Perhaps. However, Pd-black frequently does not work, > > Do you mean that Arata style experiments frequently fail (i.e. hollow > cathode), or do you mean that Pd black in other configurations fail? Yes, several laboratories in Japan failed and McKubre failed until Arata sent him one of his cathodes. Even Arata spent years getting the effect to work. Many variables interfere. > > > >yet I expect such little cavities are > >always present to some degree. Clearly, this is not the only variable. > > Is it possible that all experiments work to some extent, but that you reject > those where the "signal" is buried in the noise? I suspect this is true. However, a wide range of energy values exist above the noise that seems to be vacant of results. > > What I mean is this. Is it possible that the experiments do indeed rely upon > a highly variable parameter, and consequently also produce highly variable > results, and that you simply reject as failures those in which the results > don't meet your criteria for "success"? > IOW that the "work/don't work" criterion is not a property of the > experiment, but a criterion which you impose upon it? > > What I am getting at is that you can't really reject cavities as a critical > property of the material until proper measurements have been undertaken of > the cavity sizes and numbers, and the results compared to excess heat > measurements. AFAIK, this hasn't been done yet. Nature will produce a very wide range of void size and number by random processes. If voids were important, we should see an effect that occurs often and has a similar range of values. Clearly, we do not see this behavior. It is not sufficient to simply assume that EP would not be seen by this process unless the voids were made on purpose. > > [snip] > >Palladium is unique in that it forms defects very easily. This can be seen using > >electron-transmission-microcopsy. This being the case, PdD will always have a collection of > >such defects, yet excess power is not always seen at some level. If any combination of > >defects is important, some excess energy should always be detected because of the random > >nature of this variable. Instead of being apparently random, excess energy is either > >present or it is absent, with very little range between these two extremes. > > This could be partly explained by a "threshold" mechanism. I.e. a feedback > mechanism which results in the reactions themselves helping to maintain the > environment which leads to those reactions. Such a mechanism can be brought > about by Mills shrinkages, when the UV released ionises helium (from > deuterinos have already fused), such that the helium also becomes a > catalyst. > If this is so, then cathodes that have just produced considerable excess > heat and are still full of helium should "start up" again quickly, while > those that have been heated to remove their helium, should be almost > returned to their initial state, and should once again take longer before > generating excess heat bursts, as they did when first loaded. > (I.e. long loading times before the first heat burst could be at least > partially related to the requirement to build up a certain concentration of > helium in the cavities). > Furthermore, if the resultant heat release and pressure build up result in > destruction of the cavity, and release of the helium, then it could again be > quite a while before enough helium builds up for another heat burst. > [snip] Samples must be heated to over 1200° C before all helium is released. Helium can also be flushed out by a hydrogen flux. About 50-75% of the helium is released immediately because it is produced very near the surface. The remaining He is captured within small bubbles at grain boundaries. It has been my experience that once the correct conditions are present, excess energy is produced and it continues regardless of what is done to the sample within reason. > > >> So you agree that it is a materials problem, but you don't think it has > >> anything to do with which other elements are present. So which material > >> properties are left? > > > >Three basic kinds of variables exist. These are chemical such as modified by impurities, > >physical such as you are exploring, or a combination of other types such as phonon action, > >weird particles or electron energy levels. The concentration of D would be important in all > >cases and each major variable would be influenced by the other ones. Clearly, the required > >conditions are rare and difficult to achieve. Therefore, the conditions are probably a > >complex combination of the major variables. > > Which process do you consider to be most likely to be responsible, and why? The Case and Arata work show that fine particles are important. Production of energy from Pt shows that a complex alloy is important and this alloy does not have to involve Pd. Indeed, excess energy has been produced using a variety of elements, depending on the method used to inject the D. At this point, the nature of the required chemical environment is not known nor is it addressed by the various "theories". > > > > > >> > >> >> Does anyone know anything about the formation process of the Case cell > >> >> catalyst? Is it possible that small amounts of C migrate into the Pd during > >> >> production? > >> > > >> >Small amounts of C surely migrate into the Pd. However, C has a very low solubility in > >> >Pd so that the amount would be very small. > > > >> > >> That's not a problem, I was just curious. There is still the possibility > >> that the Pd lattice is a bad match for the C lattice, or even that the C > >> lattice itself forms cavities of the right size. > > > >Carbon has two choices, it can go into the lattice and replace D or it can combine with its > >self to form graphite. The graphite forms at the grain boundaries and therein weakens the > >lattice. Consequently, PdD containing excessive carbon will not load very well because of > >excessive crack formation. > How about using ion implantation, rather than simple smelting? The idea > being, to get single atoms of C into the Pd matrix, rather than allowing it > to form graphite, as it might prefer to do. Carbon injected this way will not go very far into the lattice and the process will produce local heating. This increased temperature will allow the nonequilibrium carbon concentration to adjust to equilibrium by forming graphite. Nevertheless, some nonequilibrium conditions would escape this process and these local regions could produce EP if the presence of nonequilibrium carbon is important. Unfortunately, as with all suggestions, a person would have to invest considerable time and money to explore all the variables. For example, why only carbon? Why not a mixture of C and B, or B and Si? What concentration would be required? Might not the environment require 8 C atoms in a cage structure so as to capture the two D atoms. Or perhaps 8 B are required. You can see that an infinite number of possibilities exist. Whatever the environment, it must be realized by using electrolytic loading, gas loading, ultrasonic loading, or ion bombardment. In addition it must be produced in at least Pd, Ag, Ni, Ti, and Pt, or in complex alloys that can form on or in these materials. Unless you can propose an environment that can be applied to all of these conditions, you have nothing, but please keep thinking anyway. Unless a suggestion has good support by observation, no one has the time and money to explore the possibility. Indeed, all of us can and do think of hundreds of possibilities involving various physical and chemical environments. Having creative ideas is not the problem. The problem rests on not having the required resources. In addition, it is strange how much creative energy is applied to understanding the mechanism of the nuclear reaction and how little is applied to identifying the unique chemical environment. Apparently, once the required environment is produced, nature applies the mechanism automatically. Yet, most scientists focus on the mechanism without asking what unique condition must be present before the mechanism can work. As a result, these "theories" provide NO guidance to the experimenter. Regards, Ed > From vortex-l-request eskimo.com Fri Feb 9 09:18:25 2001 Received: (from smartlst localhost) by mx1.eskimo.com (8.9.1a/8.8.8) id JAA30242; Fri, 9 Feb 2001 09:17:19 -0800 Resent-Date: Fri, 9 Feb 2001 09:17:19 -0800 Message-ID: <3A841871.C6D5F04A ix.netcom.com> Date: Fri, 09 Feb 2001 10:19:07 -0600 From: Edmund Storms X-Mailer: Mozilla 4.5 (Macintosh; U; PPC) X-Accept-Language: en,pdf MIME-Version: 1.0 To: vortex-l eskimo.com Subject: Re: Hydrino based CF References: <23th6t4f4rklemsue40p6lf34nq5cu9vpi 4ax.com> <3A69C660.1CCEDCF6@pacbell.net> <3A6C9BA9.3F2EE932@ix.netcom.com> <9onp6toob4ul639i7qbplu31frdsg4cj12@4ax.com> <3A7C3CC4.6C576A56@ix.netcom.com> <3A7C6FA4.9E2F82AA@ix.netcom.com> <4uhp7tchrau57caq9tl3t0bom1rcfmqmns@4ax.com> <3A7D6C9A.411C958B@ix.netcom.com> <3A8011FE.96E427A4@ix.netcom.com> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii; x-mac-type="54455854"; x-mac-creator="4D4F5353" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Resent-Message-ID: <"lOQw52.0.NO7.UO2Xw" mx1> Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/40672 X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com Status: O X-Status: Robin van Spaandonk wrote: > In reply to Edmund Storms's message of Tue, 06 Feb 2001 09:02:29 -0600: > [snip] > >I agree, scraping the surface will produce dislocations in the Pd sublattice in the surface > >region. Bending the sample will have the same effect. Both have been done with no effect. > > Yet, there are reports of this being effective with gold and nickel? The question is, what exactly does scraping do" Does it make dislocations in the surface, does it remove the surface barrier, does it increase the surface area, or does it create regions to which the electrolytic current is attracted, thereby producing a high local current/area value? The answer depends on who's "theory" is being discussed. Would it not be better to learn the answer by experiment? Unfortunately, no one seems to care what the answer is. Regards, Ed From vortex-l-request eskimo.com Fri Feb 9 09:31:56 2001 Received: (from smartlst localhost) by mx1.eskimo.com (8.9.1a/8.8.8) id JAA04886; Fri, 9 Feb 2001 09:29:57 -0800 Resent-Date: Fri, 9 Feb 2001 09:29:57 -0800 Date: Fri, 09 Feb 2001 08:59:06 -0800 From: Jones Beene Subject: megahertz-meter? To: vortex-l eskimo.com Message-id: <3A8421DA.4020509 pacbell.net> MIME-version: 1.0 Content-type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii; format=flowed Content-transfer-encoding: 7bit User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (Windows; U; Win98; en-US; m18) Gecko/20001108 Netscape6/6.0 X-Accept-Language: en References: <2b.10d648ee.27b56dff aol.com> Resent-Message-ID: <"PTqpb2.0.GC1.La2Xw" mx1> Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/40673 X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com Status: O X-Status: FZNIDARSIC aol.com wrote: > The constants of the motion tend toward the electromagnetic in a > Bose condensate that is excited at a frequency of one megahertz-meter. In > the Case cell 50nm times 10xp14 hertz thermal equals one megahertz-meter. > In Podletknov's experiment a 1/3 meter disk driven at 3 mega hertz produces > the gravitational anomaly. Again the frequency is one megahertz meter > (Znidarsic's constant) This is interesting but a little confusing. For those of us who missed your presentation could you explain please: You seem to be multiplying the IR frequency of the thermal load with supposed surface features of the carbon catalyst - is that where the 50nm comes from? Is the connection between Podletknov's gravitational anomalies and CF then related somehow to high temperature superconductivity being induced in the carbon ? Is your constant based on empirical connections that you have witnessed or on first principles? Are you assuming that Cooper pairing is a magnetic phenomena based on megahertz-meter? TIA, Jones Beene From vortex-l-request eskimo.com Fri Feb 9 09:40:59 2001 Received: (from smartlst localhost) by mx1.eskimo.com (8.9.1a/8.8.8) id JAA09788; Fri, 9 Feb 2001 09:39:50 -0800 Resent-Date: Fri, 9 Feb 2001 09:39:50 -0800 Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" X-Sender: mjones pop.jump.net Message-Id: Date: Fri, 9 Feb 2001 11:38:53 -0600 To: vortex-l eskimo.com From: Mitchell Jones Subject: Re: Jumping Bean Space Drive Resent-Message-ID: <"6qsEg.0.nO2.bj2Xw" mx1> Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/40674 X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com Status: O X-Status: ***{Fred, you have your "reply-to" header screwed up. I had to send this twice. :-( --MJ}*** >At one million beans per cubic meter, what will be the >Boltzman Temperature of this "Bean Gas" in zero gravity, Scott? > >Normally in a closed system; "The Sum of Fx + Fy + Fz = 0". > >However? :-) ***{It's not a closed system. When the caterpillar inside the bean jumps, he pushes off against the bottom of the bean, which rests on some surface--e.g., a table top--and thus the bean is not free to move in the opposite direction as the jump. Thus some of the energy stored as fat in the caterpillar is converted into upward momentum of the caterpillar inside the bean, without imparting an opposite momentum to the bean. On the other hand, when the caterpillar, after jumping, hits the top of the bean, it is *not* against a restraining surface. Result: part of the upward momentum of the caterpillar is transferred to the bean, which then jumps. Bottom line: if the bean-caterpillar system were floating in space, with no surface to push against, conservation of momentum would strictly apply, and the caterpillar's exertions would merely produce heat and some jiggling, without changing the momentum of the system. However, with a surface to push against, the exertions of the caterpillar can alter the momentum of the bean-caterpillar system. P.S. I saw a circus clown once who was inside a transparent plastic sphere about 8 feet in diameter. When he walked, the sphere rolled. Result: he could move about inside the sphere almost as freely as if he were unrestrained. The fact that the sphere was in contact with a surface that he could push against was, once again, the key that enabled him to convert his stored calories into actual movement, rather than merely into fruitless oscillations. --Mitchell Jones}*** > > http://www.jbean.com/wht_mks_jmp.htm > >Regards, Frederick > >Content-Type: application/octet-stream; > name="Home Page.url" >Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit >Content-Disposition: attachment; > filename="Home Page.url" > >Attachment converted: HD4000:Home Page.url (????/----) (0007FAA5) ________________ Quote of the month: "Law is what the authorities use to ride the country." --Anatoly Schransky From vortex-l-request eskimo.com Fri Feb 9 10:46:47 2001 Received: (from smartlst localhost) by mx1.eskimo.com (8.9.1a/8.8.8) id KAA10733; Fri, 9 Feb 2001 10:40:37 -0800 Resent-Date: Fri, 9 Feb 2001 10:40:37 -0800 Message-Id: Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Date: Fri, 9 Feb 2001 09:50:18 -0900 To: vortex-l eskimo.com From: hheffner mtaonline.net (Horace Heffner) Subject: Re: Cook's Drive Resent-Message-ID: <"-iSkL3.0.bd2.ac3Xw" mx1> Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/40675 X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com Status: O X-Status: At 8:43 AM 2/9/1, Scott Little wrote: >At 11:45 PM 2/8/2001 -1000, Rick Monteverde wrote: >I'm imagining Rick's gyro to have a horizontal axis. Its cage is mounted >to the output shaft (vertically oriented) of the DC gearmotor, which motor >is fixed to the arm of the torsion pendulum so its shaft remains vertical >as the pendulum rotates. The gearmotor forces the gyro cage to rotate How does the gearmotor force the cage to rotate without any precession (the gyro axis rotating toward the vertical?) >slowly but does not allow the gyro axis to leave the horizontal >plane. If the gyro axis does not leave the vertical plane there is no transfer of angular momentum to the torsion pendulum form the gyro. The gyro does not resist the turning in a manner so as to produce torque in the vertical axis against the motor or cage. >Won't that cause the torsion pendulum to wind up steadily (at the >same rpm as the DC gearmotor) in the opposite direction until the torsion >restoring force equals the precession force generated by the gyro? No, because if it does then COAM is denied, a source of free energy is available. In fact, in that case the test SHOULD pass! It is still a very good test for something miraculous. Further, the forces applied by any cage motion that does result (due to precession of the gyro axis out of the horizontal plane, some of which must occur due to flexibility of the steel etc.) will be periodically reversing in nature, not a sustained net force, and thus will not pass the "sustaining" criteria of the test. BTW, changing the topic back to the vertical pendulum, how's this for a gadget to produce a pendulum line that is non-vertical, time averaged? A heavy ball shaped device is suspended from a long very thin steel arm of length R - somewhat like a Christmas tree ornament, except the long thin arm enters the ball where it is attached to a mechanism that can flick it in a specific direction to some large angle, say 90 degrees. Also in the ball is a mechanism that periodically suddenly jerks on the arm so as to vertically raise the ball to a height L above its normal resting place. If there is no lateral motion of the arm, i.e. tha ball maintains the arm in a vertical orientation, the ball merely hops up and down with a random lateral motion having a mean of zero and a vertical motion having a max height of R. Now, if, as the ball rises and the string slackens, the light the arm is activated lightly so as to avoid tension on the string, but still take up most of the slack with lateral motion of the arm, then the time average location of the string will be moved with almost no effect on the average position of the heavy ball. I think, in practice, the ball would have to be very smart in its orienting and sudden jerks to avoid creating gyrations all over the place, but still, even if the ball gyrates all over the place, if the arm is rapidly adjusted so as to take up almost all the slack in the form of lateral displacement of the string location, the average string location will change. This is all very artificial. However, I think a heavy mas, in a light box, undergoing the large accelerations associated with a fast epicycloid or hypocycloid path creates a situation not totally different from that described above. It differs mainly in degree of the various aspects. Regards, Horace Heffner From vortex-l-request eskimo.com Fri Feb 9 11:05:43 2001 Received: (from smartlst localhost) by mx1.eskimo.com (8.9.1a/8.8.8) id LAA23901; Fri, 9 Feb 2001 11:04:59 -0800 Resent-Date: Fri, 9 Feb 2001 11:04:59 -0800 Message-Id: Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Date: Fri, 9 Feb 2001 10:14:38 -0900 To: vortex-l eskimo.com From: hheffner mtaonline.net (Horace Heffner) Subject: Re: Cook's Drive Resent-Message-ID: <"hQHYp1.0.Mr5.Qz3Xw" mx1> Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/40676 X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com Status: O X-Status: At 8:43 AM 2/9/1, Scott Little wrote: >I'm imagining Rick's gyro to have a horizontal axis. Its cage is mounted >to the output shaft (vertically oriented) of the DC gearmotor, which motor >is fixed to the arm of the torsion pendulum so its shaft remains vertical >as the pendulum rotates. The gearmotor forces the gyro cage to rotate >slowly but does not allow the gyro axis to leave the horizontal >plane. Won't that cause the torsion pendulum to wind up steadily (at the >same rpm as the DC gearmotor) in the opposite direction until the torsion >restoring force equals the precession force generated by the gyro? Here is another perspecitve on the above scenario. Suppose the cage is filled with an even number of gyros arrayed uniformly about the cage perimeter with axes aligned on the radii of the cage. This is really not any different from looking at a single gyro being rotated through all such positions. The effect of this is multiple gyro array is that, when the cage is rotated, it will have no resistance to the rotation, it will merely flex. Each of the opposing gyros will provide the counter force to its paired gyro. In fact, each pair of the gyros could be made into counter-rotating gyros sharing the same shaft, without any change in the net resistance. Such configurations have been tried for airplane motors in order to eliminate the gyroscopic effects of pitch and yaw. Apparently the resulting stress, wear and tear was not affordable except for helicopters and the like. However, it should now be easy to see that the net effect of rotating a single gyro about the suggested axis produces no net torque, no net resistance to the motor. Regards, Horace Heffner From vortex-l-request eskimo.com Fri Feb 9 11:17:23 2001 Received: (from smartlst localhost) by mx1.eskimo.com (8.9.1a/8.8.8) id LAA28843; Fri, 9 Feb 2001 11:14:47 -0800 Resent-Date: Fri, 9 Feb 2001 11:14:47 -0800 Message-Id: Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Date: Fri, 9 Feb 2001 10:24:29 -0900 To: vortex-l eskimo.com From: hheffner mtaonline.net (Horace Heffner) Subject: megahertz meter Resent-Message-ID: <"bA0Mq2.0.Y27.c64Xw" mx1> Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/40677 X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com Status: O X-Status: At 10:59 AM 2/9/1, FZNIDARSIC aol.com wrote: >Mike good observation. That's what I spoke about at ANS Washington. The >50nm size. The constants of the motion tend toward the electromagnetic in a >Bose condensate that is excited at a frequency of one megahertz-meter. In >the Case cell 50nm times 10xp14 hertz thermal equals one megahertz-meter. >In Podletknov's experiment a 1/3 meter disk driven at 3 mega hertz produces >the gravitational anomaly. Again the frequency is one megahertz meter >(Znidarsic's constant) > >Frank Znidarsic A megahertz meter is not a frequency. It is a velocity of 10^6 m/s. Regards, Horace Heffner From vortex-l-request eskimo.com Fri Feb 9 12:00:22 2001 Received: (from smartlst localhost) by mx1.eskimo.com (8.9.1a/8.8.8) id LAA13665; Fri, 9 Feb 2001 11:53:43 -0800 Resent-Date: Fri, 9 Feb 2001 11:53:43 -0800 Mime-Version: 1.0 X-Sender: rick mail.highsurf.com Message-Id: In-Reply-To: <5.0.2.1.0.20010209083720.00aa8bc8 earthtech.org> References: <5.0.2.1.0.20010209083720.00aa8bc8 earthtech.org> Date: Fri, 9 Feb 2001 09:53:33 -1000 To: vortex-l eskimo.com From: Rick Monteverde Subject: Re: Cook's Drive Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" ; format="flowed" Resent-Message-ID: <"v9rkA1.0.ML3.7h4Xw" mx1> Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/40678 X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com Status: O X-Status: Scott - At 8:43 AM -0600 2/9/01, Scott Little wrote: >Gosh, Rick, I was just getting ready to defend your position... >and you caved in...:) > >I'm imagining Rick's gyro to have a horizontal axis. Its cage is >mounted to the output shaft (vertically oriented) of the DC >gearmotor, which motor is fixed to the arm of the torsion pendulum >so its shaft remains vertical as the pendulum rotates. The >gearmotor forces the gyro cage to rotate slowly but does not allow >the gyro axis to leave the horizontal plane. Won't that cause the >torsion pendulum to wind up steadily (at the same rpm as the DC >gearmotor) in the opposite direction until the torsion restoring >force equals the precession force generated by the gyro? Well, because he's right - I was thinking of the gyro axis going over vertical. Then I was writing something like you did above as an answer afterwards, but didn't bother sending it. It was late, and - no kidding - I felt like sh*t from standing in the living room spinning around and around while holding one of those stupid toy gyros. Went to bed. I'm pretty sure an armature with a horizontal gyro, where work against the gyro is from a mechanism which is fixed uh, fixedly (thanks W.) to the armature, will spin up as you say. My head sure did. You have to hold it at the tip of the axis, axis horizontal and radial, like holding it straight out from you, holding it between your fingers loosely (allowing it to droop or rise in precession) while turning your body around and around. Then there's a continuous horizontal resistance to the turning motion, all 360 degrees. As in Horace's 'confession', the gyro must be unsupported except at its axis tip by a swivel (free vertical, horizontal restricted). Now if the frame for the motor that turns the thing is itself on bearings and is *not* solidly attached to the armature, I don't think it would work and is a better test of an inertial drive. So, for instance, the test unit could hang from a soft line off the end of the armature. If the armature turns continuously or accelerates, there's a reactionless drive propelling it - right? - Rick Monteverde Honolulu, HI From vortex-l-request eskimo.com Fri Feb 9 12:08:05 2001 Received: (from smartlst localhost) by mx1.eskimo.com (8.9.1a/8.8.8) id MAA20402; Fri, 9 Feb 2001 12:04:18 -0800 Resent-Date: Fri, 9 Feb 2001 12:04:18 -0800 Mime-Version: 1.0 X-Sender: rick mail.highsurf.com Message-Id: In-Reply-To: References: Date: Fri, 9 Feb 2001 10:04:10 -1000 To: vortex-l eskimo.com From: Rick Monteverde Subject: Re: Jumping Bean Space Drive Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1" ; format="flowed" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit X-MIME-Autoconverted: from quoted-printable to 8bit by mx1.eskimo.com id MAA20367 Resent-Message-ID: <"_ecI31.0.h-4.1r4Xw" mx1> Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/40679 X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com Status: O X-Status: Mitchell - At 11:38 AM -0600 2/9/01, Mitchell Jones wrote: >The fact that the sphere was in contact with a surface that >he could push against was, once again, the key that enabled him to convert >his stored calories into actual movement, rather than merely into fruitless >oscillations. We seem to have some sort of spooky connection with the 'fixed stars'. We call the result inertia. That sense, combined with a gyro's ability to orthorotate reaction forces, leads some to intuit that there could be a way to push against these stars (or aether/ZPE or what) despite Newton's rather resounding "No Way José"! - Rick Monteverde Honolulu, HI From vortex-l-request eskimo.com Fri Feb 9 12:17:54 2001 Received: (from smartlst localhost) by mx1.eskimo.com (8.9.1a/8.8.8) id MAA24722; Fri, 9 Feb 2001 12:12:34 -0800 Resent-Date: Fri, 9 Feb 2001 12:12:34 -0800 Mime-Version: 1.0 X-Sender: rick mail.highsurf.com Message-Id: In-Reply-To: References: Date: Fri, 9 Feb 2001 10:12:18 -1000 To: vortex-l eskimo.com From: Rick Monteverde Subject: Re: Cook's Drive Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" ; format="flowed" Resent-Message-ID: <"6m7SQ3.0.C26.oy4Xw" mx1> Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/40680 X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com Status: O X-Status: Horace - At 10:14 AM -0900 2/9/01, Horace Heffner wrote: >However, it should now be easy to see that the net effect of >rotating a single gyro about the suggested axis produces no net torque, no >net resistance to the motor. It is and it *does* produce resistance/net torque, IFF the mount at the axis tip (the hub of the larger device) can swing in the vertical plane, and the gyros 'want' to precess in the direction the whole array is turning. Hold a gyro out on a horizontal axis, plane of gyro wheel rotation vertical, wheel rotation clockwise. Make turntable rotation counterclockwise as seen from above. When the gyro is 'floating' at or in the vicinity of the horizontal it does produce a steady resistance to turning. - Rick Monteverde Honolulu, HI From vortex-l-request eskimo.com Fri Feb 9 12:56:18 2001 Received: (from smartlst localhost) by mx1.eskimo.com (8.9.1a/8.8.8) id MAA12528; Fri, 9 Feb 2001 12:52:36 -0800 Resent-Date: Fri, 9 Feb 2001 12:52:36 -0800 From: FZNIDARSIC aol.com Message-ID: Date: Fri, 9 Feb 2001 15:51:36 EST Subject: Re: megahertz-meter? To: vortex-l eskimo.com MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="US-ASCII" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-Mailer: AOL 5.0 for Windows sub 128 Resent-Message-ID: <"G8P8P2.0.g33.KY5Xw" mx1> Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/40681 X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com Status: RO X-Status: In a message dated 2/9/01 12:31:44 PM Eastern Standard Time, jonesb9 pacbell.net writes: << You seem to be multiplying the IR frequency of the thermal load with supposed surface features of the carbon catalyst - is that where the 50nm comes from? Is the connection between Podletknov's gravitational anomalies and CF then related somehow to high temperature superconductivity being induced in the carbon ? >> Thank for your question Jones Beene. Yes the phenomena are related. Yes high temperature superconductivity is being induced into the carbon. It is a vibrationally reinforced condensation. The frequency required for reinforcement is one megahertz meter. My work is an extension of the Russian work on high temperature superconductivity. abstract cond-mat/0003190 Normally superconductivity is destroyed by vibrational energy. In normal superconductivity bound electrons are paired. These electrons have kinetic energies in the order of a few electron volts. The electrons that come in with the dissolved hydrogen are not bound and move with thermal energies. They move at an energy of E=KT = 20 milli electrons volts. Vibration of the correct frequency tends to bind these thermal electrons into a condensate. The energy levels with the ensemble of the condensate are nuclear in magnitude. An energy match between the nucleus and the condensate is formed. Energy seems to flow from the nucleus to the electronic condensate after the energy match is achieved. Ref the recent energy match work Rydberg electrons. After the nuclear energy is distributed across the electronic lattice. This energy can be considered to be held in place by restraining forces. Gravity = G/ccr (dp/dt) These forces induce a near field gravitational effect. This is what Podletknov has seen. Ref to my article in IE "Force and Gravity" Frank Znidarsic, Infinite Energy, Vol 4, Issue #22, 1998 How did I derive the megahertz meter relationship? This is a longer story. Hal Fox has my paper. I do not believe that he has as of yet published it. Frank Znidarsic From vortex-l-request eskimo.com Fri Feb 9 13:32:46 2001 Received: (from smartlst localhost) by mx1.eskimo.com (8.9.1a/8.8.8) id NAA04515; Fri, 9 Feb 2001 13:29:35 -0800 Resent-Date: Fri, 9 Feb 2001 13:29:35 -0800 Message-Id: Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Date: Fri, 9 Feb 2001 12:39:16 -0900 To: vortex-l eskimo.com From: hheffner mtaonline.net (Horace Heffner) Subject: Re: Cook's Drive Resent-Message-ID: <"ajt8Q2.0.661.z46Xw" mx1> Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/40682 X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com Status: O X-Status: At 10:12 AM 2/9/1, Rick Monteverde wrote: >Horace - > >At 10:14 AM -0900 2/9/01, Horace Heffner wrote: > >>However, it should now be easy to see that the net effect of >>rotating a single gyro about the suggested axis produces no net torque, no >>net resistance to the motor. > >It is and it *does* produce resistance/net torque, IFF the mount at >the axis tip (the hub of the larger device) can swing in the vertical >plane, It is the ability to move in the vertical plane that permits the transfer of momentum from the gyro elsewhere, and was hypothesized not to against. >and the gyros 'want' to precess in the direction the whole >array is turning. Hold a gyro out on a horizontal axis, plane of gyro >wheel rotation vertical, wheel rotation clockwise. Make turntable >rotation counterclockwise as seen from above. When the gyro is >'floating' at or in the vicinity of the horizontal it does produce a >steady resistance to turning. > >- Rick Monteverde >Honolulu, HI Regards, Horace Heffner From vortex-l-request eskimo.com Fri Feb 9 15:52:13 2001 Received: (from smartlst localhost) by mx1.eskimo.com (8.9.1a/8.8.8) id PAA26361; Fri, 9 Feb 2001 15:49:10 -0800 Resent-Date: Fri, 9 Feb 2001 15:49:10 -0800 X-Apparently-From: Message-Id: <4.2.0.58.20010209131945.00961880 postoffice.swbell.net> X-Sender: cjford1 pop.mail.yahoo.com X-Mailer: QUALCOMM Windows Eudora Pro Version 4.2.0.58 Date: Fri, 09 Feb 2001 16:39:15 -0600 To: vortex-l eskimo.com From: Charles Ford Subject: Re: megahertz-meter? In-Reply-To: <3A8421DA.4020509 pacbell.net> References: <2b.10d648ee.27b56dff aol.com> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"; format=flowed Resent-Message-ID: <"UV1PA.0.pR6.s78Xw" mx1> Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/40683 X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com Status: O X-Status: Megahertz-meter. ??? This is a nonsensical concatenation of three different variable principals. Megahertz is a frequency (million cycles per second) meters is a distance or--- Megahertz meter is a device that measures frequency --- "excited at a frequency of one megahertz-meter." is an impossible set of parameters as Frequency is measured in Hertz or Megahertz. not in feet or meters. I directly associate this to the same type blunder competence that I have seen in the Over unity motor/generator fraud bunch. Like a motor/generator that produces 1.2 KWH of power... A Kelo-Watt-Hour is energy not power. But you will never be able to argue this down with the inventor. The inventor thinks he has OU many times because He simply does not understand power. At 08:59 AM 2/9/01 -0800, you wrote: >FZNIDARSIC aol.com wrote: > >>The constants of the motion tend toward the electromagnetic in a Bose >>condensate that is excited at a frequency of one megahertz-meter. In the >>Case cell 50nm times 10xp14 hertz thermal equals one megahertz-meter. >>In Podletknov's experiment a 1/3 meter disk driven at 3 mega hertz >>produces the gravitational anomaly. Again the frequency is one megahertz >>meter (Znidarsic's constant) > > >This is interesting but a little confusing. For those of us who missed >your presentation could you explain please: > >You seem to be multiplying the IR frequency of the thermal load with >supposed surfaFrom vortex-l-request eskimo.com Fri Feb 9 16:45:57 2001 Received: (from smartlst localhost) by mx1.eskimo.com (8.9.1a/8.8.8) id QAA02851; Fri, 9 Feb 2001 16:04:45 -0800 Resent-Date: Fri, 9 Feb 2001 16:04:45 -0800 Message-ID: <000c01c092fd$93e4cb00$418f85ce fjsparber> Reply-To: "Frederick Sparber" From: "Frederick Sparber" To: References: <2b.10d648ee.27b56dff aol.com> <4.2.0.58.20010209131945.00961880@postoffice.swbell.net> Subject: Re: megahertz-meter? Date: Fri, 9 Feb 2001 17:05:22 -0800 MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-Priority: 3 X-MSMail-Priority: Normal X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook Express 5.00.2615.200 X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V5.00.2615.200 Resent-Message-ID: <"wJ8083.0.Ki.TM8Xw" mx1> Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/40684 X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com ----- Original Message ----- From: Charles Ford To: Sent: Friday, February 09, 2001 2:39 PM Subject: Re: megahertz-meter? Would you buy Event-Meter, Charlie? :-) NEVER argue with someone that SHOUTS their NAME! FJS > Megahertz-meter. ??? > > This is a nonsensical concatenation of three different variable principals. > Megahertz is a frequency (million cycles per second) meters is a distance > or--- Megahertz meter is a device that measures frequency --- > "excited at a frequency of one megahertz-meter." is an impossible set of > parameters as Frequency is measured in Hertz or Megahertz. not in feet or > meters. > > I directly associate this to the same type blunder competence that I have > seen in the Over unity motor/generator fraud bunch. Like a > motor/generator that produces 1.2 KWH of power... A Kelo-Watt-Hour is > energy not power. But you will never be able to argue this down with the > inventor. The inventor thinks he has OU many times because He simply does > not understand power. Snip > > Charlie Ford > > KC5-OWZ > cjford1 yahoo.com > cjford1 swbell.net > > _________________________________________________________ > Do You Yahoo!? > Get your free yahoo.com address at http://mail.yahoo.com > > From vortex-l-request eskimo.com Fri Feb 9 16:47:22 2001 Received: (from smartlst localhost) by mx1.eskimo.com (8.9.1a/8.8.8) id QAA19999; Fri, 9 Feb 2001 16:36:47 -0800 Resent-Date: Fri, 9 Feb 2001 16:36:47 -0800 Message-ID: <3A848BAC.1AB2BFA1 ix.netcom.com> Date: Fri, 09 Feb 2001 16:30:36 -0800 From: Akira Kawasaki X-Mailer: Mozilla 4.72 [en]C-CCK-MCD NSCPCD472 (Win95; U) X-Accept-Language: en MIME-Version: 1.0 To: Vortex Subject: [Fwd: What's New for Feb 09, 2001] Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Resent-Message-ID: <"PCLCr2.0.Pu4.Vq8Xw" mx1> Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/40685 X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com Status: O X-Status: -------- Original Message -------- Subject: What's New for Feb 09, 2001 Date: Fri, 9 Feb 2001 15:44:22 -0500 (EST) From: "What's New" To: aki ix.netcom.com WHAT'S NEW Robert L. Park Friday, 9 Feb 01 Washington, DC 1. SUMMER INTERN: THE APS WASHINGTON OFFICE HAS AN OPENING. We are looking for a physics major with great writing skills and a genius IQ to spend eight to ten weeks in Washington, battling the forces of evil. The starting date is negotiable and we're flexible on the genius thing. Write opa aps.org for details. We need a resume, writing sample and two references by April 15. 2. CELL PHONES: NO DAMAGE TO DANES' BRAINS. A study of more than 420,000 Danes, from 1982 through 1995, that was reported in the Journal of the National Cancer Institute, found no link between cell phone use and brain cancer. That should settle the issue, but it won't. As one famous Dane said four hundred years ago: "Methinks it is like a weasel." Dire EMF warnings continue to be issued. A local TV station just alerted people to beware of the metro - some subway cars have fields as high as a Gauss! That's no where near as deadly as the bubble gum stuck to the seat. 3. INTERNATIONAL SPACE STATION: WHO WANTS TO BE AN ASTRONAUT? NASA Administrator Dan Goldin grumbles that space is not for "spectators." The Russians have a more practical point of view. Dennis Tito, a dot-com multi-millionaire, signed a $20 million deal with the impoverished Russian space agency for a taxi ride to the International Space Station. If they can find just 4,500 more entrepreneurs like Tito, they can pay for the whole project. 4. SENATOR LIEBERMAN CALLS FOR NMD. With an evenly split Senate, the voice of Democratic centrist Joe Lieberman has extraordinary volume. As his national star continues to ascend, Lieberman's endorsement last week of Stars Wars, The Sequel must make his former rival, President Bush, The Sequel, beam with pride. "Reducing the nuclear threat and cooperating on non-proliferation is the top priority...," Lieberman said, but deploying NMD "as soon as it is technologically feasible...is American law." 5. EHLERS APPOINTED CHAIR OF HOUSE SCIENCE SUBCOMMITTEE. In a reorganized structure, physicist Vern Ehlers (R-MI) takes over the new Environment, Technology and Standards Subcommittee. Nick Smith remains chair of Research, formerly Basic Research, and Dana Rohrabacher (R-CA) holds on to Space and Aeronautics. Psychologist Roscoe Bartlett (R-MD), who now heads Energy, may find his professional degree useful, given DOE's headaches. 6. HOLE POKED IN PHYSICS THEORY BY BROOKHAVEN EXPERIMENT. Almost 20 years ago, Yale physicist Vernon Hughes had a dream: to measure the response of rare particles called muons in a giant precision magnet. Now an international team, led by Hughes and Lee Roberts of Boston University, has reported its first results, which contradict the "Standard Model" of subatomic theory. THE AMERICAN PHYSICAL SOCIETY (Note: Opinions are the author's and are not necessarily shared by the APS, but they should be.) From vortex-l-request eskimo.com Fri Feb 9 16:59:25 2001 Received: (from smartlst localhost) by mx1.eskimo.com (8.9.1a/8.8.8) id QAA30979; Fri, 9 Feb 2001 16:56:46 -0800 Resent-Date: Fri, 9 Feb 2001 16:56:46 -0800 X-Authentication-Warning: eskimo.com: billb owned process doing -bs Date: Fri, 9 Feb 2001 16:56:44 -0800 (PST) From: William Beaty To: vortex-l eskimo.com Subject: Cool application of buoyancy. (fwd) Message-ID: MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: TEXT/PLAIN; charset=US-ASCII Resent-Message-ID: <"hvxfi.0.zZ7.E79Xw" mx1> Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/40686 X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com Status: O X-Status: Playing with ships in the big bathtub. See below. ((((((((((((((((((((( ( ( ( ( (O) ) ) ) ) ))))))))))))))))))))) William J. Beaty SCIENCE HOBBYIST website billb eskimo.com http://www.amasci.com EE/programmer/sci-exhibits science projects, tesla, weird science Seattle, WA 206-789-0775 freenrg-L taoshum-L vortex-L webhead-L ---------- Forwarded message ---------- Date: Thu, 08 Feb 2001 13:48:02 -0700 From: John SOHL Reply-To: "phys-l lists.nau.edu: Forum for Physics Educators" To: PHYS-L lists.nau.edu Subject: Cool application of buoyancy. When they recovered the USS Cole after the bomb attack they used a floating dry dock ship to get it back to the US. The Norwegian heavy transport ship "M/V Blue Marlin" did the job by filling its hull with water, slipping under the disabled USS Cole and then pumping air into the hull to displace the water. Effectively scooping up the USS Cole. There are some remarkable photos of the process at: http://geocities.com/rare_photos/ Note especially the last shot were you can see some people for scale. Note also that they placed it diagonally so that the lower slung screw ("propeller") and sonar could hang over the side of the M/V Blue Marlin. John From vortex-l-request eskimo.com Fri Feb 9 18:01:07 2001 Received: (from smartlst localhost) by mx1.eskimo.com (8.9.1a/8.8.8) id RAA25490; Fri, 9 Feb 2001 17:55:34 -0800 Resent-Date: Fri, 9 Feb 2001 17:55:34 -0800 From: Robin van Spaandonk To: vortex-l eskimo.com Subject: Re: Conservation of angular momentum Date: Sat, 10 Feb 2001 12:54:57 +1100 Organization: Improving Message-ID: References: In-Reply-To: X-Mailer: Forte Agent 1.8/32.548 MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit X-MIME-Autoconverted: from quoted-printable to 8bit by mx1.eskimo.com id RAA25414 Resent-Message-ID: <"MZiBp.0.7E6.M-9Xw" mx1> Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/40688 X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com Status: O X-Status: In reply to Horace Heffner's message of Fri, 9 Feb 2001 00:02:50 -0900: >Here is a confession of sorts regarding my present apparent faith in >conservation of angular momentum by gyros. Just a thought. If an element with an odd A value is included in a strong magnet, then the magnetic field in the magnet should also align the nucleus of those atoms such that their spins are aligned. This should result in a solid that has gyroscopic properties without rotating macroscopically? Regards, Robin van Spaandonk A Future For Humanity see: http://users.bigpond.net.au/rvanspaa/ From vortex-l-request eskimo.com Fri Feb 9 18:01:50 2001 Received: (from smartlst localhost) by mx1.eskimo.com (8.9.1a/8.8.8) id RAA22740; Fri, 9 Feb 2001 17:48:38 -0800 Resent-Date: Fri, 9 Feb 2001 17:48:38 -0800 Message-Id: <200102100148.UAA10888 mercury.mv.net> Subject: Fwd: Tiniest of Particles Pokes Big Hole in Physics Theory Date: Fri, 9 Feb 2001 20:44:10 -0400 x-sender: zeropoint-ed pop.mv.net x-mailer: Claris Emailer 2.0v3, January 22, 1998 From: "Eugene F. Mallove" To: "VORTEX" Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit X-MIME-Autoconverted: from quoted-printable to 8bit by mx1.eskimo.com id RAA22719 Resent-Message-ID: <"AW5s5.0.DZ5.st9Xw" mx1> Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/40687 X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com Status: RO X-Status: Oh, so the Standard Model has holes in it? Whadaya know! Next thing the HE physicists may be found accepting cold fusion! Steven E. Jones might be happy to learn that his precious muons have a new twist... --Gene Mallove February 9, 2001 Single-Page Format Tiniest of Particles Pokes Big Hole in Physics Theory By JAMES GLANZ ---------------------------------------------------------- Related Articles ï Issue in Depth: Physics ï Physical Science Home ï Science Home Forum ï Join a Discussion on Science in the News ---------------------------------------------------------- PTON, N.Y., Feb. 8 ó New observations of subatomic particles do not appear to fit into the standard theories explaining the matter and forces that shape the universe, scientists at Brookhaven National Laboratory reported today. The unexpected findings, made with a particle accelerator at the laboratory, may be the first glimpse of a previously unseen kind of matter. If the findings are confirmed, the heart of subatomic theory, called the Standard Model, will be "insufficient to describe our universe," said Dr. Thomas B. Kirk, Brookhaven's associate director for high energy and nuclear physics. Though the results announced today throw cherished ideas into question, particle physicists have been waiting for such a development for years because it opens a door into new worlds of theory and experimentation. The scientists, from a dozen institutions in Germany, Japan, Russia and the United States, cautioned in interviews and at a news conference here today that there was a slim chance the results were a statistical fluke and that the Standard Model, which has held up for 30 years, would remain unchallenged. But they said the experiments, which involved painstaking measurements of about a billion rare particles called muons (pronounced MEW-ons), had so far determined with 99 percent probability that the accepted theory had been breached. They said they were already gathering and analyzing more data that could eliminate the one chance in a hundred that their results were a fluke. Muons are subatomic cousins of electrons. In the experiments described today, physicists measured muons' responses to magnetic fields. The results showed a large departure from predictions, based on the Standard Model, of the way muons wobbled in a powerful magnetic field, Dr. Kirk said. Dr. Gerald Gabrielse, a professor and chairman of the physics department at Harvard University, called the results "tremendously exciting" because of the possible explanations for the discrepancy. "It could lead to a whole deeper understanding of how reality is put together," Dr. Gabrielse said. Among the leading possible reasons for the difference, physicists said, would be the existence of previously undetected particles with strange properties affecting the way the muons wobbled, or precessed, in the magnetic field. In the Brookhaven experiment, called E821, muons created by a particle accelerator known as the Alternating Gradient Synchroton were injected into a powerful magnetic field and the frequency of their wobble was measured precisely. Physicists have long known that the wobble rate is affected by the properties of space itself. Under the laws of quantum mechanics, which rule the subatomic realm, apparently empty space is actually a sea of what scientists call "virtual particles" that briefly appear and disappear and can interact with muons. The Standard Model shows scientists how to calculate the effect that all known particles in that sea should have on the wobble frequency; those predicted shifts have been measured and verified with great precision. But the new measurements differ from those predictions, suggesting that previously unknown particles are also lurking in that subatomic sea, said Dr. Lee Roberts, a professor of physics at Boston University who is one of the spokesmen for the experiment. "This whole experiment is based on measuring the effect of these virtual particles," Dr. Roberts said. "There's a possibility that new particles that haven't been observed could be contributing." While those particles are not predicted by the Standard Model and have never been seen directly in an experiment, their existence would not surprise theorists. Despite the model's success in explaining decades of experimental data, theorists believe it has logical and aesthetic flaws and that its complicated structure is unlikely to represent natural law at its most fundamental level. Continued 1 | 2 | Next>> Single-Page Format Click Here to Receive 50% Off Home Delivery of The New York Times Newspaper. -------------------------------------------------------------- Home | Site Index | Site Search | Forums | Archives | Shopping News | Business | International | National | New York Region | NYT Front Page | Obituaries | Politics | Quick News | Sports | Health | Science | Technology/Internet | Weather | Editorial | Op-Ed Features | Arts | Automobiles | Books | Cartoons | Crossword | Games | Job Market | Living | Magazine | Real Estate | Travel | Week in Review Help/Feedback | Classifieds | Services | Newspaper Delivery | New York Today Copyright 2001 The New York Times Company ----------------- End Forwarded Message ----------------- From vortex-l-request eskimo.com Fri Feb 9 19:34:59 2001 Received: (from smartlst localhost) by mx1.eskimo.com (8.9.1a/8.8.8) id TAA29491; Fri, 9 Feb 2001 19:32:50 -0800 Resent-Date: Fri, 9 Feb 2001 19:32:50 -0800 Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1" X-Sender: mjones pop.jump.net Message-Id: In-Reply-To: References: Date: Fri, 9 Feb 2001 17:36:08 -0600 To: vortex-l eskimo.com From: Mitchell Jones Subject: Re: Jumping Bean Space Drive Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit X-MIME-Autoconverted: from quoted-printable to 8bit by mx1.eskimo.com id TAA29472 Resent-Message-ID: <"xO7s2.0.jC7.YPBXw" mx1> Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/40689 X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com Status: O X-Status: >Mitchell - > >At 11:38 AM -0600 2/9/01, Mitchell Jones wrote: > >>The fact that the sphere was in contact with a surface that >>he could push against was, once again, the key that enabled him to convert >>his stored calories into actual movement, rather than merely into fruitless >>oscillations. > >We seem to have some sort of spooky connection with the 'fixed >stars'. We call the result inertia. ***{Yes, inertia is an odd duck, especially given the *utterly proven* proposition that a material/energetic medium pervades what we normally think of as empty space. The drag which any such medium would impose on a body moving through it makes one wonder how it could be that bodies might continue in motion in straight lines when not acted on by external forces, as per Newton's first law. The drag, after all, would be an "external force," and would, given sufficient time, cause any moving object to slow down and, finally, come to rest with respect to the medium. It thus seems, at first glance, to be implicit in the Newtonian paradigm, that empty space exists somewhere--e.g., outside the Earth's atmosphere, in a vacuum chamber, etc.--despite the prevailing view that it does not. (There is a way out of this dilemma, by the way.) --MJ}*** That sense, combined with a >gyro's ability to orthorotate reaction forces, leads some to intuit >that there could be a way to push against these stars (or aether/ZPE >or what) despite Newton's rather resounding "No Way José"! ***{Newton wouldn't have a problem with the notion of pushing against a material/energetic medium to generate thrust, though I think he would be a bit surprised to hear that such a medium exists in empty space. If you were to propose to generate thrust by pushing against *nothing*, however, he would laugh you out of court. --MJ}*** >- Rick Monteverde >Honolulu, HI ________________ Quote of the month: "Law is what the authorities use to ride the country." --Anatoly Schransky From vortex-l-request eskimo.com Fri Feb 9 19:53:01 2001 Received: (from smartlst localhost) by mx1.eskimo.com (8.9.1a/8.8.8) id TAA03315; Fri, 9 Feb 2001 19:51:20 -0800 Resent-Date: Fri, 9 Feb 2001 19:51:20 -0800 Message-ID: <005c01c0931d$3ca5b000$418f85ce fjsparber> Reply-To: "Frederick Sparber" From: "Frederick Sparber" To: References: Subject: Re: Jumping Bean Space Drive Date: Fri, 9 Feb 2001 20:52:08 -0800 MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-Priority: 3 X-MSMail-Priority: Normal X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook Express 5.00.2615.200 X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V5.00.2615.200 Resent-Message-ID: <"I0Aq_.0.ip.ugBXw" mx1> Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/40690 X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com Status: RO X-Status: ----- Original Message ----- From: Mitchell Jones To: Sent: Friday, February 09, 2001 3:36 PM Subject: Re: Jumping Bean Space Drive Mitchell Jones wrote: > > ***{Yes, inertia is an odd duck, especially given the *utterly proven* > proposition that a material/energetic medium pervades what we normally > think of as empty space. The drag which any such medium would impose on a > body moving through it makes one wonder how it could be that bodies might > continue in motion in straight lines when not acted on by external forces, > as per Newton's first law. The drag, after all, would be an "external > force," and would, given sufficient time, cause any moving object to slow > down and, finally, come to rest with respect to the medium. It thus seems, > at first glance, to be implicit in the Newtonian paradigm, that empty space > exists somewhere--e.g., outside the Earth's atmosphere, in a vacuum > chamber, etc.--despite the prevailing view that it does not. (There is a > way out of this dilemma, by the way.) --MJ}*** Relativistic Gamma explains this: Gamma = 1/[1-(v^2/c^2)]^1/2 At a Gamma of 2, Velocity v = 0.87 *c Newton didn't know this. :-) Regards, Frederick > > > ________________ > Quote of the month: > > "Law is what the authorities use to ride the country." --Anatoly Schransky > > From vortex-l-request eskimo.com Fri Feb 9 20:33:54 2001 Received: (from smartlst localhost) by mx1.eskimo.com (8.9.1a/8.8.8) id UAA21106; Fri, 9 Feb 2001 20:33:22 -0800 Resent-Date: Fri, 9 Feb 2001 20:33:22 -0800 Message-ID: <007601c09323$19ebdc00$418f85ce fjsparber> Reply-To: "Frederick Sparber" From: "Frederick Sparber" To: Cc: Subject: Re: Jumping Bean Space Drive Date: Fri, 9 Feb 2001 21:32:26 -0800 MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-Priority: 3 X-MSMail-Priority: Normal X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook Express 5.00.2615.200 X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V5.00.2615.200 Resent-Message-ID: <"0yB9b1.0.i95.IICXw" mx1> Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/40691 X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com Status: O X-Status: I wrote: > >Gamma = 1/[1-(v^2/c^2)]^1/2 >At a Gamma of 2, Velocity = 0.87*c > Now if you can create particle pairs (Light Leptons +/-) on your spacecraft from 54.4 eV or less photons, you can shoot them out the back of your "rocket" at ~ 511 KeV and they each will have a relativistic mass equal to the rest mass of the Electron: Mrel = Mo[(E'/Eo) + 1] = Mo/[1-(v^2/c^2)]^1/2 IOW, a LL of 27.2 eV rest energy has a mass equal to that of the Electron or Positron when moving at ~ 511 Kev (the rest energy of the electron/positron). Notice how the reports of strange aircraft always mention a " red to green glow" when the craft is maneuvering, indicating a plethora of photons in the red to ultraviolet which might be producing MegAmps of LL pairs for hovering and propulsion (thrust). Thus if you have the onboard capability of creating LL +/- Pairs you are home free making Hydrinos or P* species and getting your energy from Cold Fusion. Regards, Frederick From vortex-l-request eskimo.com Fri Feb 9 20:57:00 2001 Received: (from smartlst localhost) by mx1.eskimo.com (8.9.1a/8.8.8) id UAA29063; Fri, 9 Feb 2001 20:56:29 -0800 Resent-Date: Fri, 9 Feb 2001 20:56:29 -0800 From: Robin van Spaandonk To: vortex-l eskimo.com Subject: Re: Unidentified subject! Date: Sat, 10 Feb 2001 15:55:50 +1100 Organization: Improving Message-ID: References: <3A69C660.1CCEDCF6 pacbell.net> <3A6C9BA9.3F2EE932@ix.netcom.com> <9onp6toob4ul639i7qbplu31frdsg4cj12@4ax.com> <3A7C3CC4.6C576A56@ix.netcom.com> <3A7C6FA 4.9E2F82AA ix.netcom.com> <3A7D6C64.80C32AF6@ix.netcom.com> <3A8011D6.60DF2DA5@ix.netcom.com> <004701c092c9$4fbf6900$f279ccd1@asus> In-Reply-To: <004701c092c9$4fbf6900$f279ccd1 asus> X-Mailer: Forte Agent 1.8/32.548 MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit X-MIME-Autoconverted: from quoted-printable to 8bit by mx1.eskimo.com id UAA29017 Resent-Message-ID: <"k_JNV1.0.x57.zdCXw" mx1> Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/40692 X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com Status: O X-Status: In reply to Mike Carrell's message of Fri, 9 Feb 2001 10:49:37 -0500 (EST): [snip] >I haven't been following this thread intensively, but I note that it has >wandered into discussions of the Arata and Case cells, both of which have >been tested by McKubre with positive results. There is now an attempt to tie >these results to speculations about Mills' hydrinos as the energy yielding >process. More an attempt on my part to show that a Mills process could *conceivably* be behind it. [snip] >In the Case cell, the Pd is directly gas loaded without electrolysis. It >seems reasonable that the ultimate processes are similar. It's a lottery, we >still don't know exactly what is necessary, only that if you produce a lot >of highly fractured Pd particles that enough of them will have active sites >for the reaction products to become visible on a macroscopic scale. And these sites may reside on the vastly increased surface. > >I believe the McKubre reports that with his Case cell experiments that the >4He production is commensurate with the heat production, to the extent that >one can say with some confidence that DD fusion is taking place. The energy >density of this reaction is greater than that claimed by Mills for the BLP >reaction, and Mills claims no He production. The density claimed by Mills is either the result of calculations based on assumptions pertaining to different types of system, or based on measurements of such. Therefore no direct comparison can be made, and this argument alone cannot be used to exclude a Mills process. As to Mills not claiming He production, this is true, however it is also possible that even Mills may not as yet have foreseen all the consequences of his theory. [snip] >IMHO, we don't know nearly enough about both either set of phenomena to see >deep connections. They probably exist, but I think for the present we should >not strain too hard to connect them, but accept their coexistence as a kind >of 'wave-particle duality'. I see no harm in examining the possibilities. If such examination leads to predictions and makes suggestions as to possible experimental courses of action, then it may well prove useful. > >What we earnestly need is progress toward replicable power systems and >commercial development. Of course we do, however as long as the process is not understood, such progress is likely to remain elusive. Regards, Robin van Spaandonk A Future For Humanity see: http://users.bigpond.net.au/rvanspaa/ From vortex-l-request eskimo.com Fri Feb 9 22:04:56 2001 Received: (from smartlst localhost) by mx1.eskimo.com (8.9.1a/8.8.8) id WAA20941; Fri, 9 Feb 2001 22:02:33 -0800 Resent-Date: Fri, 9 Feb 2001 22:02:33 -0800 From: Robin van Spaandonk To: vortex-l eskimo.com Subject: Re: Hydrino based CF Date: Sat, 10 Feb 2001 17:01:47 +1100 Organization: Improving Message-ID: References: <3A6C9BA9.3F2EE932@ix.netcom.com> <9onp6toob4ul639i7qbplu31frdsg4cj12@4ax.com> <3A7C3CC4.6C576A56@ix.netcom.com> <3A7C6FA4.9E2F82AA@ix.netcom.com> <3A7D6C64.80C32AF6@ix.netcom.com> <3A8011D6.60DF2DA5@ix.netcom.com> <3A8412F2.A1690733@ix.netcom.com> In-Reply-To: <3A8412F2.A1690733 ix.netcom.com> X-Mailer: Forte Agent 1.8/32.548 MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit X-MIME-Autoconverted: from quoted-printable to 8bit by mx1.eskimo.com id WAA20882 Resent-Message-ID: <"_DW_R.0.575.ubDXw" mx1> Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/40693 X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com Status: O X-Status: In reply to Edmund Storms's message of Fri, 09 Feb 2001 09:55:38 -0600: [snip] >> Do you mean that Arata style experiments frequently fail (i.e. hollow >> cathode), or do you mean that Pd black in other configurations fail? > >Yes, several laboratories in Japan failed and McKubre failed until Arata sent him one of his >cathodes. Even Arata spent years getting the effect to work. Many variables interfere. To your knowledge, has Arata determined what they are? (Or, if he does know, is he prepared to say?) [snip] >I suspect this is true. However, a wide range of energy values exist above the noise that seems >to be vacant of results. What is the range? [snip] >> What I am getting at is that you can't really reject cavities as a critical >> property of the material until proper measurements have been undertaken of >> the cavity sizes and numbers, and the results compared to excess heat >> measurements. AFAIK, this hasn't been done yet. > >Nature will produce a very wide range of void size and number by random processes. If voids >were important, we should see an effect that occurs often and has a similar range of values. Maybe you do, but that range lies in the noise. IOW perhaps for the effect to be really noticeable, such a large number of the right size cavities needs to be present, that this is quite rare. What I'm getting at is that a random distribution of cavity numbers and sizes may not result in much heat. What may be needed is that there are very many cavities of the right size, and few of any other size, or alternatively a great deal of surface area. I suspect that "the right size" is just big enough for three H atoms to bounce around a bit, but not much bigger. This would tend to keep them in close proximity until either H2 or Hy is formed. >Clearly, we do not see this behavior. It is not sufficient to simply assume that EP would not >be seen by this process unless the voids were made on purpose. I'm not making that assumption. Of course the right conditions can occur by accident. Making them on purpose however would help to either eliminate the concept, or result in a useable product. [snip] >Samples must be heated to over 1200° C before all helium is released. If hydrino production and nuclear reactions are taking place in "burst mode", in a small cavity, then 1200 ºC is likely to be very much on the low side. If helium is acting as the catalyst, then the cavity can be larger (therefore contain more gas), because three particle collisions are not needed to catalyze the reaction. Also because catalyst production is dependant upon UV photons, the reaction can spread throughout a cavity at near the speed of light, resulting in an energy release that is much faster than heat can be conducted away by the metal, in turn resulting in the little "volcanoes". >Helium can also be >flushed out by a hydrogen flux. This is news to me. I wonder how that works? >About 50-75% of the helium is released immediately because it is >produced very near the surface. The remaining He is captured within small bubbles at grain >boundaries. Can it migrate through the metal to the grain boundaries, or is it more likely that it formed in hydrogen which had collected in the bubbles at the boundaries? Or perhaps it formed on the surface of grains, and migrated along the surface collecting in the bubbles? > >It has been my experience that once the correct conditions are present, excess energy is >produced and it continues regardless of what is done to the sample within reason. What is "within reason"? [snip] >> Which process do you consider to be most likely to be responsible, and why? > >The Case and Arata work show that fine particles are important. Production of energy from Pt >shows that a complex alloy is important and this alloy does not have to involve Pd. Indeed, >excess energy has been produced using a variety of elements, depending on the method used to >inject the D. At this point, the nature of the required chemical environment is not known nor >is it addressed by the various "theories". Have compounds been tried which are normally used as high temperature superconductors? (Following on from Frank Znidarsic's ideas, this would seem to be a logical direction to try). (Are these proton conductors?) [snip] >Carbon injected this way will not go very far into the lattice and the process will produce >local heating. This increased temperature will allow the nonequilibrium carbon concentration to >adjust to equilibrium by forming graphite. It was not my intent to inject that much C in one place. I.e. very rapid sweeping of a low current, high voltage beam would be best. [snip] >Unfortunately, as with all suggestions, a person would have to invest considerable time and >money to explore all the variables. For example, why only carbon? Why not a mixture of C and >B, or B and Si? Because carbon is smaller than any of the others, such that the difference with the size of Pd would result in maximum stress on the lattice, and therefore most likely lead to lattice disruptions. (Also, I think the bond angle would also be quite disruptive). >What concentration would be required? 1% would be a good place to start, but if that is impossibly high, then the as near as possible. >Might not the environment require 8 C >atoms in a cage structure so as to capture the two D atoms. Or perhaps 8 B are required. You >can see that an infinite number of possibilities exist. An infinite number of possibilities exist, only as long as one is not guided by a theory. That is precisely why we (as a race) bother to produce theories at all. >Whatever the environment, it must be >realized by using electrolytic loading, gas loading, ultrasonic loading, or ion bombardment. In >addition it must be produced in at least Pd, Ag, Ni, Ti, and Pt, or in complex alloys that can >form on or in these materials. Unless you can propose an environment that can be applied to all >of these conditions, you have nothing, but please keep thinking anyway. All the metals mentioned will split H2 into 2 H, though I'm not sure about Ag? This ability is a prerequisite for a Mills based method. (Fe will also do this, so I'm wondering about iron cathodes). Come to think of it, most of the transition metals can be used as a cathode, where H would form before H2 anyway, so in that sense perhaps any of them would suffice to some extent. > >Unless a suggestion has good support by observation, no one has the time and money to explore >the possibility. When I propose something, I try to ensure that it at least satisfies past experiments. >Indeed, all of us can and do think of hundreds of possibilities involving >various physical and chemical environments. Having creative ideas is not the problem. >The >problem rests on not having the required resources. In addition, it is strange how much >creative energy is applied to understanding the mechanism of the nuclear reaction and how little >is applied to identifying the unique chemical environment. Apparently, once the required >environment is produced, nature applies the mechanism automatically. Yet, most scientists focus >on the mechanism without asking what unique condition must be present before the mechanism can >work. As a result, these "theories" provide NO guidance to the experimenter. I don't think that can be said for my efforts in the last few posts (including this one). On the contrary, I have tried to use the hypothesis to do exactly that, i.e. to provide a clear experimental direction. [snip] Regards, Robin van Spaandonk A Future For Humanity see: http://users.bigpond.net.au/rvanspaa/ From vortex-l-request eskimo.com Fri Feb 9 22:08:56 2001 Received: (from smartlst localhost) by mx1.eskimo.com (8.9.1a/8.8.8) id WAA23699; Fri, 9 Feb 2001 22:08:19 -0800 Resent-Date: Fri, 9 Feb 2001 22:08:19 -0800 From: Robin van Spaandonk To: vortex-l eskimo.com Subject: Re: Hydrino based CF Date: Sat, 10 Feb 2001 17:07:40 +1100 Organization: Improving Message-ID: References: <3A6C9BA9.3F2EE932@ix.netcom.com> <9onp6toob4ul639i7qbplu31frdsg4cj12@4ax.com> <3A7C3CC4.6C576A56@ix.netcom.com> <3A7C6FA4.9E2F82AA@ix.netcom.com> <4uhp7 tchrau57caq9tl3t0bom1rcfmqmns 4ax.com> <3A7D6C9A.411C958B@ix.netcom.com> <3A8011FE.96E427A4@ix.netcom.com> <3A841871.C6D5F04A@ix.netcom.com> In-Reply-To: <3A841871.C6D5F04A ix.netcom.com> X-Mailer: Forte Agent 1.8/32.548 MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit X-MIME-Autoconverted: from quoted-printable to 8bit by mx1.eskimo.com id WAA23661 Resent-Message-ID: <"mTJbs3.0.7o5.JhDXw" mx1> Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/40694 X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com Status: O X-Status: In reply to Edmund Storms's message of Fri, 09 Feb 2001 10:19:07 -0600: [snip] >The question is, what exactly does scraping do" Does it make dislocations in the surface, does >it remove the surface barrier, does it increase the surface area, or does it create regions to >which the electrolytic current is attracted, thereby producing a high local current/area >value? The answer depends on who's "theory" is being discussed. Would it not be better to >learn the answer by experiment? Unfortunately, no one seems to care what the answer is. [snip] Obviously it does all of these, and they can also all be complementary. What I was trying to show was that at least one aspect of scraping could be an asset to a Mills based process, which therefore could be an explanation of CF. Regards, Robin van Spaandonk A Future For Humanity see: http://users.bigpond.net.au/rvanspaa/ From vortex-l-request eskimo.com Fri Feb 9 22:43:21 2001 Received: (from smartlst localhost) by mx1.eskimo.com (8.9.1a/8.8.8) id WAA08905; Fri, 9 Feb 2001 22:41:22 -0800 Resent-Date: Fri, 9 Feb 2001 22:41:22 -0800 From: FZNIDARSIC aol.com Message-ID: Date: Sat, 10 Feb 2001 01:40:45 EST Subject: Re: megahertz-meter? To: vortex-l eskimo.com MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="US-ASCII" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-Mailer: AOL 5.0 for Windows sub 128 Resent-Message-ID: <"eKlxH3.0._A2.GAEXw" mx1> Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/40695 X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com Status: O X-Status: In a message dated 2/9/01 7:30:42 PM Eastern Standard Time, cjford1 yahoo.com writes: << > >Is your constant based on empirical connections that you have witnessed or >on first principles? Are you assuming that Cooper pairing is a magnetic >phenomena based on megahertz-meter? > >TIA, > >thank you Jones Beene. I see you understand where the units come from. The concept comes from first principles and experimental data. The dimensional frequency = c/(137 X 2) I've also done another analysis of the downshifting of the Compton wavelengths of the electron. I took my lead from David Noever on this. He was working on the downshifting of the frequencies idea at NASA Marshall. Hal Fox is going to publish my paper on this in the next addition of the Journal of New Energy. Frank Znidarsic From vortex-l-request eskimo.com Fri Feb 9 22:49:26 2001 Received: (from smartlst localhost) by mx1.eskimo.com (8.9.1a/8.8.8) id WAA12270; Fri, 9 Feb 2001 22:49:00 -0800 Resent-Date: Fri, 9 Feb 2001 22:49:00 -0800 From: FZNIDARSIC aol.com Message-ID: <99.107db3d1.27b63e33 aol.com> Date: Sat, 10 Feb 2001 01:48:19 EST Subject: Fwd: megahertz-meter? To: vortex-l eskimo.com MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: multipart/mixed; boundary="part1_99.107db3d1.27b63e33_boundary" X-Mailer: AOL 5.0 for Windows sub 128 Resent-Message-ID: <"Yrb6a2.0.d_2.SHEXw" mx1> Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/40696 X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com Status: O X-Status: --part1_99.107db3d1.27b63e33_boundary Content-Type: text/plain; charset="US-ASCII" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit In a message dated 2/10/01 1:33:58 AM Eastern Standard Time, FZNIDARSIC writes: << << > > I directly associate this to the same type blunder competence that I have > seen in the Over unity motor/generator fraud bunch. Like a > motor/generator that produces 1.2 KWH of power... A Kelo-Watt-Hour is > energy not power. But you will never be able to argue this down with the > inventor. The inventor thinks he has OU many times because He simply does > not understand power. Snip > > Charlie Ford > >> Charlie read, do not spout, its your competence that has blundered. The relationship gives the stimulation frequency required of a certain sized condensate. It is in units of velocity an equals 1/2 the ground state velocity of hydrogen. megahertz-meter = c/(2)(137) Frank >> --part1_99.107db3d1.27b63e33_boundary Content-Type: message/rfc822 Content-Disposition: inline Return-path: From: FZNIDARSIC aol.com Full-name: FZNIDARSIC Message-ID: <56.70daa5d.27b63ad6 aol.com> Date: Sat, 10 Feb 2001 01:33:58 EST Subject: Re: megahertz-meter? To: fjsparber earthlink.net MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="US-ASCII" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-Mailer: AOL 5.0 for Windows sub 128 In a message dated 2/9/01 7:06:33 PM Eastern Standard Time, fjsparber earthlink.net writes: << > > I directly associate this to the same type blunder competence that I have > seen in the Over unity motor/generator fraud bunch. Like a > motor/generator that produces 1.2 KWH of power... A Kelo-Watt-Hour is > energy not power. But you will never be able to argue this down with the > inventor. The inventor thinks he has OU many times because He simply does > not understand power. Snip > > Charlie Ford > >> Charlie read, do not spout, its your competence that blundered. The relationship gives the stimulation frequency required of a certain sized condensate. It is in units of velocity an equals 1/2 the ground state velocity of hydrogen. megahertz-meter = c/(2)(137) Frank --part1_99.107db3d1.27b63e33_boundary-- From vortex-l-request eskimo.com Sat Feb 10 04:57:14 2001 Received: (from smartlst localhost) by mx1.eskimo.com (8.9.1a/8.8.8) id EAA21146; Sat, 10 Feb 2001 04:56:05 -0800 Resent-Date: Sat, 10 Feb 2001 04:56:05 -0800 X-Sender: rmuha mail Message-Id: In-Reply-To: <200102100148.UAA10888 mercury.mv.net> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Date: Sat, 10 Feb 2001 07:55:44 -0500 To: vortex-l eskimo.com From: ralph muha Subject: Re: Fwd: Tiniest of Particles Pokes Big Hole in Physics Theory Resent-Message-ID: <"kTCjf2.0.KA5.bfJXw" mx1> Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/40697 X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com Status: O X-Status: [gene only posted the first page of the article, here is the complete text] http://www.nytimes.com/2001/02/09/science/09PHYS.html?printpage=yes > > February 9, 2001 > > Tiniest of Particles Pokes Big Hole in Physics Theory > > By JAMES GLANZ > > [U]PTON, N.Y., Feb. 8 - New observations of subatomic particles do not >appear to fit into the standard theories explaining the matter and forces >that shape the universe, scientists at Brookhaven National Laboratory >reported today. > > The unexpected findings, made with a particle accelerator at the >laboratory, may be the first glimpse of a previously unseen kind of >matter. If the findings are confirmed, the heart of subatomic theory, >called the Standard Model, will be "insufficient to describe our >universe," said Dr. Thomas B. Kirk, Brookhaven's associate director for >high energy and nuclear physics. > > Though the results announced today throw cherished ideas into question, >particle physicists have been waiting for such a development for years >because it opens a door into new worlds of theory and experimentation. > > The scientists, from a dozen institutions in Germany, Japan, Russia and >the United States, cautioned in interviews and at a news conference here >today that there was a slim chance the results were a statistical fluke >and that the Standard Model, which has held up for 30 years, would remain >unchallenged. > > But they said the experiments, which involved painstaking measurements >of about a billion rare particles called muons (pronounced MEW-ons), had >so far determined with 99 percent probability that the accepted theory had >been breached. They said they were already gathering and analyzing more >data that could eliminate the one chance in a hundred that their results >were a fluke. > > Muons are subatomic cousins of electrons. In the experiments described >today, physicists measured muons' responses to magnetic fields. The >results showed a large departure from predictions, based on the Standard >Model, of the way muons wobbled in a powerful magnetic field, Dr. Kirk >said. > > Dr. Gerald Gabrielse, a professor and chairman of the physics department >at Harvard University, called the results "tremendously exciting" because >of the possible explanations for the discrepancy. > > "It could lead to a whole deeper understanding of how reality is put >together," Dr. Gabrielse said. Among the leading possible reasons for the >difference, physicists said, would be the existence of previously >undetected particles with strange properties affecting the way the muons >wobbled, or precessed, in the magnetic field. > > In the Brookhaven experiment, called E821, muons created by a particle >accelerator known as the Alternating Gradient Synchroton were injected >into a powerful magnetic field and the frequency of their wobble was >measured precisely. > > Physicists have long known that the wobble rate is affected by the >properties of space itself. Under the laws of quantum mechanics, which >rule the subatomic realm, apparently empty space is actually a sea of what >scientists call "virtual particles" that briefly appear and disappear and >can interact with muons. > > The Standard Model shows scientists how to calculate the effect that all >known particles in that sea should have on the wobble frequency; those >predicted shifts have been measured and verified with great precision. But >the new measurements differ from those predictions, suggesting that >previously unknown particles are also lurking in that subatomic sea, said >Dr. Lee Roberts, a professor of physics at Boston University who is one of >the spokesmen for the experiment. > > "This whole experiment is based on measuring the effect of these virtual >particles," Dr. Roberts said. "There's a possibility that new particles >that haven't been observed could be contributing." > > While those particles are not predicted by the Standard Model and have >never been seen directly in an experiment, their existence would not >surprise theorists. Despite the model's success in explaining decades of >experimental data, theorists believe it has logical and aesthetic flaws >and that its complicated structure is unlikely to represent natural law at >its most fundamental level. > > To solve those problems, some physicists have developed a grander and >much more speculative theory called supersymmetry. That theory solves many >of those problems, by positing the existence of new particles, called >supersymmetric partners, for each of the known particles. > > Those partners are predicted to be relatively massive for subatomic >particles and interact weakly with ordinary matter, making them difficult >both to produce and to detect. But their existence could account for the >unexplained shift in the wobble frequency, said Dr. William J. Marciano, a >theorist at Brookhaven. > > "The most natural meaning of this kind of indication," Dr. Marciano >said, "would be superymmetry." The observed change in the frequency, he >said, "fits supersymmetry like a glove." > > Dr. Frank Wilczek, a physics professor at the Massachusetts Institute of >Technology, said that the new result, though not statistically airtight, >did mesh with what he called other indirect suggestions that supersymmetry >might be the correct way to extend and shore up the Standard Model. > > "It would mean that in describing the world, we would need to add to the >equations of the Standard Model," Dr. Wilczek said. "And those additions >make the whole thing much prettier, more unified and more beautiful." > > If the Brookhaven experiments are an indirect indication that >supersymmetric particles exist, then the size of the observed effect >suggests that they could be produced and detected directly in a new >generation of particle accelerators that will soon begin collecting data, >several theorists said. > > The first new machine to go into operation will be the upgraded Tevatron >accelerator at the Fermi National Accelerator Laboratory, outside Chicago, >which will begin collecting data this spring. > > "Certainly at the highest energy machines they will look in these energy >ranges for these new particles," said Dr. Vernon Hughes, a Yale physicist >who is a spokesman for the experiment. > > Theorists said that they would also explore other ways of explaining the >data, like the possibility that particles believed to be elementary and >indivisible are made of smaller entities, and that the structure of space >itself may be more complex than mainstream physics assumes. > > The new results were presented today at a scientific colloquium by Dr. >William M. Morse, a Brookhaven physicist who is a member of the >experimental team and its resident spokesman. > > The experiments begin when protons, electrically charged particles >normally found in atomic nuclei, stream at nearly the speed of light and >smash into a piece of nickel. > > From the debris created by those collisions, physicists extract bunches >containing thousands of muons. The scientists chose muons because, being >more massive than electrons, they are more likely to interact with the >relatively massive particles predicted by supersymmetry. > > To make the measurements, the scientists relied on a quantum-mechanical >property, called spin, that is shared by muons and other particles. Though >the particles do not really spin, they do share some properties with an >ordinary top. If the top's spin axis is not exactly vertical, it wobbles, >or precesses, just as the muons do in a strong magnetic field. > > The Brookhaven scientists observed precisely the frequency with which >the muons wobbled, leading to the results presented today. Dr. Morse said >that the team had already made observations of several billion muons, but >had finished analyzing the results from only about a billion of them. > > By coincidence, Dr. Hughes studied under Isidor I. Rabi, the Nobel Prize >winner who uttered a memorable line when the muon was a surprise discovery >in the 1930's. > > "Who ordered that?" Professor Rabi asked. > > When asked for a corresponding reaction to the new finding, Dr. Hughes >thought for a moment and said, "The people who do supersymmetry ordered >it." > > Copyright 2001 The New York Times Company From vortex-l-request eskimo.com Sat Feb 10 06:33:40 2001 Received: (from smartlst localhost) by mx1.eskimo.com (8.9.1a/8.8.8) id GAA12653; Sat, 10 Feb 2001 06:33:05 -0800 Resent-Date: Sat, 10 Feb 2001 06:33:05 -0800 Message-ID: <3A854378.E745A1E4 ix.netcom.com> Date: Sat, 10 Feb 2001 07:34:51 -0600 From: Edmund Storms X-Mailer: Mozilla 4.5 (Macintosh; U; PPC) X-Accept-Language: en,pdf MIME-Version: 1.0 To: vortex-l eskimo.com Subject: fusion in the earth Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary="------------AC29C92F4C4C83AFF6A6716F" Resent-Message-ID: <"WgAdG1.0.Y53.W4LXw" mx1> Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/40698 X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com Status: O X-Status: --------------AC29C92F4C4C83AFF6A6716F Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii; x-mac-type="54455854"; x-mac-creator="4D4F5353" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit To anyone interested: Here is an articles from Physics News Web that may be of interest. Apparently, the breaking of rock on a large scale can generate neutrons. Unfortunately, as noted in red, the explanation provided by the authors (or reporter) makes no sense. Alpha particles, while containing neutrons, do not normally generate neutrons. A more plausible but less accepted explanation might be cold fusion. Ed Storms Neutron flashes may forecast earthquakes [5 Feb 2001] Earthquakes may be heralded by bursts of neutrons from the Earth's surface and could even be linked to the lunar cycle, according to Russian physicists. Nikolaj Volodichev and Mikhail Panasjuk of the Skobeltsyn Research Institute of Nuclear Physics in Moscow noticed that flow of neutrons from the Earth's crust increased sharply during the new moon and the full moon. This is when tidal forces acting on the Earth are at their strongest, which could trigger seismic activity. The researchers are optimistic that their discovery could form the basis of a new system for forecasting earthquakes. Volodichev and Panasjuk measured levels of neutron emission in the Pamir mountains in Tajikistan - a seismically active region where the Indian and Eurasian tectonic plates meet - and found that they peaked at twelve-hour intervals. The researchers noticed that the variation in neutron flux coincided with the daily fluctuations of the moon's gravitational pull. This prompted them to study the neutron bursts when these tidal forces are at their greatest - that is, when the Sun, Earth and moon line up - at the time of a new moon or a full moon. Volodichev and Panasjuk found that the neutron flow during these periods was around twelve times higher than the background level. This led them to believe that the tidal stress on the Earth's crust opens up fissures through which radioactive gases and particles can escape. The radioactive material quickly decays, emitting alpha particles that contain neutrons. To back their theory, the researchers analysed data collected over 28 years from the Pacific 'ring of fire' - a region of intense earthquake activity. They found that the most severe earthquakes took place around the time of a new moon or a full moon. "Our work suggests that neutron flashes and an increase in seismic activity are closely related, and are bound by tidal forces", said Volodichev. "The prediction of earthquakes from neutron bursts is still in the development stage but it is very promising". --------------AC29C92F4C4C83AFF6A6716F Content-Type: text/html; charset=us-ascii Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit To anyone interested:

Here is an articles from Physics News Web that may be of interest.  Apparently, the breaking of rock on a large scale can generate neutrons.  Unfortunately, as noted in red, the explanation provided by the authors (or reporter) makes no sense.  Alpha particles, while containing neutrons, do not normally generate neutrons.  A more plausible but less accepted explanation might be cold fusion.

Ed Storms
 

Neutron flashes may forecast earthquakes
[5 Feb 2001] Earthquakes may be heralded by bursts of neutrons from the
Earth's surface and could even be linked to the lunar cycle, according to Russian
physicists. Nikolaj Volodichev and Mikhail Panasjuk of the Skobeltsyn
Research Institute of Nuclear Physics in Moscow noticed that flow of neutrons from the Earth's crust increased sharply during the new moon and the full moon.
This is when tidal forces acting on the Earth are at their strongest, which could
trigger seismic activity. The researchers are optimistic that their discovery
could form the basis of a new system for forecasting earthquakes.
Volodichev and Panasjuk measured levels of neutron emission in the
Pamir mountains in Tajikistan - a seismically active region where the Indian and
Eurasian tectonic plates meet - and found that they peaked at twelve-hour
intervals. The researchers noticed that the variation in neutron flux
coincided with the daily fluctuations of the moon's gravitational pull. This prompted them to study the neutron bursts when these tidal forces are at their
greatest - that is, when the Sun, Earth and moon line up - at the time of a new
moon or a full moon. Volodichev and Panasjuk found that the neutron flow during these periods was around twelve times higher than the background level. This led them to believe that the tidal stress on the Earth's crust opens up fissures through which radioactive gases and particles can escape. The radioactive material quickly decays, emitting alpha particles that contain neutrons.
To back their theory, the researchers analysed data collected over 28 years
from the Pacific 'ring of fire' - a region of intense earthquake activity.
They found that the most severe earthquakes took place around the time of a
new moon or a full moon. "Our work suggests that neutron flashes and an increase in seismic activity are closely related, and are bound by tidal forces", said Volodichev. "The prediction of earthquakes from neutron bursts is still in
the development stage but it is very promising".
 
  --------------AC29C92F4C4C83AFF6A6716F-- From vortex-l-request eskimo.com Sat Feb 10 08:18:49 2001 Received: (from smartlst localhost) by mx1.eskimo.com (8.9.1a/8.8.8) id IAA13725; Sat, 10 Feb 2001 08:15:12 -0800 Resent-Date: Sat, 10 Feb 2001 08:15:12 -0800 Message-ID: <3A855B5C.D087C718 ix.netcom.com> Date: Sat, 10 Feb 2001 09:17:03 -0600 From: Edmund Storms X-Mailer: Mozilla 4.5 (Macintosh; U; PPC) X-Accept-Language: en,pdf MIME-Version: 1.0 To: vortex-l eskimo.com Subject: Re: Hydrino based CF References: <3A6C9BA9.3F2EE932@ix.netcom.com> <9onp6toob4ul639i7qbplu31frdsg4cj12@4ax.com> <3A7C3CC4.6C576A56@ix.netcom.com> <3A7C6FA4.9E2F82AA@ix.netcom.com> <3A7D6C64.80C32AF6@ix.netcom.com> <3A8011D6.60DF2DA5@ix.netcom.com> <3A8412F2.A1690733@ix.netcom.com> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=iso-8859-1; x-mac-type="54455854"; x-mac-creator="4D4F5353" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit Resent-Message-ID: <"yY_wu1.0.LM3.FaMXw" mx1> Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/40699 X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com Status: O X-Status: Robin van Spaandonk wrote: > In reply to Edmund Storms's message of Fri, 09 Feb 2001 09:55:38 -0600: > [snip] > >> Do you mean that Arata style experiments frequently fail (i.e. hollow > >> cathode), or do you mean that Pd black in other configurations fail? > > > >Yes, several laboratories in Japan failed and McKubre failed until Arata sent him one of his > >cathodes. Even Arata spent years getting the effect to work. Many variables interfere. > > To your knowledge, has Arata determined what they are? (Or, if he does know, > is he prepared to say?) He is not prepared to say. However, the purity of the Pd-black surface is apparently one of the major variables. This surface must be free of any absorbed non-D gas. This is not easy to accomplish because Pd-black is an excellent getter. > > [snip] > >I suspect this is true. However, a wide range of energy values exist above the noise that seems > >to be vacant of results. > > What is the range? ~10 w/cm2 to >10^6 watts/cm2 > > [snip] > >> What I am getting at is that you can't really reject cavities as a critical > >> property of the material until proper measurements have been undertaken of > >> the cavity sizes and numbers, and the results compared to excess heat > >> measurements. AFAIK, this hasn't been done yet. > > > >Nature will produce a very wide range of void size and number by random processes. If voids > >were important, we should see an effect that occurs often and has a similar range of values. > > Maybe you do, but that range lies in the noise. IOW perhaps for the effect > to be really noticeable, such a large number of the right size cavities > needs to be present, that this is quite rare. That assumption is always possible. However, it creates a problem in that one would have to know the right size and how to make them in good numbers. A failed experiment would provide no insight because you could always argue that the correct size was not provided, rather than admitting that such voids played no role whatsoever. What I'm getting at is that a random distribution of cavity numbers and > sizes may not result in much heat. What may be needed is that there are very > many cavities of the right size, and few of any other size, or alternatively > a great deal of surface area. > I suspect that "the right size" is just big enough for three H atoms to > bounce around a bit, but not much bigger. This would tend to keep them in > close proximity until either H2 or Hy is formed. How big is a void that allows 3 H to "bounce around"? If nature does not make such a size by random process, how would you propose to create such a size? > > > >Clearly, we do not see this behavior. It is not sufficient to simply assume that EP would not > >be seen by this process unless the voids were made on purpose. > > I'm not making that assumption. Of course the right conditions can occur by > accident. Making them on purpose however would help to either eliminate the > concept, or result in a useable product. For this concept to work, one would have to know a way to make the necessary size. Without such knowledge, the experiment would be just another study in trial and error. > > [snip] > >Samples must be heated to over 1200° C before all helium is released. > > If hydrino production and nuclear reactions are taking place in "burst > mode", in a small cavity, then 1200 ºC is likely to be very much on the low > side. If helium is acting as the catalyst, then the cavity can be larger > (therefore contain more gas), because three particle collisions are not > needed to catalyze the reaction. > Also because catalyst production is dependant upon UV photons, the reaction > can spread throughout a cavity at near the speed of light, resulting in an > energy release that is much faster than heat can be conducted away by the > metal, in turn resulting in the little "volcanoes". The problem with the volcano observation, which I believe, is that once the material gets very hot, the structure and/or unique chemical compound is lost. At this point, energy production stops and temperature can rise no further. So why does sufficient liquid form to produce an ejection? > > > >Helium can also be > >flushed out by a hydrogen flux. > > This is news to me. I wonder how that works? Apparently H enters the bubbles containing He. When the H leaves, it provides a local lattice expansion and/or electron distortion sufficient to allow the He to enter the Pd lattice and diffuse to the next grain boundary or to the outer surface. > > > >About 50-75% of the helium is released immediately because it is > >produced very near the surface. The remaining He is captured within small bubbles at grain > >boundaries. > > Can it migrate through the metal to the grain boundaries, or is it more > likely that it formed in hydrogen which had collected in the bubbles at the > boundaries? > Or perhaps it formed on the surface of grains, and migrated along the > surface collecting in the bubbles? Study of He-3 formed from tritium decay indicates that the He can diffuse rapidly until it encounters a grain boundary where it is trapped as growing bubbles. If the He is formed at the surface, it can diffuse either toward the surface or toward the interior. Most He that diffuses to the interior will be trapped. > > > > > >It has been my experience that once the correct conditions are present, excess energy is > >produced and it continues regardless of what is done to the sample within reason. > > What is "within reason"? This answer is not clear. It is ok to deload and reload, to remove the surface using Aqua Regia, and to handle the piece without care. However, I suspect that heating to a high temperature would be bad as would be beating the piece to a pulp. > > [snip] > >> Which process do you consider to be most likely to be responsible, and why? > > > >The Case and Arata work show that fine particles are important. Production of energy from Pt > >shows that a complex alloy is important and this alloy does not have to involve Pd. Indeed, > >excess energy has been produced using a variety of elements, depending on the method used to > >inject the D. At this point, the nature of the required chemical environment is not known nor > >is it addressed by the various "theories". > > Have compounds been tried which are normally used as high temperature > superconductors? (Following on from Frank Znidarsic's ideas, this would seem > to be a logical direction to try). Yes, some have been tried and EP at low level was claimed. > > (Are these proton conductors?) > [snip] > >Carbon injected this way will not go very far into the lattice and the process will produce > >local heating. This increased temperature will allow the nonequilibrium carbon concentration to > >adjust to equilibrium by forming graphite. > > It was not my intent to inject that much C in one place. I.e. very rapid > sweeping of a low current, high voltage beam would be best. > > [snip] > >Unfortunately, as with all suggestions, a person would have to invest considerable time and > >money to explore all the variables. For example, why only carbon? Why not a mixture of C and > >B, or B and Si? > > Because carbon is smaller than any of the others, such that the difference > with the size of Pd would result in maximum stress on the lattice, and > therefore most likely lead to lattice disruptions. > (Also, I think the bond angle would also be quite disruptive). > > >What concentration would be required? > > 1% would be a good place to start, but if that is impossibly high, then the > as near as possible. Why this value other than it is a round number? And is this 1% by weight or by atom fraction? > > > >Might not the environment require 8 C > >atoms in a cage structure so as to capture the two D atoms. Or perhaps 8 B are required. You > >can see that an infinite number of possibilities exist. > > An infinite number of possibilities exist, only as long as one is not guided > by a theory. That is precisely why we (as a race) bother to produce theories > at all. True, but a theory for theory sake is not very useful. I suggest that the natural human tendency to find an explanation for everything is actually a hindrance. Some things (such as CF and death) can not be explained because insufficient information is available . An explanation only distracts from finding the necessary information by simple observation - rather than by being guided by an incorrect model. It also is the natural tendency of human kind to ignore everything that does not fit their "explanation". Consequently, if the model has too much energy invested in its belief, important observations will be ignored. Unfortunately, it is also the nature of human kind to be deceived in thinking that they are objective when evaluating such a strongly held model. The irony is that we are designed to blind ourselves by our own efforts to "see" more clearly. > > > >Whatever the environment, it must be > >realized by using electrolytic loading, gas loading, ultrasonic loading, or ion bombardment. In > >addition it must be produced in at least Pd, Ag, Ni, Ti, and Pt, or in complex alloys that can > >form on or in these materials. Unless you can propose an environment that can be applied to all > >of these conditions, you have nothing, but please keep thinking anyway. > > All the metals mentioned will split H2 into 2 H, though I'm not sure about > Ag? > This ability is a prerequisite for a Mills based method. > (Fe will also do this, so I'm wondering about iron cathodes). > Come to think of it, most of the transition metals can be used as a cathode, > where H would form before H2 anyway, so in that sense perhaps any of them > would suffice to some extent. In an electrolytic cell, the H2 is already split. > > > > > >Unless a suggestion has good support by observation, no one has the time and money to explore > >the possibility. > > When I propose something, I try to ensure that it at least satisfies past > experiments. A good procedure. However, this is very difficult to do without studying the field for years and having all available information . Even then, it is hard to know how much of what is claimed is actually true. As a result, it is possible to pick-and-choose to support any explanation, just as most theoreticians are presently doing. > > > >Indeed, all of us can and do think of hundreds of possibilities involving > >various physical and chemical environments. Having creative ideas is not the problem. > >The > >problem rests on not having the required resources. In addition, it is strange how much > >creative energy is applied to understanding the mechanism of the nuclear reaction and how little > >is applied to identifying the unique chemical environment. Apparently, once the required > >environment is produced, nature applies the mechanism automatically. Yet, most scientists focus > >on the mechanism without asking what unique condition must be present before the mechanism can > >work. As a result, these "theories" provide NO guidance to the experimenter. > > I don't think that can be said for my efforts in the last few posts > (including this one). On the contrary, I have tried to use the hypothesis to > do exactly that, i.e. to provide a clear experimental direction. I realize your intentions are good and honorable. However, as you can see, I do not trust any effort to find an explanation for anything, although I generally have my own set of partial explanations. I guess this puts me on the other side of the coin from theoreticians who do not trust any experimental observation. As for the Mills model, I offer the following basic problem. The Mills model proposes that an electron can enter an orbit near enough to the nucleus to allow the combination to enter another nucleus. The result of two D nuclei combining would be He-4, which requires the formation of a neutron within the combined structure. Formation of a neutron requires energy (0.75 MeV) and involves a neutrino. From where does this energy and neutrino come? Be careful when you answer this question not to provide another implausible unproved process as an explanation. Regards, Ed Storms From vortex-l-request eskimo.com Sat Feb 10 08:19:26 2001 Received: (from smartlst localhost) by mx1.eskimo.com (8.9.1a/8.8.8) id IAA14082; Sat, 10 Feb 2001 08:15:57 -0800 Resent-Date: Sat, 10 Feb 2001 08:15:57 -0800 Date: Sat, 10 Feb 2001 08:14:17 -0800 From: Jones Beene Subject: Re: megahertz-meter? To: vortex-l eskimo.com Message-id: <3A8568D9.8030801 pacbell.net> MIME-version: 1.0 Content-type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii; format=flowed Content-transfer-encoding: 7bit User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (Windows; U; Win98; en-US; m18) Gecko/20001108 Netscape6/6.0 X-Accept-Language: en References: Resent-Message-ID: <"a-f0V2.0.sR3.zaMXw" mx1> Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/40700 X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com Status: O X-Status: FZNIDARSIC aol.com wrote: > I've also done another analysis of the downshifting of the Compton > wavelengths of the electron. I took my lead from David Noever on this. He > was working on the downshifting of the frequencies idea at NASA Marshall. > > Hal Fox is going to publish my paper on this in the next addition of the > Journal of New Energy. I hope it will be available in digital form over the internet. Please let us know if and when it appears on the JNE site. Also, it would seem that your theory has some relevance to Ken Shoulders notion of EVs - charge clusters, assuming that he is seeing a physical reality. Have you looked into this? The parameters for EV formation seem to be in line with your constant and there is some similarity with a Bose condensate but in either case it is a bit of a stretch. Regards, Jones Beene From vortex-l-request eskimo.com Sat Feb 10 08:38:30 2001 Received: (from smartlst localhost) by mx1.eskimo.com (8.9.1a/8.8.8) id IAA20544; Sat, 10 Feb 2001 08:36:27 -0800 Resent-Date: Sat, 10 Feb 2001 08:36:27 -0800 Date: Sat, 10 Feb 2001 08:35:44 -0800 From: Jones Beene Subject: Re: fusion in the earth To: vortex-l eskimo.com Message-id: <3A856DE0.6000406 pacbell.net> MIME-version: 1.0 Content-type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii; format=flowed Content-transfer-encoding: 7bit User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (Windows; U; Win98; en-US; m18) Gecko/20001108 Netscape6/6.0 X-Accept-Language: en References: <3A854378.E745A1E4 ix.netcom.com> Resent-Message-ID: <"rk5SM.0.w05.BuMXw" mx1> Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/40701 X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com Status: O X-Status: Edmund Storms wrote: > Here is an articles from Physics News Web that may be of interest. > Apparently, the breaking of rock on a large scale can generate > neutrons. Thanks for posting this article. Along with helium and tritium showing up in natural gas, it's one more little bit of real world evidence for the possibility of LENRs. > Unfortunately, as noted in red, the explanation provided by > the authors (or reporter) makes no sense. Alpha particles, while > containing neutrons, do not normally generate neutrons. A more > plausible but less accepted explanation might be cold fusion. Agreed, but the authors are probably looking at alphas to provide spallation neutrons - particularly through reaction with light elements such as in the earliest neutron generators, later used in the bomb, i.e. mixing a strong alpha emitter such as radium/polonium with a little Beryllium. Of course some of these neutrons would always be around in minute quantities that could escape more easily when the rock is fractured - so as with tritium in natural gas there are alternative explanations available for those who want to deny the validity of LENRs. Regards, Jones Beene From vortex-l-request eskimo.com Sat Feb 10 10:20:17 2001 Received: (from smartlst localhost) by mx1.eskimo.com (8.9.1a/8.8.8) id KAA25486; Sat, 10 Feb 2001 10:17:52 -0800 Resent-Date: Sat, 10 Feb 2001 10:17:52 -0800 Message-ID: <005601c093a7$9249b760$6a45ccd1 asus> From: "Mike Carrell" To: References: <3A6C9BA9.3F2EE932@ix.netcom.com> <9onp6toob4ul639i7qbplu31frdsg4cj12@4ax.com> <3A7C3CC4.6C576A56@ix.netcom.com> <3A7C6FA4.9E2F82AA@ix.netcom.com> <3A7D6C64.80C32AF6@ix.netcom.com> <3A8011D6.60DF2DA5@ix.netcom.com> <3A8412F2.A1690733@ix.netcom.com> Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com Subject: Unidentified subject! Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/40702 X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com Status: O X-Status: q037fd4omn 4ax.com> Subject: Re: Hydrino based CF Date: Sat, 10 Feb 2001 13:17:21 -0800 MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-Priority: 3 X-MSMail-Priority: Normal X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook Express 5.50.4522.1200 X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V5.50.4522.1200 About the Arata cathodes: It is possibly no coincidence that Arata's associate is a professor in a metallurgical institute. Arata has evidence that very high pressures develop within the cathode cavity. Pd is a very difficult material to machine and weld, which are necessary in fabricating the cathode shell. Thus others who lacked the necessary metallurgical know-how may have been unable to make a suitable cathode shell. This search for the magic set of parameters suggests some variation on combinatorial chemistry, the systematic exploration of parameters which mimic evolutionary processes. This will take capital and thinking outside the box and test tube. Unless someone has a theory.... Mike Carrell From vortex-l-request eskimo.com Sat Feb 10 10:47:42 2001 Received: (from smartlst localhost) by mx1.eskimo.com (8.9.1a/8.8.8) id KAA03616; Sat, 10 Feb 2001 10:42:52 -0800 Resent-Date: Sat, 10 Feb 2001 10:42:52 -0800 Message-ID: <3A857DFD.449CF8D6 ix.netcom.com> Date: Sat, 10 Feb 2001 11:45:11 -0600 From: Edmund Storms X-Mailer: Mozilla 4.5 (Macintosh; U; PPC) X-Accept-Language: en,pdf MIME-Version: 1.0 To: vortex-l eskimo.com Subject: Re: fusion in the earth References: <3A854378.E745A1E4 ix.netcom.com> <3A856DE0.6000406@pacbell.net> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii; x-mac-type="54455854"; x-mac-creator="4D4F5353" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Resent-Message-ID: <"aRqZe.0.Iu.hkOXw" mx1> Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/40703 X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com Status: O X-Status: Jones Beene wrote: > Edmund Storms wrote: > > > > Here is an articles from Physics News Web that may be of interest. > > Apparently, the breaking of rock on a large scale can generate > > neutrons. > > Thanks for posting this article. Along with helium and tritium > showing up in natural gas, it's one more little bit of real > world evidence for the possibility of LENRs. > > > Unfortunately, as noted in red, the explanation provided by > > the authors (or reporter) makes no sense. Alpha particles, while > > containing neutrons, do not normally generate neutrons. A more > > plausible but less accepted explanation might be cold fusion. > > Agreed, but the authors are probably looking at alphas to > provide spallation neutrons - particularly through reaction with > light elements such as in the earliest neutron generators, later > used in the bomb, i.e. mixing a strong alpha emitter such as > radium/polonium with a little Beryllium. Of course some of these > neutrons would always be around in minute quantities that could > escape more easily when the rock is fractured - so as with > tritium in natural gas there are alternative explanations > available for those who want to deny the validity of LENRs. While this might be the explanation for the comment, if it is correct then the claim is not related to LENR. Release of an alpha emitting element from rock during cracking is a normal and expected process. If the emitted alphas are causing alpha-n reactions in the surrounding rock, then this process should happen regardless of cracking. Nevertheless, the observation might make earthquake prediction more reliable. Regards, Ed Storms From vortex-l-request eskimo.com Sat Feb 10 11:04:29 2001 Received: (from smartlst localhost) by mx1.eskimo.com (8.9.1a/8.8.8) id KAA09905; Sat, 10 Feb 2001 10:56:35 -0800 Resent-Date: Sat, 10 Feb 2001 10:56:35 -0800 Message-ID: <3A858151.F81468BD ix.netcom.com> Date: Sat, 10 Feb 2001 11:59:25 -0600 From: Edmund Storms X-Mailer: Mozilla 4.5 (Macintosh; U; PPC) X-Accept-Language: en,pdf MIME-Version: 1.0 To: vortex-l eskimo.com Subject: Re: Unidentified subject! References: <3A6C9BA9.3F2EE932@ix.netcom.com> <9onp6toob4ul639i7qbplu31frdsg4cj12@4ax.com> <3A7C3CC4.6C576A56@ix.netcom.com> <3A7C6FA4.9E2F82AA@ix.netcom.com> <3A7D6C64.80C32AF6@ix.netcom.com> <3A8011D6.60DF2DA5@ix.netcom.com> <3A8412F2.A1690733@ix.netcom.com> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=iso-8859-1; x-mac-type="54455854"; x-mac-creator="4D4F5353" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit Resent-Message-ID: <"JAExS1.0.cQ2.YxOXw" mx1> Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/40704 X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com Status: O X-Status: Mike Carrell wrote: > q037fd4omn 4ax.com> > Subject: Re: Hydrino based CF > Date: Sat, 10 Feb 2001 13:17:21 -0800 > MIME-Version: 1.0 > Content-Type: text/plain; > charset="iso-8859-1" > Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit > X-Priority: 3 > X-MSMail-Priority: Normal > X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook Express 5.50.4522.1200 > X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V5.50.4522.1200 > > About the Arata cathodes: > > It is possibly no coincidence that Arata's associate is a professor in a > metallurgical institute. Arata has evidence that very high pressures develop > within the cathode cavity. Pd is a very difficult material to machine and > weld, which are necessary in fabricating the cathode shell. Thus others who > lacked the necessary metallurgical know-how may have been unable to make a > suitable cathode shell. > > This search for the magic set of parameters suggests some variation on > combinatorial chemistry, the systematic exploration of parameters which > mimic evolutionary processes. This will take capital and thinking outside > the box and test tube. > > Unless someone has a theory.... All very true, but everyone has a theory including Arata. At present, insufficient information exists to determine which is correct. My explanation, for what its worth, requires that the surface of the Pd-black be free of adsorbed impurity. Otherwise, no room exists for the D. Even Arata does not do a very good job of cleaning his Pd-black. Therefore, I predict that only a very small fraction of the material is active. The skill in making the container is to eliminate all leaks, a condition that is very difficult to achieve using such materials. Any leak will allow the Pd-black to be recontaminated. In addition, the Pd-black must not be heated above about 75°C during the welding process because above this temperature it will sinter, thereby eliminating the high surface area. In addition, Pd-black comes in many different forms, depending on how it is produced. The form Arata has chosen seems to work while other forms may not. Once again, we are presented with a materials problem, not a physics problem. Ed Storms From vortex-l-request eskimo.com Sat Feb 10 12:29:04 2001 Received: (from smartlst localhost) by mx1.eskimo.com (8.9.1a/8.8.8) id MAA09532; Sat, 10 Feb 2001 12:24:04 -0800 Resent-Date: Sat, 10 Feb 2001 12:24:04 -0800 Message-Id: Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Date: Sat, 10 Feb 2001 11:33:50 -0900 To: vortex-l eskimo.com From: hheffner mtaonline.net (Horace Heffner) Subject: Re: fusion in the earth Resent-Message-ID: <"-hty82.0.sK2.aDQXw" mx1> Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/40705 X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com Status: O X-Status: At 7:34 AM 2/10/1, Edmund Storms wrote: >To anyone interested: > >Here is an articles from Physics News Web that may be of >interest. Apparently, the breaking of rock on a large scale >can generate neutrons. Unfortunately, as noted in red, the >explanation provided by the authors (or reporter) makes no >sense. Alpha particles, while containing neutrons, do not >normally generate neutrons. A more plausible but less >accepted explanation might be cold fusion. > >Ed Storms The information in this article makes no sense at all, unless possibly the neutrons are carried along inertially to the surface in a hydrogen, steam, or methane gas, and then into the couter vicinity as well. All elements in the earth's crust have non-zero neutron cross sections. The short mean free paths (on a geologic scale) mean that all the neutrons must be originating very close to the surface of the earth, not down at typical earthquake epicenter depths. Further, gravity itself puts a bias on the briefly existing neutrons, tending to direct their travel toward the center of the earth. The gravity of the moon does not even come close to reversing this bias, and again even if it did, or even if the delta gravity force were significant to the process, it could still only affect neutrons with near surface origins. Another possibility is that the particles being measured are not neutrons, but rather some unexpected particle for which the earth elements have a low cross section. This explanation seems far fetched, given that the particles are readily detected in neutron counters, i.e. up to 8 times background. The flux would have to be enormous - similar to or much greater than neutrino fluxes. I think the fact earthquakes tend to occur near full or new moon is already well known, as is the tendency for quakes to occur at times of sustained winds in a given direction. Regards, Horace Heffner From vortex-l-request eskimo.com Sat Feb 10 15:04:00 2001 Received: (from smartlst localhost) by mx1.eskimo.com (8.9.1a/8.8.8) id PAA31452; Sat, 10 Feb 2001 15:00:19 -0800 Resent-Date: Sat, 10 Feb 2001 15:00:19 -0800 Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary="============_-1230276525==_ma============" X-Sender: mjones pop.jump.net Message-Id: In-Reply-To: <3A854378.E745A1E4 ix.netcom.com> Date: Sat, 10 Feb 2001 16:58:32 -0600 To: vortex-l eskimo.com From: Mitchell Jones Subject: Re: fusion in the earth Resent-Message-ID: <"H6oxK2.0.Lh7.3WSXw" mx1> Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/40706 X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com Status: O X-Status: --============_-1230276525==_ma============ Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" >To anyone interested: > >Here is an articles from Physics News Web that may be of interest. >Apparently, the breaking of rock on a large scale can generate neutrons. >Unfortunately, as noted in red, the explanation provided by the authors >(or reporter) makes no sense. Alpha particles, while containing neutrons, >do not normally generate neutrons. A more plausible but less accepted >explanation might be cold fusion. ***{You are correct to reject the explanation that was given. However, U235 occurs naturally at a percentage abundance of about .7, and undergoes spontaneous fission with the emission of neutrons. If some of this material, perhaps in a gaseous form (Uranium hexafluoride?), gets forced to the surface through cracks during times of tectonic stress, the observed result can be accounted for without the necessity to postulate cold fusion. --MJ}*** > > >Ed Storms [snip] ________________ Quote of the month: "Law is what the authorities use to ride the country." --Anatoly Schransky --============_-1230276525==_ma============ Content-Type: text/html; charset="us-ascii" Re: fusion in the earth

To anyone interested:

Here is an articles from Physics News Web that may be of interest.  Apparently, the breaking of rock on a large scale can generate neutrons.  Unfortunately, as noted in red, the explanation provided by the authors (or reporter) makes no sense.  Alpha particles, while containing neutrons, do not normally generate neutrons.  A more plausible but less accepted explanation might be cold fusion.

***{You are correct to reject the explanation that was given. However, U235 occurs naturally at a percentage abundance of about .7, and undergoes spontaneous fission with the emission of neutrons. If some of this material, perhaps in a gaseous form (Uranium hexafluoride?), gets forced to the surface through cracks during times of tectonic stress, the observed result can be accounted for without the necessity to postulate cold fusion. --MJ}***



Ed Storms

[snip]
________________
Quote of the month:

"Law is what the authorities use to ride the country." --Anatoly Schransky
--============_-1230276525==_ma============-- From vortex-l-request eskimo.com Sat Feb 10 15:58:03 2001 Received: (from smartlst localhost) by mx1.eskimo.com (8.9.1a/8.8.8) id PAA14268; Sat, 10 Feb 2001 15:51:58 -0800 Resent-Date: Sat, 10 Feb 2001 15:51:58 -0800 From: Robin van Spaandonk To: vortex-l eskimo.com Subject: Re: Hydrino based CF Date: Sun, 11 Feb 2001 10:51:18 +1100 Organization: Improving Message-ID: <5rdb8tkbhp0ohnroccgeub9voobnohceou 4ax.com> References: <9onp6toob4ul639i7qbplu31frdsg4cj12 4ax.com> <3A7C3CC4.6C576A56@ix.netcom.com> <3A7C6FA4.9E2F82AA@ix.netcom.com> <3A7D6C64.80C32AF6@ix.netcom.com> <3A8011D6.60DF2DA5@ix.netcom.com> <3A8412F2.A1690733@ix.netcom.com> <3A855B5C.D087C718@ix.netcom.com> In-Reply-To: <3A855B5C.D087C718 ix.netcom.com> X-Mailer: Forte Agent 1.8/32.548 MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit X-MIME-Autoconverted: from quoted-printable to 8bit by mx1.eskimo.com id PAA14235 Resent-Message-ID: <"WAKL_1.0.oU3.UGTXw" mx1> Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/40707 X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com Status: O X-Status: In reply to Edmund Storms's message of Sat, 10 Feb 2001 09:17:03 -0600: [snip] >> >I suspect this is true. However, a wide range of energy values exist above the noise that seems >> >to be vacant of results. >> >> What is the range? > >~10 w/cm2 to >10^6 watts/cm2 Does this mean that all results so far have been below 10 W/cm^2 or have they all been above 1E6 W/cm^2, or distributed (i.e. some below, and some above)? If all results have been below 10 W/cm^2, then they in fact all do fall into a single continuous range from zero to 10 W/cm^2. [snip] >> Maybe you do, but that range lies in the noise. IOW perhaps for the effect >> to be really noticeable, such a large number of the right size cavities >> needs to be present, that this is quite rare. > >That assumption is always possible. However, it creates a problem in that one would have to know >the right size and how to make them in good numbers. A failed experiment would provide no insight >because you could always argue that the correct size was not provided, rather than admitting that >such voids played no role whatsoever. True, only a successful experiment will tell this tale, or perhaps more accurately, a proper accounting of void size and number across both working and failed cathodes, such that eventual correlations could be determined. [snip] >> I suspect that "the right size" is just big enough for three H atoms to >> bounce around a bit, but not much bigger. This would tend to keep them in >> close proximity until either H2 or Hy is formed. > >How big is a void that allows 3 H to "bounce around"? Given a radius of .79 Å for H, and arranging three of them in an equilateral triangle, I get a sphere with a minimum radius of 1.7 Å. It seems that a single point defect would be big enough. As the size of the hole gets bigger the collision rate would drop, because an atom would have to travel farther before bouncing off a wall, which would therefore take longer, and of course the chance of missing one another entirely also increases. (When in a cavity of the "right" size, they have no option but to "collide" continually). >If nature does not make such a size by random >process, how would you propose to create such a size? Point defects do occur in nature, though any method that would increase the density should have a positive effect if this hypothesis is correct. That of course provided that the increase in point defect density doesn't so weaken the overall structure as to make it expand too much and crack. I don't know enough about metallurgy to say how one might increase the point defect density (specifically the variety where an atom of Pd is missing). [snip] >For this concept to work, one would have to know a way to make the necessary size. Without such >knowledge, the experiment would be just another study in trial and error. I agree. Any metallurgists following along that know how to increase point defect density? [snip] >> Also because catalyst production is dependant upon UV photons, the reaction >> can spread throughout a cavity at near the speed of light, resulting in an >> energy release that is much faster than heat can be conducted away by the >> metal, in turn resulting in the little "volcanoes". > >The problem with the volcano observation, which I believe, is that once the material gets very hot, >the structure and/or unique chemical compound is lost. At this point, energy production stops and >temperature can rise no further. So why does sufficient liquid form to produce an ejection? If the mechanism is Mills based, with He+ catalyst in voids in the metal, then it thrives in a hot plasma environment (and won't run at all in a gas environment). In this case, the reaction will proceed either until all the D in the cavity is used up, or until the metal between the cavity and the outside edge of the cathode has become too weak to support the enormous pressure generated in the cavity. This could happen either because the cavity is very close to the surface, or because the metal has started to melt. As the number of hydrinos present in the cavity increases, disproportionation reactions also start to play a role. This has the effect of increasing the amount of catalyst present, and speeding up the energy release. [snip] >Apparently H enters the bubbles containing He. When the H leaves, it provides a local lattice >expansion and/or electron distortion sufficient to allow the He to enter the Pd lattice and diffuse >to the next grain boundary or to the outer surface. Thanks. [snip] >Study of He-3 formed from tritium decay indicates that the He can diffuse rapidly until it >encounters a grain boundary where it is trapped as growing bubbles. If the He is formed at the >surface, it can diffuse either toward the surface or toward the interior. Most He that diffuses to >the interior will be trapped. Is this paper available on line? Suggestion for Eugene if you are watching: Start a collection of the best papers in HTML (preferably, but PDF also possible), on the IE web site. It would draw more people to the site, and you have more clout than most, when it comes to getting authors to provide papers. It would also make it easier for them to cross access one another's work, as well as making their papers more accessible to the public in general, than publishing in journals. Of course I would only expect them to allow this after their paper had been published in a journal. [snip] >> What is "within reason"? > >This answer is not clear. It is ok to deload and reload, to remove the surface using Aqua Regia, >and to handle the piece without care. However, I suspect that heating to a high temperature would >be bad as would be beating the piece to a pulp. Now consider all of these in light of point defects. Granted there are also other properties that would not change under those conditions. (Beating to pulp might actually help sometimes. Perhaps you could give it a try on a cathode that doesn't work, and see if you can improve it? ;) [snip] >> Because carbon is smaller than any of the others, such that the difference >> with the size of Pd would result in maximum stress on the lattice, and >> therefore most likely lead to lattice disruptions. >> (Also, I think the bond angle would also be quite disruptive). >> >> >What concentration would be required? >> >> 1% would be a good place to start, but if that is impossibly high, then the >> as near as possible. > >Why this value other than it is a round number? And is this 1% by weight or by atom fraction? 1% by atom fraction, and 1% because I am guessing that this would leave enough Pd between the C atoms to maintain the general integrity of the lattice. I suspect that if it is weakened too much, it will crack severely. OTOH, the C may have the same effect on the Pd as it has on iron (where it results in steel). You can see that metallurgy isn't my strong suit. :) [snip] >True, but a theory for theory sake is not very useful. I suggest that the natural human tendency to >find an explanation for everything is actually a hindrance. Some things (such as CF and death) can >not be explained because insufficient information is available . An explanation only distracts from >finding the necessary information by simple observation - rather than by being guided by an >incorrect model. It also is the natural tendency of human kind to ignore everything that does not >fit their "explanation". And of course you are not guilty of this when you attempt to exclude Mills hydrinos as a possible cause of CF? ;) >Consequently, if the model has too much energy invested in its belief, >important observations will be ignored. Unfortunately, it is also the nature of human kind to be >deceived in thinking that they are objective when evaluating such a strongly held model. The irony >is that we are designed to blind ourselves by our own efforts to "see" more clearly. I suspect you think that I am being a bit obsessive about this. I can see that it may look that way, but I am only exploring the possibility of a Mills process as the origin of CF. I am not "married" to the concept. In fact I have my doubts about the process itself (as should be obvious to those who have followed my posts on HSG). I am just following the process to its logical end, and seeing where it takes me. Along the way, some predictions, and some suggested experiments drop out of the process. For me it's a brain-storming session. [snip] >> Come to think of it, most of the transition metals can be used as a cathode, >> where H would form before H2 anyway, so in that sense perhaps any of them >> would suffice to some extent. > >In an electrolytic cell, the H2 is already split. If you reread my last sentence carefully, you will see that that was already implied. [snip] >A good procedure. However, this is very difficult to do without studying the field for years and >having all available information . Even then, it is hard to know how much of what is claimed is >actually true. As a result, it is possible to pick-and-choose to support any explanation, just as >most theoreticians are presently doing. And by implication what I am doing. And you are probably correct. Which is why I post to this list, where you can tell me where I am going wrong. So far however, I don't think you have presented any evidence that definitely rules out this hypothesis. [snip] >I realize your intentions are good and honorable. However, as you can see, I do not trust any >effort to find an explanation for anything, although I generally have my own set of partial >explanations. I guess this puts me on the other side of the coin from theoreticians who do not >trust any experimental observation. Actually it reads more like you only trust your own theories, and no one else's. Everyone is guided to some extent by theory, otherwise you might as well mix strawberry jam and straw, and expect to get CF. F&P were also guided by their own theory when they did their original experiment. The scientific method consists of *having a theory*, testing it, and modifying or rejecting it, not in having no theory at all. [snip] > >As for the Mills model, I offer the following basic problem. The Mills model proposes that an >electron can enter an orbit near enough to the nucleus to allow the combination to enter another >nucleus. The result of two D nuclei combining would be He-4, which requires the formation of a >neutron within the combined structure. Formation of a neutron requires energy (0.75 MeV) and >involves a neutrino. From where does this energy and neutrino come? Be careful when you answer this >question not to provide another implausible unproved process as an explanation. No implausible other process is necessary, as you have misunderstood the nuclear process. When two D nuclei fuse to form He4, no neutron formation (i.e. weak force moderated nuclear reaction) is required. D comprises 1 proton and 1 neutron. Two of them therefore have two protons and two neutrons between them, which is precisely enough for 1 He4 nucleus. IOW He4 is essentially just to D nuclei joined together. Regards, Robin van Spaandonk A Future For Humanity see: http://users.bigpond.net.au/rvanspaa/ From vortex-l-request eskimo.com Sat Feb 10 16:22:09 2001 Received: (from smartlst localhost) by mx1.eskimo.com (8.9.1a/8.8.8) id QAA23321; Sat, 10 Feb 2001 16:17:29 -0800 Resent-Date: Sat, 10 Feb 2001 16:17:29 -0800 From: Robin van Spaandonk To: vortex-l eskimo.com Subject: Re: Hydrino based CF Date: Sun, 11 Feb 2001 11:16:53 +1100 Organization: Improving Message-ID: References: <3A7C3CC4.6C576A56 ix.netcom.com> <3A7C6FA4.9E2F82AA@ix.netcom.com> <3A7D6C64.80C32AF6@ix.netcom.com> <3A801 1D6.60DF2DA5 ix.netcom.com> <3A8412F2.A1690733@ix.netcom.com> <3A855B5C.D087C718@ix.netcom.com> <5rdb8tkbhp0ohnroccgeub9voobnohceou@4ax.com> In-Reply-To: <5rdb8tkbhp0ohnroccgeub9voobnohceou 4ax.com> X-Mailer: Forte Agent 1.8/32.548 MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit X-MIME-Autoconverted: from quoted-printable to 8bit by mx1.eskimo.com id QAA23281 Resent-Message-ID: <"uhG4F2.0.Fi5.OeTXw" mx1> Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/40708 X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com Status: O X-Status: In reply to Robin van Spaandonk's message of Sun, 11 Feb 2001 10:51:18 +1100: >Given a radius of .79 Å for H, and arranging three of them in an equilateral Oops! - I got this radius from a reference, but of course, if Mills is correct, then the radius is just the Bohr radius, so the minimum surrounding sphere would have a radius of 1.14 Å. Regards, Robin van Spaandonk A Future For Humanity see: http://users.bigpond.net.au/rvanspaa/ From vortex-l-request eskimo.com Sat Feb 10 17:30:56 2001 Received: (from smartlst localhost) by mx1.eskimo.com (8.9.1a/8.8.8) id RAA12727; Sat, 10 Feb 2001 17:29:55 -0800 Resent-Date: Sat, 10 Feb 2001 17:29:55 -0800 From: Robin van Spaandonk To: vortex-l eskimo.com Subject: Photon in a cavity? Date: Sun, 11 Feb 2001 12:29:20 +1100 Organization: Improving Message-ID: X-Mailer: Forte Agent 1.8/32.548 MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit X-MIME-Autoconverted: from quoted-printable to 8bit by mx1.eskimo.com id RAA12703 Resent-Message-ID: <"Ely9t3.0.n63.JiUXw" mx1> Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/40709 X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com Status: O X-Status: Hi, Suppose that an atom in a cavity in metal tries to emit a photon of a wavelength that is larger than the cavity. What happens? Regards, Robin van Spaandonk A Future For Humanity see: http://users.bigpond.net.au/rvanspaa/ From vortex-l-request eskimo.com Sat Feb 10 18:11:48 2001 Received: (from smartlst localhost) by mx1.eskimo.com (8.9.1a/8.8.8) id SAA25209; Sat, 10 Feb 2001 18:10:45 -0800 Resent-Date: Sat, 10 Feb 2001 18:10:45 -0800 Mime-Version: 1.0 X-Sender: rick mail.highsurf.com Message-Id: Date: Sat, 10 Feb 2001 16:10:37 -1000 To: vortex-l eskimo.com From: Rick Monteverde Subject: Gyro experiment & inertial drive test Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" ; format="flowed" Resent-Message-ID: <"DPSL32.0.p96.bIVXw" mx1> Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/40710 X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com Status: RO X-Status: Gnorts - I did some simple gyro experiments to get a quick look at two issues arising from the recent "Cook's drive" thread: claims that there's something reactionless about precession, and the requirement for a true test of a candidate reactionless drive. Conclusions: 1) Precession is not reactionless in the same plane as the precession rotation, as apparently claimed in connection with Kidd or Laithwaite (my misunderstanding of the claims?). 2) Continuous torque on a frame can be generated even though both the gyro and the frame are free to rotate. The implication of the second one is that it would be possible build a conventional gizmo that can twist itself upwards in the vertical plane if suspended at the rim, steadily holding itself up sideways with internal torque while hanging from the end of a string (obvious to anyone who's ever played with a yo-yo, though the mechanism is a little different). This is not the same as a gyro hanging sideways from the end of a string where the string would still hang vertically. Instead, the string would hang at an angle as the gizmo centered its now offset and non-precessing mass directly under the suspension point, causing the string to stay at a steady angle. It could not displace itself completely beyond the plumbline in a steady state though, so that's still the good test - as some here had concluded, including myself, before I got led into questioning that by the recent discussions. ------- experiments ------- I used one of those cheapski Tedco gyros with the plastic gimbal pylon it comes with. Some tests were with the pylon stuck to the end of a fiberglass batten taped to a small pottery turntable. Others were with the pylon mounted on the turntable without the batten to extend the lever arm. The batten gave a radius from the turntable pivot to the gyro pylon of about 2 feet. The slightest touch on the side of the batten near the pylon would easily move it. On the batten: With the running gyro sitting on its pylon, held with its axis tilted over in line with the batten, the tip was released. As the gyro immediately began to precess, a movement of the batten indicating a counter torque was observed. The gyro from its center of wheel mass to its support on the pylon is about 2". A movement of the armature of about 1" to 1.5" or so was always seen as the gyro was released, indicating that the pivot point for the precession force was the center of gyro wheel mass, not the tip resting on the pylon. Therefore, any apparent centrifugal forces obtained from a gyro thus precessing are not obtained any differently than if a simple weight was started off in a circular path. When left to precess around and around though, the back-and-forth wobble of the batten armature would make steady net progress in the same direction as the precessional direction. This is the precession imparting torque to the frame, even though both the gyro and frame were free to rotate. This effect could be enhanced a little bit by sticking the pylon directly to the pottery turntable near the rim (without the batten), and giving the turntable a starting turn to try to synchronize the precession with the turntable rotation. The result is that I could see the precession of the gyro cranking the turntable around, maintaining its speed a little bit before the timing would deteriorate due to the short run time of the gyro. No anomalies, nothing unexpected. I don't believe claims of mechanical reactionless drives made so far, and would like to see one hanging from a string steadily outside the plumbline to be convinced otherwise. Next: SMOTs run while mounted on the turntable. Level spinaways? - Rick Monteverde Honolulu, HI From vortex-l-request eskimo.com Sat Feb 10 19:14:12 2001 Received: (from smartlst localhost) by mx1.eskimo.com (8.9.1a/8.8.8) id TAA15682; Sat, 10 Feb 2001 19:12:25 -0800 Resent-Date: Sat, 10 Feb 2001 19:12:25 -0800 Message-ID: <3A85F55E.F05512DA ix.netcom.com> Date: Sat, 10 Feb 2001 20:15:48 -0600 From: Edmund Storms X-Mailer: Mozilla 4.5 (Macintosh; U; PPC) X-Accept-Language: en,pdf MIME-Version: 1.0 To: vortex-l eskimo.com Subject: Re: Hydrino based CF References: <9onp6toob4ul639i7qbplu31frdsg4cj12 4ax.com> <3A7C3CC4.6C576A56@ix.netcom.com> <3A7C6FA4.9E2F82AA@ix.netcom.com> <3A7D6C64.80C32AF6@ix.netcom.com> <3A8011D6.60DF2DA5@ix.netcom.com> <3A8412F2.A1690733@ix.netcom.com> <3A855B5C.D087C718@ix.netcom.com> <5rdb8tkbhp0ohnroccgeub9 voobnohceou 4ax.com> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=iso-8859-1; x-mac-type="54455854"; x-mac-creator="4D4F5353" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit Resent-Message-ID: <"y8pLP1.0.wq3.OCWXw" mx1> Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/40711 X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com Status: O X-Status: Robin van Spaandonk wrote: > In reply to Edmund Storms's message of Sat, 10 Feb 2001 09:17:03 -0600: > [snip] > >> >I suspect this is true. However, a wide range of energy values exist above the noise that seems > >> >to be vacant of results. > >> > >> What is the range? > > > >~10 w/cm2 to >10^6 watts/cm2 > > Does this mean that all results so far have been below 10 W/cm^2 or have > they all been above 1E6 W/cm^2, or distributed (i.e. some below, and some > above)? > If all results have been below 10 W/cm^2, then they in fact all do fall into > a single continuous range from zero to 10 W/cm^2. Making a statement about the power distribution is difficult because so few points are available. In addition, we do not know what fraction of the measured area is active. Pons and Fleischmann used very small samples which appear to give a high power density, although a small absolute power. People using sheets of Pd having a high area report a high power, but a lower power density. At this point, I can only conclude that most claimed power falls in a range much below 100 w/c^2. Therefore, a large range exists above this value. The distribution is unknown. Local power density, at the volcanos, could be very high indeed. > > [snip] > >> Maybe you do, but that range lies in the noise. IOW perhaps for the effect > >> to be really noticeable, such a large number of the right size cavities > >> needs to be present, that this is quite rare. > > > >That assumption is always possible. However, it creates a problem in that one would have to know > >the right size and how to make them in good numbers. A failed experiment would provide no insight > >because you could always argue that the correct size was not provided, rather than admitting that > >such voids played no role whatsoever. > > True, only a successful experiment will tell this tale, or perhaps more > accurately, a proper accounting of void size and number across both working > and failed cathodes, such that eventual correlations could be determined. > [snip] This study, you will agree, would cost a bundle. > > >> I suspect that "the right size" is just big enough for three H atoms to > >> bounce around a bit, but not much bigger. This would tend to keep them in > >> close proximity until either H2 or Hy is formed. > > > >How big is a void that allows 3 H to "bounce around"? > > Given a radius of .79 Å for H, and arranging three of them in an equilateral > triangle, I get a sphere with a minimum radius of 1.7 Å. It seems that a > single point defect would be big enough. As the size of the hole gets bigger > the collision rate would drop, because an atom would have to travel farther > before bouncing off a wall, which would therefore take longer, and of course > the chance of missing one another entirely also increases. > (When in a cavity of the "right" size, they have no option but to "collide" > continually). The PdD lattice is filled with such point defects in the D sublattice. These have a concentration of PdD1-x where x is the parameter in PdDx. Experience shows that the amount of EP increases as the value of x increases. This is opposite to your proposed process. In addition, placing more than one D in such a site would take more energy than placing it in a vacant site, until most of the sites are filled. I have proposed in the past that PdD2 can form when the sites become mostly filled and that this structure consists of D2 in each D site. Although, this suggestion has nothing to do with the Mills model, you might argue that this is the smoking gun for your proposal. > > > >If nature does not make such a size by random > >process, how would you propose to create such a size? > > Point defects do occur in nature, though any method that would increase the > density should have a positive effect if this hypothesis is correct. That of > course provided that the increase in point defect density doesn't so weaken > the overall structure as to make it expand too much and crack. > I don't know enough about metallurgy to say how one might increase the point > defect density (specifically the variety where an atom of Pd is missing). The more point defects in the Pd sublattice, the weaker the structure. In addition, there is no indication in the properties of PdD that D can occupy a Pd defect. > > [snip] > >For this concept to work, one would have to know a way to make the necessary size. Without such > >knowledge, the experiment would be just another study in trial and error. > > I agree. Any metallurgists following along that know how to increase point > defect density? Bending the material will introduce many point defects in the Pd sublattice. Removing D will produce defects in the D sublattice. Neither seems to increase production of EP. > > [snip] > >> Also because catalyst production is dependant upon UV photons, the reaction > >> can spread throughout a cavity at near the speed of light, resulting in an > >> energy release that is much faster than heat can be conducted away by the > >> metal, in turn resulting in the little "volcanoes". > > > >The problem with the volcano observation, which I believe, is that once the material gets very hot, > >the structure and/or unique chemical compound is lost. At this point, energy production stops and > >temperature can rise no further. So why does sufficient liquid form to produce an ejection? > > If the mechanism is Mills based, with He+ catalyst in voids in the metal, > then it thrives in a hot plasma environment (and won't run at all in a gas > environment). In this case, the reaction will proceed either until all the D > in the cavity is used up, or until the metal > between the cavity and the outside edge of the cathode has become too weak > to support the enormous pressure generated in the cavity. > This could happen either because the cavity is very close to the surface, or > because the metal has started to melt. > As the number of hydrinos present in the cavity increases, > disproportionation reactions also start to play a role. This has the effect > of increasing the amount of catalyst present, and speeding up the energy > release. Granted, more energy would be released. How would this energy produce more molten Pd? After all, once molten Pd is produced anywhere, energy production stops in that region. > > [snip] > >Apparently H enters the bubbles containing He. When the H leaves, it provides a local lattice > >expansion and/or electron distortion sufficient to allow the He to enter the Pd lattice and diffuse > >to the next grain boundary or to the outer surface. > > Thanks. > [snip] > >Study of He-3 formed from tritium decay indicates that the He can diffuse rapidly until it > >encounters a grain boundary where it is trapped as growing bubbles. If the He is formed at the > >surface, it can diffuse either toward the surface or toward the interior. Most He that diffuses to > >the interior will be trapped. > > Is this paper available on line? > Suggestion for Eugene if you are watching: > Start a collection of the best papers in HTML (preferably, but PDF also > possible), on the IE web site. It would draw more people to the site, and > you have more clout than most, when it comes to getting authors to provide > papers. It would also make it easier for them to cross access one another's > work, as well as making their papers more accessible to the public in > general, than publishing in journals. Of course I would only expect them to > allow this after their paper had been published in a journal. This information is not available on line. If you are interested, I can cite some references. > > [snip] > >> What is "within reason"? > > > >This answer is not clear. It is ok to deload and reload, to remove the surface using Aqua Regia, > >and to handle the piece without care. However, I suspect that heating to a high temperature would > >be bad as would be beating the piece to a pulp. > > Now consider all of these in light of point defects. Granted there are also > other properties that would not change under those conditions. (Beating to > pulp might actually help sometimes. Perhaps you could give it a try on a > cathode that doesn't work, and see if you can improve it? ;) An interesting idea and one that would help lower the frustration level- better than kicking the dog. > > [snip] > >> Because carbon is smaller than any of the others, such that the difference > >> with the size of Pd would result in maximum stress on the lattice, and > >> therefore most likely lead to lattice disruptions. > >> (Also, I think the bond angle would also be quite disruptive). > >> > >> >What concentration would be required? > >> > >> 1% would be a good place to start, but if that is impossibly high, then the > >> as near as possible. > > > >Why this value other than it is a round number? And is this 1% by weight or by atom fraction? > > 1% by atom fraction, and 1% because I am guessing that this would leave > enough Pd between the C atoms to maintain the general integrity of the > lattice. I suspect that if it is weakened too much, it will crack severely. This is way over the equilibrium solubility limit. I have no idea what this would do to the strength of the lattice. > > OTOH, the C may have the same effect on the Pd as it has on iron (where it > results in steel). > You can see that metallurgy isn't my strong suit. :) > [snip] > >True, but a theory for theory sake is not very useful. I suggest that the natural human tendency to > >find an explanation for everything is actually a hindrance. Some things (such as CF and death) can > >not be explained because insufficient information is available . An explanation only distracts from > >finding the necessary information by simple observation - rather than by being guided by an > >incorrect model. It also is the natural tendency of human kind to ignore everything that does not > >fit their "explanation". > > And of course you are not guilty of this when you attempt to exclude Mills > hydrinos as a possible cause of CF? ;) I'm not excluding Mills. I just do not see any evidence that voids play a role. However, the hydrinos may produce an effect in other ways. Unless the hydrino model is better understood, I suggest that trying to prove that voids are important would be too costly compared to other more obvious possibilities. > > > >Consequently, if the model has too much energy invested in its belief, > >important observations will be ignored. Unfortunately, it is also the nature of human kind to be > >deceived in thinking that they are objective when evaluating such a strongly held model. The irony > >is that we are designed to blind ourselves by our own efforts to "see" more clearly. > > I suspect you think that I am being a bit obsessive about this. I can see > that it may look that way, but I am only exploring the possibility of a > Mills process as the origin of CF. I am not "married" to the concept. In > fact I have my doubts about the process itself (as should be obvious to > those who have followed my posts on HSG). > I am just following the process to its logical end, and seeing where it > takes me. Along the way, some predictions, and some suggested experiments > drop out of the process. For me it's a brain-storming session. I have no problem with such an effort. However, I think you are barking up the wrong tree when you concentrate on the effect of voids. > > [snip] > >> Come to think of it, most of the transition metals can be used as a cathode, > >> where H would form before H2 anyway, so in that sense perhaps any of them > >> would suffice to some extent. > > > >In an electrolytic cell, the H2 is already split. > > If you reread my last sentence carefully, you will see that that was already > implied. In which case metals such as Fe, that you note can split H2, would not be needed. > > [snip] > > >A good procedure. However, this is very difficult to do without studying the field for years and > >having all available information . Even then, it is hard to know how much of what is claimed is > >actually true. As a result, it is possible to pick-and-choose to support any explanation, just as > >most theoreticians are presently doing. > > And by implication what I am doing. And you are probably correct. Which is > why I post to this list, where you can tell me where I am going wrong. > So far however, I don't think you have presented any evidence that > definitely rules out this hypothesis. Indeed, I probably never will definitely rule out your hypothesis. Nevertheless, I admire your effort to explore the possibility. > > [snip] > >I realize your intentions are good and honorable. However, as you can see, I do not trust any > >effort to find an explanation for anything, although I generally have my own set of partial > >explanations. I guess this puts me on the other side of the coin from theoreticians who do not > >trust any experimental observation. > > Actually it reads more like you only trust your own theories, and no one > else's. No, I don't even trust my own. Nevertheless, I try various possibilities and see where they lead. Because my resources are very limited, only ideas that are simple to explore get explored. As a result, a certain selection is required up front. Your idea would be too expensive to explore so that it would be rejected unless the evidence for its importance were rather strong. So far, I do not see that strength. Someday, when more resources are available, such ideas might get more attention. Who knows, exploring this idea might even lead to success, perhaps for other reasons. > > Everyone is guided to some extent by theory, otherwise you might as well mix > strawberry jam and straw, and expect to get CF. > F&P were also guided by their own theory when they did their original > experiment. Yes, and they were wrong in many ways. As a result, they could not make the effect work very often and they were laughed out of court because they understood neither the chemistry nor the physics of the process. In spite of this limitation, they did a great service at great personal sacrifice by giving the rest of us permission to obtain a better understanding. > > > The scientific method consists of *having a theory*, testing it, and > modifying or rejecting it, not in having no theory at all. True. My argument is in how much energy and certainty is given to the theory. > > [snip] > > > >As for the Mills model, I offer the following basic problem. The Mills model proposes that an > >electron can enter an orbit near enough to the nucleus to allow the combination to enter another > >nucleus. The result of two D nuclei combining would be He-4, which requires the formation of a > >neutron within the combined structure. Formation of a neutron requires energy (0.75 MeV) and > >involves a neutrino. From where does this energy and neutrino come? Be careful when you answer this > >question not to provide another implausible unproved process as an explanation. > No implausible other process is necessary, as you have misunderstood the > nuclear process. When two D nuclei fuse to form He4, no neutron formation > (i.e. weak force moderated nuclear reaction) is required. This is not correct. The He-4 nucleus contains 2 neutrons which do not care how they were formed. Their properties are not different just because they were formed by a proton and electron coming together. Therefore, the formation process must supply all the ingredients known to be in a neutron. If 0.75 MeV is not supplied, then the He-4 nucleus so formed would have a lower energy than every other He-4 nucleus. Are you proposing that the hydrino process produces low energy He-4? > > D comprises 1 proton and 1 neutron. Two of them therefore have two protons > and two neutrons between them, which is precisely enough for 1 He4 nucleus. > IOW He4 is essentially just to D nuclei joined together. This is not correct either. When the two D combine, 24 MeV is released, hence the mass decreases, and a nucleus is formed having entirely different properties. Some models even suggest that the proton and neutron do not exist as distinct particles within the nucleus, but as a complex stew involving more basic particles. Regards, Ed From vortex-l-request eskimo.com Sat Feb 10 19:17:18 2001 Received: (from smartlst localhost) by mx1.eskimo.com (8.9.1a/8.8.8) id TAA16925; Sat, 10 Feb 2001 19:15:48 -0800 Resent-Date: Sat, 10 Feb 2001 19:15:48 -0800 Message-ID: <3A85F654.BADA2E94 ix.netcom.com> Date: Sat, 10 Feb 2001 20:19:54 -0600 From: Edmund Storms X-Mailer: Mozilla 4.5 (Macintosh; U; PPC) X-Accept-Language: en,pdf MIME-Version: 1.0 To: vortex-l eskimo.com Subject: Re: Photon in a cavity? References: Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii; x-mac-type="54455854"; x-mac-creator="4D4F5353" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Resent-Message-ID: <"_S6n4.0.J84.ZFWXw" mx1> Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/40712 X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com Status: O X-Status: Robin van Spaandonk wrote: > Hi, > > Suppose that an atom in a cavity in metal tries to emit a photon of a > wavelength that is larger than the cavity. > What happens? The photon leaves the atom because from an atom's point of view, there is no such thing as a cavity. The atom is in a sea of electrons with no boundary. The idea of a boundary is a human construct. Regards, Ed From vortex-l-request eskimo.com Sun Feb 11 00:20:06 2001 Received: (from smartlst localhost) by mx1.eskimo.com (8.9.1a/8.8.8) id AAA09614; Sun, 11 Feb 2001 00:19:14 -0800 Resent-Date: Sun, 11 Feb 2001 00:19:14 -0800 From: Robin van Spaandonk To: vortex-l eskimo.com Subject: Re: Photon in a cavity? Date: Sun, 11 Feb 2001 19:18:38 +1100 Organization: Improving Message-ID: References: <3A85F654.BADA2E94@ix.netcom.com> In-Reply-To: <3A85F654.BADA2E94 ix.netcom.com> X-Mailer: Forte Agent 1.8/32.548 MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit X-MIME-Autoconverted: from quoted-printable to 8bit by mx1.eskimo.com id AAA09583 Resent-Message-ID: <"ztlww.0.8M2.2iaXw" mx1> Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/40713 X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com Status: O X-Status: In reply to Edmund Storms's message of Sat, 10 Feb 2001 20:19:54 -0600: [snip] >The photon leaves the atom because from an atom's point of view, there >is no such thing as a cavity. The atom is in a sea of electrons with no >boundary. The idea of a boundary is a human construct. [snip] Please explain how mirrors work. Regards, Robin van Spaandonk A Future For Humanity see: http://users.bigpond.net.au/rvanspaa/ From vortex-l-request eskimo.com Sun Feb 11 01:39:46 2001 Received: (from smartlst localhost) by mx1.eskimo.com (8.9.1a/8.8.8) id BAA26593; Sun, 11 Feb 2001 01:37:11 -0800 Resent-Date: Sun, 11 Feb 2001 01:37:11 -0800 From: "xplorer" To: "Vortex-L Eskimo. Com" Subject: Report: HotWater Date: Sun, 11 Feb 2001 16:37:02 +0700 Message-ID: MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-Priority: 3 (Normal) X-MSMail-Priority: Normal X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook IMO, Build 9.0.2416 (9.0.2910.0) X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V4.72.3110.3 Importance: Normal Resent-Message-ID: <"elBXw1.0.NV6.7rbXw" mx1> Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/40714 X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com Status: O X-Status: Having gotten to the point where I can resume my periodic attempts at CF, I built a device that replicates some aspects of what seemed to be 'successful' runs from days gone by when I had nothing but scrap metal and a VOM to try to do things with. One of the things we don't have at our house is hot water. I quit taking hot showers a long time ago as the water here is so disgusting that the skin quite literally crawls after a shower - hot water exaggerates this phenomenon considerably. The only way to survive this is to use antiseptic soap and not rinse completely. And keep a healthy attitude to boost the immune system. My wife and I have always wanted a hot water heater, but we found that heating this water is worse than taking cold showers, so this is what we have done with for some time. Last night I managed to get my first 'CF' experiment going, running 215 Vac 50 Hz through it for 3000 seconds. This unit was immersed in a bucket of 20 measured liters of tap water. Check my numbers if you would: 2000.02.10-23:55 t T A Ttheory 0 27.1 2.5 27.1 214 Vac 600 31.0 2.3 30.8 214 Vac 1200 35.0 2.3 34.3 214 Vac 1800 38.0 2.4 37.9 214 Vac 2400 42.1 3.0 42.1 214 Vac: Begin 185 Vdc 3000 47.0 3.0 46.1 185 Vdc As you see, at 2400 seconds I routed the Ac through a bridge rectifier to turn the AC into DC. My meter is a piece of garbage which I can't really trust very well as far as Ac volts are concerned, but it does work quite well for DC. It is linear, and the current measurements are reliable. Current is always measured using a DC rectification Bridge. Because it was quite late and I have lost a lot of sleep recently, I miscalculated the numbers getting a value of 80% efficiency and thought to myself, 'oh well, it heats water'. I quickly used this as my first hot water shower, and noticed the itch was missing. Just to be safe I placed the heating element next to my geiger counter, getting no significant change from background levels (That's _another_ story!). This morning as I reviewed the calculations I found my error and now get 1.05 for efficiency. I quickly reran this and, using DC current, get the following dataset: 2000.02.11-11:00 t T A Ttheory 0 30.0 2.20 30.0 184 Vdc 600 ? 2.25 32.9 184 Vdc 1200 ? 2.30 35.9 184 Vdc 1800 ? 2.35 39.0 184 Vdc 2400 44.3 2.35 42.1 184 Vdc Efficiency: 1.18 In order not to interfere with the process, I let it run without taking interim temperature samples, as taking samples requires shutting off the power, due to the need to stir the water to eliminate temperature stratification in the bucket I use. The calculated efficiency completely disregards energy loss through such things as: 1) the plastic bucket (significant), 2) through surface evaporation (minor?), 3) through electrolytic separation (minor), 4) through joule heating of the bridge circuit (significant). I don't disregard the possibility that some of the unanticipated energy could be coming from pollutants, but I will rerun this with distilled water to be sure. I am not claiming an OU success, as I need to run a control using a joule heater and I need to examine in detail every possible aspect where I could be mistaken - starting with replacing my meter with a data-logging setup and refining the device and computations methodology. Any suggestions are welcome, but my access to higher-order test equipment is quite limited. In the meantime, I'm gonna mount this unit on the bathroom wall and enjoy more hotwater showers... cheers, Paul E. Anderson PS - The microwaved bottle experiment was null results - I didn't have enough water inside it and not enough loose nuts to try it on a waterlogged setup ;) From vortex-l-request eskimo.com Sun Feb 11 01:51:23 2001 Received: (from smartlst localhost) by mx1.eskimo.com (8.9.1a/8.8.8) id BAA28631; Sun, 11 Feb 2001 01:48:26 -0800 Resent-Date: Sun, 11 Feb 2001 01:48:26 -0800 From: Robin van Spaandonk To: vortex-l eskimo.com Subject: Re: Hydrino based CF Date: Sun, 11 Feb 2001 20:47:49 +1100 Organization: Improving Message-ID: References: <3A7C6FA4.9E2F82AA@ix.netcom.com> <3A7D6C64.80C32AF6@ix.netcom.com> <3A8011D6.60DF2DA5@ix.netcom.com> <3A8412F2.A1690733@ix.netcom.com> <3A855B5C.D087C718@ix.netcom.com> <5rdb8tkbhp0ohnroccgeub9voobnohceou@4ax.com> <3A85F55E.F05512DA@ix.netcom.com> In-Reply-To: <3A85F55E.F05512DA ix.netcom.com> X-Mailer: Forte Agent 1.8/32.548 MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit X-MIME-Autoconverted: from quoted-printable to 8bit by mx1.eskimo.com id BAA28593 Resent-Message-ID: <"tLdxz3.0.H_6.f_bXw" mx1> Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/40715 X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com Status: O X-Status: In reply to Edmund Storms's message of Sat, 10 Feb 2001 20:15:48 -0600: [snip] >Making a statement about the power distribution is difficult because so few points are available. In >addition, we do not know what fraction of the measured area is active. Pons and Fleischmann used very >small samples which appear to give a high power density, although a small absolute power. People using >sheets of Pd having a high area report a high power, but a lower power density. At this point, I can >only conclude that most claimed power falls in a range much below 100 w/c^2. Therefore, a large range >exists above this value. The distribution is unknown. Local power density, at the volcanos, could be >very high indeed. So this really just means that if a random distribution of sites is responsible, then the best that can be achieved with such a distribution at present would appear to be about 100 W/cm^2? [snip] >> True, only a successful experiment will tell this tale, or perhaps more >> accurately, a proper accounting of void size and number across both working >> and failed cathodes, such that eventual correlations could be determined. >> [snip] > >This study, you will agree, would cost a bundle. I guess you have a better idea of this than I, so I defer to your judgement. [snip] >> >> I suspect that "the right size" is just big enough for three H atoms to >> >> bounce around a bit, but not much bigger. This would tend to keep them in >> >> close proximity until either H2 or Hy is formed. >> > >> >How big is a void that allows 3 H to "bounce around"? >> >> Given a radius of .79 Å for H, and arranging three of them in an equilateral >> triangle, I get a sphere with a minimum radius of 1.7 Å. It seems that a In a later post I corrected this to 1.14 Å. [snip] >filled. I have proposed in the past that PdD2 can form when the sites become mostly filled and that >this structure consists of D2 in each D site. Although, this suggestion has nothing to do with the >Mills model, you might argue that this is the smoking gun for your proposal. Yes, I do remember reading it before. Based upon an "a" value for Pd of 3.8908 Å, I just did a quick calculation to determine the size of the spaces between the Pd atoms, if we assume that they touch along the diagonals of the faces of the cube (in an fcc lattice). I came up with exactly 1.14 Å at closest approach in the centre of the cube (some coincidence!). IOW there is exactly enough room for three deuterons in the normal lattice spacing between all Pd atoms. If I have done my sums right this time, then that would result in PdD2.25, if as many as possible were packed in. IOW before Mills catalysis could occur, the local D:Pd ratio would need to be 2.25:1, which seems to be in line with the difficulty of achieving the right conditions. BTW this completely does away with the point defect notion. (I had previously simply assumed that there wasn't normally enough room for three Ds together in a normal lattice). [snip] >Bending the material will introduce many point defects in the Pd sublattice. Removing D will produce >defects in the D sublattice. Neither seems to increase production of EP. In light of the above, now understandable. [snip] >> >The problem with the volcano observation, which I believe, is that once the material gets very hot, >> >the structure and/or unique chemical compound is lost. At this point, energy production stops and >> >temperature can rise no further. So why does sufficient liquid form to produce an ejection? >> >> If the mechanism is Mills based, with He+ catalyst in voids in the metal, >> then it thrives in a hot plasma environment (and won't run at all in a gas >> environment). In this case, the reaction will proceed either until all the D >> in the cavity is used up, or until the metal >> between the cavity and the outside edge of the cathode has become too weak >> to support the enormous pressure generated in the cavity. >> This could happen either because the cavity is very close to the surface, or >> because the metal has started to melt. >> As the number of hydrinos present in the cavity increases, >> disproportionation reactions also start to play a role. This has the effect >> of increasing the amount of catalyst present, and speeding up the energy >> release. > >Granted, more energy would be released. How would this energy produce more molten Pd? After all, once >molten Pd is produced anywhere, energy production stops in that region. I suspect that when this plasma mode regime gets going, the reaction is all over and done with in nano-seconds, before the Pd even has time to react. Consequently the "volcanic eruption" doesn't occur until after the actual energy production is finished. The inner surface of such a void would have evaporated and contributed to the plasma, but the metal lattice is not a contributor to the reaction. It simply provides a containment. The hot plasma eventually cools by shedding heat to the metal (in microseconds), causing it to melt, and "erupt" if near the surface. (The pressure is also extreme, as a consequence of the high temperature). [snip] >> Is this paper available on line? >> Suggestion for Eugene if you are watching: >> Start a collection of the best papers in HTML (preferably, but PDF also >> possible), on the IE web site. It would draw more people to the site, and >> you have more clout than most, when it comes to getting authors to provide >> papers. It would also make it easier for them to cross access one another's >> work, as well as making their papers more accessible to the public in >> general, than publishing in journals. Of course I would only expect them to >> allow this after their paper had been published in a journal. > >This information is not available on line. If you are interested, I can cite some references. If it isn't any trouble. The likelihood that I will follow up a library reference however is about 1000 times lower than for a web reference. [snip] >This is way over the equilibrium solubility limit. I have no idea what this would do to the strength of >the lattice. Given the above, I think we can dump the carbon suggestion (see, brainstorming is useful, we've already disposed of a whole set of experiments, just by talking about it ;). [snip] >I'm not excluding Mills. I just do not see any evidence that voids play a role. However, the hydrinos >may produce an effect in other ways. Unless the hydrino model is better understood, I suggest that >trying to prove that voids are important would be too costly compared to other more obvious >possibilities. You seem to have been prescient here, or perhaps it's the experience showing :). [snip] >> >> Come to think of it, most of the transition metals can be used as a cathode, >> >> where H would form before H2 anyway, so in that sense perhaps any of them >> >> would suffice to some extent. >> > >> >In an electrolytic cell, the H2 is already split. >> >> If you reread my last sentence carefully, you will see that that was already >> implied. > >In which case metals such as Fe, that you note can split H2, would not be needed. Indeed. That was implied above when I wrote "Come to think of it...". [snip] However most metals won't be able to accommodate at least three D atoms simultaneously. It might be interesting to see which ones will. [snip] >> >As for the Mills model, I offer the following basic problem. The Mills model proposes that an >> >electron can enter an orbit near enough to the nucleus to allow the combination to enter another >> >nucleus. The result of two D nuclei combining would be He-4, which requires the formation of a >> >neutron within the combined structure. Formation of a neutron requires energy (0.75 MeV) and >> >involves a neutrino. From where does this energy and neutrino come? Be careful when you answer this >> >question not to provide another implausible unproved process as an explanation. >> No implausible other process is necessary, as you have misunderstood the >> nuclear process. When two D nuclei fuse to form He4, no neutron formation >> (i.e. weak force moderated nuclear reaction) is required. > >This is not correct. The He-4 nucleus contains 2 neutrons which do not care how they were formed. Indeed, but in 2 D nuclei, they already exist. No neutron formation is required. >Their properties are not different just because they were formed by a proton and electron coming >together. Therefore, the formation process must supply all the ingredients known to be in a neutron. Once again, the neutrons already exist, and don't need to be formed. >If >0.75 MeV is not supplied, then the He-4 nucleus so formed would have a lower energy than every other >He-4 nucleus. Are you proposing that the hydrino process produces low energy He-4? The primary function of the hydrino process would be to bring the two D nuclei close enough together to fuse. IOW it provides a way "around" the Coulomb barrier. [snip] >> IOW He4 is essentially just to D nuclei joined together. > >This is not correct either. Qua energy no, it isn't correct. However it is correct qua number and type of nucleons, and that is what I meant. >When the two D combine, 24 MeV is released, hence the mass decreases, and a >nucleus is formed having entirely different properties. Some models even suggest that the proton and >neutron do not exist as distinct particles within the nucleus, but as a complex stew involving more >basic particles. Doubtless also a possibility, however in this case the sums just shift to counting more fundamental particles. The result is the same. The numbers of such, don't change during the fusion process. As to what sacrifices some of its mass during the process, I don't think you will be able to get a straight answer from any nuclear physicist. I don't understand why you are talking about creating neutrons. Regards, Robin van Spaandonk A Future For Humanity see: http://users.bigpond.net.au/rvanspaa/ From vortex-l-request eskimo.com Sun Feb 11 04:00:13 2001 Received: (from smartlst localhost) by mx1.eskimo.com (8.9.1a/8.8.8) id DAA16661; Sun, 11 Feb 2001 03:59:26 -0800 Resent-Date: Sun, 11 Feb 2001 03:59:26 -0800 Message-Id: Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Date: Sun, 11 Feb 2001 03:09:05 -0900 To: vortex-l eskimo.com From: hheffner mtaonline.net (Horace Heffner) Subject: Re: Photon in a cavity? Resent-Message-ID: <"nwN8r1.0.E44.UwdXw" mx1> Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/40716 X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com Status: O X-Status: At 12:29 PM 2/11/1, Robin van Spaandonk wrote: >Hi, > >Suppose that an atom in a cavity in metal tries to emit a photon of a >wavelength that is larger than the cavity. >What happens? This is not something I know much about. However, I think a set of QM related scattering probabilities (amplitudes) is invoked depending on the probabilites of electrons being located in various places and probabilities of the photon being scattered from those places. The probabilites determine the degree to which the lattice is transparent and other optical properties associated with the wavelength involved. However, in a metal lattice, a low energy photon is almost always fully absorbed. This means the energy of the photon is distributed (likely very locally) about the lattice (possibly instantaneously) in the form of one or more phonons. Phonons are lattice vibrations having a fixed quantum of energy, and are not localized to a single electron, but are distributed over the motions of a locality of electrons. The location of a phonon cannot be known exactly, due to the Heisenberg principle, because its quantum of energy is exact. A tightly localized phonon consists of about 10 atomic spacings. Phonons act like particles in the sense they have energy, momentum, a deBroglie wavelength, obey the Heisenberg principle, etc. They can be absorbed and pass through each other, so act like bosons. It is the distributed nature of the phonon that gives the Chubb and Chubb theory of cold fusion energy absorbtion by the lattice some credence. They proposed that large segments of lattice can instantly absorb in a distributed fashion the large photon energy involved in cold fusion, thus suppressing the gamma signature of fusion. Regards, Horace Heffner From vortex-l-request eskimo.com Sun Feb 11 04:01:41 2001 Received: (from smartlst localhost) by mx1.eskimo.com (8.9.1a/8.8.8) id EAA16861; Sun, 11 Feb 2001 04:00:34 -0800 Resent-Date: Sun, 11 Feb 2001 04:00:34 -0800 Message-ID: <3A867EC0.80F0953B ix.netcom.com> Date: Sun, 11 Feb 2001 04:00:00 -0800 From: Akira Kawasaki X-Mailer: Mozilla 4.72 [en]C-CCK-MCD NSCPCD472 (Win95; U) X-Accept-Language: en MIME-Version: 1.0 To: vortex-l eskimo.com Subject: Re: fusion in the earth References: <3A854378.E745A1E4 ix.netcom.com> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Resent-Message-ID: <"PzJIa.0.N74.XxdXw" mx1> Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/40717 X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com Status: O X-Status: February 12, 2001 Vortex, Ed's forwarding of the news item about neutron bursts with large scale rock 'cracking' brings to mind a statement made by Dobson, the astronomer. The statement he made in a general astronomy class to which my grandson and I are taking in conjunction with a astronomical telescope making class also by Dobson was: Jupiter and Saturn are NOT planets of the Sun but are also suns themselves. This was in regard to the fact that Jupiter and Saturn were generating approximately twice the heat it receives from our Sun. And these suns were mainly constituted out of the lighter elements. CF anyone? There were no mention of excess radioactivity emanating out of Jupiter or Saturn. Dobson also does not subscribe to the 'Standard Model' that was called to question by the Muon experiment reported by Brookhaven's experimental team. -AK- From vortex-l-request eskimo.com Sun Feb 11 06:14:42 2001 Received: (from smartlst localhost) by mx1.eskimo.com (8.9.1a/8.8.8) id GAA09256; Sun, 11 Feb 2001 06:14:06 -0800 Resent-Date: Sun, 11 Feb 2001 06:14:06 -0800 Message-ID: <00a301c09434$e8cf8be0$30b342d5 interactiveinstitute.se> From: "David Jonsson" To: References: <3A854378.E745A1E4 ix.netcom.com> <3A867EC0.80F0953B@ix.netcom.com> Subject: Sideway drift of a lightray experiment performed Date: Sun, 11 Feb 2001 15:12:32 +0100 MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit X-Priority: 3 X-MSMail-Priority: Normal X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook Express 5.50.4522.1200 X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V5.50.4522.1200 Resent-Message-ID: <"T0YiY1.0.SG2.jufXw" mx1> Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/40718 X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com Status: O X-Status: Måns Gauffin (82 years old) in Stockholm has performed some very interesting measurements. He has projected a 300 meter long laserbeam on a surface and observed how the spot has moved during 3 months. I have his entire report here, paper only. It is in Swedish but the tables and graphs are readable for anyone. My explanation to the drift is that the earth is not an inertial systems. It rotates around its axis and around the sun and the beam is at rest regarding those two rotations. Right? (Mr Gauffin himself seems to be a supporter of absolute ether theory.) Can someone give the theoretical values so we have something to compare with? Mr. Gauffin just observed that the speed of the earth around the sun is 30 km/s and thus he estimated the maximum sideway drift to be 30 km/s/c= 1/10 000 which is confirmed by the maximum drift he observed. Does anyone know if someone else has performed similar measurements? Gauffin also made the measuremnents 22 meters below ground and detected no drift. How can we understand this? Do we have inertial systems in this regard inside earth? The ether drift or frame dragging should not be noticeable under these circumstances and they should definitely not be as large as to cancel the entire effect. David -- phone +46-703-000 370 or +46-8-783 24 49 Timezone GMT+1 From vortex-l-request eskimo.com Sun Feb 11 07:29:22 2001 Received: (from smartlst localhost) by mx1.eskimo.com (8.9.1a/8.8.8) id HAA25995; Sun, 11 Feb 2001 07:28:42 -0800 Resent-Date: Sun, 11 Feb 2001 07:28:42 -0800 Message-ID: <3A86A219.9A713786 ix.netcom.com> Date: Sun, 11 Feb 2001 08:30:52 -0600 From: Edmund Storms X-Mailer: Mozilla 4.5 (Macintosh; U; PPC) X-Accept-Language: en,pdf MIME-Version: 1.0 To: vortex-l eskimo.com Subject: Re: Photon in a cavity? References: <3A85F654.BADA2E94@ix.netcom.com> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii; x-mac-type="54455854"; x-mac-creator="4D4F5353" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Resent-Message-ID: <"HbfvT2.0.5M6.g-gXw" mx1> Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/40719 X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com Status: O X-Status: Mirrors work because an uniform discontinuity exists between two vastly different environments. As the photon wave penetrates the new environment, its wave front experiences cancellation in one direction and reinforcement in the other. No such discontinuity exists within a solid substance. The condition having the most discontinuity within a solid is a grain boundary. However, your model does not address this structure. In any case, an atom at a grain boundary experiences an inhomogeneous environment, not a uniform discontinuity. A uniform structure does not exists, a condition for a photon to be influenced. Regards, Ed Robin van Spaandonk wrote: > In reply to Edmund Storms's message of Sat, 10 Feb 2001 20:19:54 -0600: > [snip] > >The photon leaves the atom because from an atom's point of view, there > >is no such thing as a cavity. The atom is in a sea of electrons with no > >boundary. The idea of a boundary is a human construct. > [snip] > Please explain how mirrors work. > > Regards, > > Robin van Spaandonk > > A Future For Humanity see: http://users.bigpond.net.au/rvanspaa/ From vortex-l-request eskimo.com Sun Feb 11 07:42:29 2001 Received: (from smartlst localhost) by mx1.eskimo.com (8.9.1a/8.8.8) id HAA28595; Sun, 11 Feb 2001 07:39:51 -0800 Resent-Date: Sun, 11 Feb 2001 07:39:51 -0800 Message-ID: <3A86A49A.10B9DAD ix.netcom.com> Date: Sun, 11 Feb 2001 08:41:33 -0600 From: Edmund Storms X-Mailer: Mozilla 4.5 (Macintosh; U; PPC) X-Accept-Language: en,pdf MIME-Version: 1.0 To: vortex-l eskimo.com Subject: Re: Report: HotWater References: Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii; x-mac-type="54455854"; x-mac-creator="4D4F5353" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Resent-Message-ID: <"PZPK42.0.j-6.79hXw" mx1> Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/40720 X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com Status: O X-Status: While you may not have produced CF, you definitely have found a way to sterilize your water. Electrolytic action has been known for many years to kill bacteria in water and to remove many heavy elements. Indeed, the water thus produced, when mixed with untreated water, will also kill bacteria. If you use silver electrodes, the effect will be even larger. You might now have the luxury of a hot shower. Regards, Ed Storms xplorer wrote: > Having gotten to the point where I can resume my > periodic attempts at CF, I built a device that > replicates some aspects of what seemed to be > 'successful' runs from days gone by when I had > nothing but scrap metal and a VOM to try to > do things with. > > One of the things we don't have at our house is > hot water. I quit taking hot showers a long time > ago as the water here is so disgusting that > the skin quite literally crawls after a shower > - hot water exaggerates this phenomenon considerably. > The only way to survive this is to use antiseptic > soap and not rinse completely. And keep a healthy > attitude to boost the immune system. > > My wife and I have always wanted a hot water heater, > but we found that heating this water is worse > than taking cold showers, so this is what we have > done with for some time. > > Last night I managed to get my first 'CF' experiment > going, running 215 Vac 50 Hz through it for 3000 seconds. > This unit was immersed in a bucket of 20 measured liters > of tap water. > > Check my numbers if you would: > > 2000.02.10-23:55 > t T A Ttheory > 0 27.1 2.5 27.1 214 Vac > 600 31.0 2.3 30.8 214 Vac > 1200 35.0 2.3 34.3 214 Vac > 1800 38.0 2.4 37.9 214 Vac > 2400 42.1 3.0 42.1 214 Vac: Begin 185 Vdc > 3000 47.0 3.0 46.1 185 Vdc > > As you see, at 2400 seconds I routed the Ac through > a bridge rectifier to turn the AC into DC. > My meter is a piece of garbage which I can't really > trust very well as far as Ac volts are concerned, > but it does work quite well for DC. > It is linear, and the current measurements are reliable. > Current is always measured > using a DC rectification Bridge. > > Because it was quite late and I have lost a lot of sleep > recently, I miscalculated the numbers getting a value of > 80% efficiency and thought to myself, > 'oh well, it heats water'. > I quickly used this as my first hot water shower, > and noticed the itch was missing. > Just to be safe I placed the heating element > next to my geiger counter, getting no significant > change from background levels (That's _another_ story!). > > This morning as I reviewed the calculations I found my > error and now get 1.05 for efficiency. > > I quickly reran this and, using DC current, > get the following dataset: > > 2000.02.11-11:00 > t T A Ttheory > 0 30.0 2.20 30.0 184 Vdc > 600 ? 2.25 32.9 184 Vdc > 1200 ? 2.30 35.9 184 Vdc > 1800 ? 2.35 39.0 184 Vdc > 2400 44.3 2.35 42.1 184 Vdc > > Efficiency: 1.18 > > In order not to interfere with the process, > I let it run without taking interim > temperature samples, as taking samples > requires shutting off the power, due to > the need to stir the water to eliminate > temperature stratification in the bucket > I use. > > The calculated efficiency completely disregards > energy loss through such things as: > > 1) the plastic bucket (significant), > 2) through surface evaporation (minor?), > 3) through electrolytic separation (minor), > 4) through joule heating of the bridge circuit (significant). > > I don't disregard the possibility that some of the > unanticipated energy could be coming from pollutants, > but I will rerun this with distilled water to be sure. > > I am not claiming an OU success, > as I need to run a control using a joule heater > and I need to examine in detail every possible > aspect where I could be mistaken - starting > with replacing my meter with a data-logging setup > and refining the device and computations methodology. > > Any suggestions are welcome, > but my access to higher-order test equipment is quite > limited. > > In the meantime, I'm gonna mount this unit > on the bathroom wall and enjoy more hotwater showers... > > cheers, > Paul E. Anderson > > PS - The microwaved bottle experiment was null results - > I didn't have enough water inside it and not enough > loose nuts to try it on a waterlogged setup ;) > > From vortex-l-request eskimo.com Sun Feb 11 08:21:55 2001 Received: (from smartlst localhost) by mx1.eskimo.com (8.9.1a/8.8.8) id IAA06743; Sun, 11 Feb 2001 08:20:11 -0800 Resent-Date: Sun, 11 Feb 2001 08:20:11 -0800 Message-ID: <3A86AE25.7F69AA8C ix.netcom.com> Date: Sun, 11 Feb 2001 09:22:20 -0600 From: Edmund Storms X-Mailer: Mozilla 4.5 (Macintosh; U; PPC) X-Accept-Language: en,pdf MIME-Version: 1.0 To: vortex-l eskimo.com Subject: Re: Hydrino based CF References: <3A7C6FA4.9E2F82AA@ix.netcom.com> <3A7D6C64.80C32AF6@ix.netcom.com> <3A8011D6.60DF2DA5@ix.netcom.com> <3A8412F2.A1690733@ix.netcom.com> <3A855B5C.D087C718@ix.netcom.com> <5rdb8tkbhp0ohnroccgeub9voobnohceou@4ax.com> <3A85F55E.F05512DA@ix.netcom.com> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=iso-8859-1; x-mac-type="54455854"; x-mac-creator="4D4F5353" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit Resent-Message-ID: <"GrAbY2.0.Hf1.xkhXw" mx1> Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/40721 X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com Status: O X-Status: Robin van Spaandonk wrote: > In reply to Edmund Storms's message of Sat, 10 Feb 2001 20:15:48 -0600: > [snip] > >Making a statement about the power distribution is difficult because so few points are available. In > >addition, we do not know what fraction of the measured area is active. Pons and Fleischmann used very > >small samples which appear to give a high power density, although a small absolute power. People using > >sheets of Pd having a high area report a high power, but a lower power density. At this point, I can > >only conclude that most claimed power falls in a range much below 100 w/c^2. Therefore, a large range > >exists above this value. The distribution is unknown. Local power density, at the volcanos, could be > >very high indeed. > > So this really just means that if a random distribution of sites is > responsible, then the best that can be achieved with such a distribution at > present would appear to be about 100 W/cm^2? This statement assumes, as you state, that the sites are important. I suggest that the sites have no effect on CF and that another variable is important, a variable that has not been explored. The conditions created by this variable are hardly ever produced by nature. Once this variable is identified, the conditions can be produced in greater quantity, hence more EP. > > [snip] > >> True, only a successful experiment will tell this tale, or perhaps more > >> accurately, a proper accounting of void size and number across both working > >> and failed cathodes, such that eventual correlations could be determined. > >> [snip] > > > >This study, you will agree, would cost a bundle. > > I guess you have a better idea of this than I, so I defer to your judgement. Thanks > > [snip] > >> >> I suspect that "the right size" is just big enough for three H atoms to > >> >> bounce around a bit, but not much bigger. This would tend to keep them in > >> >> close proximity until either H2 or Hy is formed. > >> > > >> >How big is a void that allows 3 H to "bounce around"? > >> > >> Given a radius of .79 Å for H, and arranging three of them in an equilateral > >> triangle, I get a sphere with a minimum radius of 1.7 Å. It seems that a > > In a later post I corrected this to 1.14 Å. > [snip] > >filled. I have proposed in the past that PdD2 can form when the sites become mostly filled and that > >this structure consists of D2 in each D site. Although, this suggestion has nothing to do with the > >Mills model, you might argue that this is the smoking gun for your proposal. > > Yes, I do remember reading it before. > Based upon an "a" value for Pd of 3.8908 Å, I just did a quick calculation > to determine the size of the spaces between the Pd atoms, if we assume that > they touch along the diagonals of the faces of the cube (in an fcc lattice). > I came up with exactly 1.14 Å at closest approach in the centre of the cube > (some coincidence!). IOW there is exactly enough room for three deuterons in > the normal lattice spacing between all Pd atoms. If I have done my sums > right this time, then that would result in PdD2.25, if as many as possible > were packed in. IOW before Mills catalysis could occur, the local D:Pd ratio > would need to be 2.25:1, which seems to be in line with the difficulty of > achieving the right conditions. > BTW this completely does away with the point defect notion. > (I had previously simply assumed that there wasn't normally enough room for > three Ds together in a normal lattice). This might explain the unique conditions in Pd, but it does not explain how other materials, such as Pt, become active. Pt does not react with H to any significant degree. > > [snip] > >Bending the material will introduce many point defects in the Pd sublattice. Removing D will produce > >defects in the D sublattice. Neither seems to increase production of EP. > > In light of the above, now understandable. > [snip] > >> >The problem with the volcano observation, which I believe, is that once the material gets very hot, > >> >the structure and/or unique chemical compound is lost. At this point, energy production stops and > >> >temperature can rise no further. So why does sufficient liquid form to produce an ejection? > >> > >> If the mechanism is Mills based, with He+ catalyst in voids in the metal, > >> then it thrives in a hot plasma environment (and won't run at all in a gas > >> environment). In this case, the reaction will proceed either until all the D > >> in the cavity is used up, or until the metal > >> between the cavity and the outside edge of the cathode has become too weak > >> to support the enormous pressure generated in the cavity. > >> This could happen either because the cavity is very close to the surface, or > >> because the metal has started to melt. > >> As the number of hydrinos present in the cavity increases, > >> disproportionation reactions also start to play a role. This has the effect > >> of increasing the amount of catalyst present, and speeding up the energy > >> release. > > > >Granted, more energy would be released. How would this energy produce more molten Pd? After all, once > >molten Pd is produced anywhere, energy production stops in that region. > > I suspect that when this plasma mode regime gets going, the reaction is all > over and done with in nano-seconds, before the Pd even has time to react. > Consequently the "volcanic eruption" doesn't occur until after the actual > energy production is finished. The inner surface of such a void would have > evaporated and contributed to the plasma, but the metal lattice is not a > contributor to the reaction. It simply provides a containment. The hot > plasma eventually cools by shedding heat to the metal (in microseconds), > causing it to melt, and "erupt" if near the surface. (The pressure is also > extreme, as a consequence of the high temperature). This may be the explanation, but I have no idea how it might be tested. > > [snip] > >> Is this paper available on line? > >> Suggestion for Eugene if you are watching: > >> Start a collection of the best papers in HTML (preferably, but PDF also > >> possible), on the IE web site. It would draw more people to the site, and > >> you have more clout than most, when it comes to getting authors to provide > >> papers. It would also make it easier for them to cross access one another's > >> work, as well as making their papers more accessible to the public in > >> general, than publishing in journals. Of course I would only expect them to > >> allow this after their paper had been published in a journal. > > > >This information is not available on line. If you are interested, I can cite some references. > > If it isn't any trouble. The likelihood that I will follow up a library > reference however is about 1000 times lower than for a web reference. > [snip] > >This is way over the equilibrium solubility limit. I have no idea what this would do to the strength of > >the lattice. > > Given the above, I think we can dump the carbon suggestion (see, > brainstorming is useful, we've already disposed of a whole set of > experiments, just by talking about it ;). This is progress! > > [snip] > >I'm not excluding Mills. I just do not see any evidence that voids play a role. However, the hydrinos > >may produce an effect in other ways. Unless the hydrino model is better understood, I suggest that > >trying to prove that voids are important would be too costly compared to other more obvious > >possibilities. > > You seem to have been prescient here, or perhaps it's the experience showing > :). I hope it is experience. > > [snip] > >> >> Come to think of it, most of the transition metals can be used as a cathode, > >> >> where H would form before H2 anyway, so in that sense perhaps any of them > >> >> would suffice to some extent. > >> > > >> >In an electrolytic cell, the H2 is already split. > >> > >> If you reread my last sentence carefully, you will see that that was already > >> implied. > > > >In which case metals such as Fe, that you note can split H2, would not be needed. > > Indeed. That was implied above when I wrote "Come to think of it...". Point taken. > > [snip] > > However most metals won't be able to accommodate at least three D atoms > simultaneously. It might be interesting to see which ones will. I suggest that all metals would be able to accept three D simultaneously provided a high enough pressure were applied. The problem is the practical pressure limit. Even electrolysis has its limit. In addition, most metals become very brittle and pulverize when they react with D, hence can not be used as a cathode. Nature does not cooperate very well. > > [snip] > >> >As for the Mills model, I offer the following basic problem. The Mills model proposes that an > >> >electron can enter an orbit near enough to the nucleus to allow the combination to enter another > >> >nucleus. The result of two D nuclei combining would be He-4, which requires the formation of a > >> >neutron within the combined structure. Formation of a neutron requires energy (0.75 MeV) and > >> >involves a neutrino. From where does this energy and neutrino come? Be careful when you answer this > >> >question not to provide another implausible unproved process as an explanation. > >> No implausible other process is necessary, as you have misunderstood the > >> nuclear process. When two D nuclei fuse to form He4, no neutron formation > >> (i.e. weak force moderated nuclear reaction) is required. > > > >This is not correct. The He-4 nucleus contains 2 neutrons which do not care how they were formed. > > Indeed, but in 2 D nuclei, they already exist. No neutron formation is > required. As I understand the process, somehow the barrier must be overcome. This is done by the proton being converted to a virtual neutron. In this case of D, this would result in two neutrons stuck together long enough to react with the other D. Ejection of an electron restores the structure to He-4. If two D can just get together without overcoming the barrier in this manner, who needs Mills? > > > >Their properties are not different just because they were formed by a proton and electron coming > >together. Therefore, the formation process must supply all the ingredients known to be in a neutron. > > Once again, the neutrons already exist, and don't need to be formed. Note the comment above. > > > >If > >0.75 MeV is not supplied, then the He-4 nucleus so formed would have a lower energy than every other > >He-4 nucleus. Are you proposing that the hydrino process produces low energy He-4? > > The primary function of the hydrino process would be to bring the two D > nuclei close enough together to fuse. IOW it provides a way "around" the > Coulomb barrier. OK, I see what you are saying. The electron never enters into a nuclear reaction but is just an innocent bystander providing a charge to counter the barrier. The problem is that you would have to have two hydrinos come together to have enough charge neutralization. In addition, you would have to assume that the electron is so tightly bound within the "chemical" orbit that it would not be sucked into the fusing nucleus. In any case, from the observers point of view, the fusion reaction would seem to produce two beta emissions having the energy of the electron within the hydrino. This might be something work looking for. > > [snip] > >> IOW He4 is essentially just to D nuclei joined together. > > > >This is not correct either. > > Qua energy no, it isn't correct. However it is correct qua number and type > of nucleons, and that is what I meant. > > >When the two D combine, 24 MeV is released, hence the mass decreases, and a > >nucleus is formed having entirely different properties. Some models even suggest that the proton and > >neutron do not exist as distinct particles within the nucleus, but as a complex stew involving more > >basic particles. > > Doubtless also a possibility, however in this case the sums just shift to > counting more fundamental particles. The result is the same. The numbers of > such, don't change during the fusion process. > As to what sacrifices some of its mass during the process, I don't think you > will be able to get a straight answer from any nuclear physicist. > > I don't understand why you are talking about creating neutrons. This comment has to do with how far the p-e reaction must go before the p is allowed to fuse with the other p. You assume the e does not react with the p while I assume such a reaction is necessary. I don't think we can resolve this issue with debate. Regards, Ed Storms From vortex-l-request eskimo.com Sun Feb 11 08:58:33 2001 Received: (from smartlst localhost) by mx1.eskimo.com (8.9.1a/8.8.8) id IAA20176; Sun, 11 Feb 2001 08:56:19 -0800 Resent-Date: Sun, 11 Feb 2001 08:56:19 -0800 From: "xplorer" To: Subject: Report: HotWater, Run 3 =1.20 Date: Sun, 11 Feb 2001 23:56:07 +0700 Message-ID: MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-Priority: 3 (Normal) X-MSMail-Priority: Normal X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook IMO, Build 9.0.2416 (9.0.2910.0) X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V4.72.3110.3 In-Reply-To: Importance: Normal Resent-Message-ID: <"8YhtR3.0.5x4.oGiXw" mx1> Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/40722 X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com Status: O X-Status: Third measured run (other than normal domestic use) After small geometry modification... 2000.02.11-22:00 187 Vdc 20 Kg H2O t T A Ttheory Efficiency 0 26.7 2.40 26.7 1.00 900 2.30 31.5 1800 38.8 2.30 36.1 1.29 2700 2.20 40.7 3600 48.8 2.15 45.1 1.12 1.20 From vortex-l-request eskimo.com Sun Feb 11 09:12:28 2001 Received: (from smartlst localhost) by mx1.eskimo.com (8.9.1a/8.8.8) id JAA25072; Sun, 11 Feb 2001 09:09:48 -0800 Resent-Date: Sun, 11 Feb 2001 09:09:48 -0800 From: "xplorer" To: Subject: RE: Report: HotWater Date: Mon, 12 Feb 2001 00:09:38 +0700 Message-ID: MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-Priority: 3 (Normal) X-MSMail-Priority: Normal X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook IMO, Build 9.0.2416 (9.0.2910.0) X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V4.72.3110.3 In-Reply-To: <3A86A49A.10B9DAD ix.netcom.com> Importance: Normal Resent-Message-ID: <"G8VBT1.0.g76.STiXw" mx1> Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/40723 X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com Status: O X-Status: > From: Edmund Storms [mailto:storms2 ix.netcom.com] > Sent: 2001 February 11, Sunday 21:42 > Subject: Re: Report: HotWater > > > While you may not have produced CF, you definitely have found a > way to sterilize your water. Electrolytic action has been known > for many years to kill bacteria in water and to remove many > heavy elements. Indeed, the water thus produced, when mixed > with untreated water, will also kill bacteria. If you use > silver electrodes, the effect will be even larger. You might now > have the luxury of a hot shower. Thanx for the info - I suspected as much, but I had discounted the possibility - I haven't read that much on the biological aspects of electrolysis. I have seen UV treatment systems we use in remote locations for cleaning the swampwater for our base camps, but I haven't managed to generate any UV in this just yet. At this point I'm just happy to have hot water again for the toilet. It is a bit rusty, but that's due to the low-grade pipe I used in building this. I do plan to try silver when I get the funds to replace the cathode... On the removal of heavy elements: Where do they go ? I do get a bit of floating sludge from this, and I assumed this was all ferric hydroxides and oxides (everything in this is steel). cheers... From vortex-l-request eskimo.com Sun Feb 11 09:33:29 2001 Received: (from smartlst localhost) by mx1.eskimo.com (8.9.1a/8.8.8) id JAA32089; Sun, 11 Feb 2001 09:31:16 -0800 Resent-Date: Sun, 11 Feb 2001 09:31:16 -0800 Date: Sun, 11 Feb 2001 09:29:47 -0800 From: Jones Beene Subject: Re: Photon in a cavity? To: vortex-l eskimo.com Message-id: <3A86CC0B.9080202 pacbell.net> MIME-version: 1.0 Content-type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii; format=flowed Content-transfer-encoding: 7bit User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (Windows; U; Win98; en-US; m18) Gecko/20001108 Netscape6/6.0 X-Accept-Language: en References: Resent-Message-ID: <"O61qg2.0.Dr7.ZniXw" mx1> Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/40724 X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com Status: O X-Status: Robin van Spaandonk wrote: > Suppose that an atom in a cavity in metal tries to emit a photon of a > wavelength that is larger than the cavity. > What happens? Robin, A cavity of restricted size is not at all unusual. Also, I think the "exit path" or waveguide out of the cavity is as important as the cavity itself, but in either case a "harmonic ratio" can be more important than a constricted size, per se. I have been recently modifying a microwave cavity, for instance, and it is interesting that although the chamber was designed to produce 2450 Mhz radiation - about 12 cm, the manufacturer used a quarter wave length diameter chamber of only ~ 3 cm. I had assumed that quarter wavelength was an optimal waveguide dimension or antenna length, but had assumed that the chamber itself would be a full wavelength. Also, the waveguide for this magnetron is curious, a ~1 cm dia circular tube - more often they are rectangular. Since the unit is rated at about 60% efficiency it doesn't seem to suffer much from the size constraints (which were undoubtedly manufacturing considerations). Jones From vortex-l-request eskimo.com Sun Feb 11 09:38:11 2001 Received: (from smartlst localhost) by mx1.eskimo.com (8.9.1a/8.8.8) id JAA00837; Sun, 11 Feb 2001 09:36:11 -0800 Resent-Date: Sun, 11 Feb 2001 09:36:11 -0800 Message-ID: <3A86CD12.BC4DE252 groupz.net> Date: Sun, 11 Feb 2001 12:34:10 -0500 From: sno X-Mailer: Mozilla 4.76 [en] (Win98; U) X-Accept-Language: en,x-ns1siWpfcUINhQ,x-ns2r2d09OnmPe2 MIME-Version: 1.0 To: vortex-l eskimo.com Subject: Re: Sideway drift of a lightray experiment performed References: <3A854378.E745A1E4 ix.netcom.com> <3A867EC0.80F0953B@ix.netcom.com> <00a301c09434$e8cf8be0$30b342d5@interactiveinstitute.se> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=iso-8859-1 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit Resent-Message-ID: <"eKLDX.0.zC.AsiXw" mx1> Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/40725 X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com Status: O X-Status: Have heard of experiment back in the 20's, when they lowered a plumb line into mile long mine shaft....and line did not point to center of earth.... don't know if this is same effect you are talking about....steve David Jonsson wrote: > > Måns Gauffin (82 years old) in Stockholm has performed some very interesting > > Gauffin also made the measuremnents 22 meters below ground and detected no > drift. How can we understand this? Do we have inertial systems in this > regard inside earth? The ether drift or frame dragging should not be > noticeable under these circumstances and they should definitely not be as > large as to cancel the entire effect. > > David > > -- > phone +46-703-000 370 or +46-8-783 24 49 Timezone GMT+1 From vortex-l-request eskimo.com Sun Feb 11 10:31:35 2001 Received: (from smartlst localhost) by mx1.eskimo.com (8.9.1a/8.8.8) id KAA16846; Sun, 11 Feb 2001 10:27:48 -0800 Resent-Date: Sun, 11 Feb 2001 10:27:48 -0800 Message-Id: Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Date: Sun, 11 Feb 2001 09:37:31 -0900 To: vortex-l eskimo.com From: hheffner mtaonline.net (Horace Heffner) Subject: Re: Report: HotWater Resent-Message-ID: <"Ey_2h1.0.874.ZcjXw" mx1> Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/40726 X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com Status: O X-Status: At 4:37 PM 2/11/1, xplorer wrote: >In the meantime, I'm gonna mount this unit > on the bathroom wall and enjoy more hotwater showers... > >cheers, >Paul E. Anderson This may not be a good idea! It is not a good idea to introduce currents into a water supply system because it can cause corrosion and also unexpected shocks or electrocution. Hopefully you are running your device from a GFCI plug. If it won't run from a GFCI plug then it is not safe. Regards, Horace Heffner From vortex-l-request eskimo.com Sun Feb 11 10:49:40 2001 Received: (from smartlst localhost) by mx1.eskimo.com (8.9.1a/8.8.8) id KAA21347; Sun, 11 Feb 2001 10:41:40 -0800 Resent-Date: Sun, 11 Feb 2001 10:41:40 -0800 Message-ID: <3A86CF54.D51A5DC4 ix.netcom.com> Date: Sun, 11 Feb 2001 11:44:09 -0600 From: Edmund Storms X-Mailer: Mozilla 4.5 (Macintosh; U; PPC) X-Accept-Language: en,pdf MIME-Version: 1.0 To: vortex-l eskimo.com Subject: Re: Report: HotWater References: Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii; x-mac-type="54455854"; x-mac-creator="4D4F5353" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Resent-Message-ID: <"JS5BD2.0.MD5.ZpjXw" mx1> Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/40727 X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com Status: O X-Status: xplorer wrote: > > From: Edmund Storms [mailto:storms2 ix.netcom.com] > > Sent: 2001 February 11, Sunday 21:42 > > Subject: Re: Report: HotWater > > > > > > While you may not have produced CF, you definitely have found a > > way to sterilize your water. Electrolytic action has been known > > for many years to kill bacteria in water and to remove many > > heavy elements. Indeed, the water thus produced, when mixed > > with untreated water, will also kill bacteria. If you use > > silver electrodes, the effect will be even larger. You might now > > have the luxury of a hot shower. > > Thanx for the info - I suspected as much, > but I had discounted the possibility - > I haven't read that much on the biological aspects > of electrolysis. > I have seen UV treatment systems we use in remote > locations for cleaning the swampwater for our > base camps, but I haven't managed to generate any UV > in this just yet. At this point I'm just happy > to have hot water again for the toilet. > It is a bit rusty, but that's due to the low-grade > pipe I used in building this. > I do plan to try silver when I get the funds to > replace the cathode... > > On the removal of heavy elements: > Where do they go ? I do get a bit of floating sludge > from this, and I assumed this was all ferric > hydroxides and oxides (everything in this is steel). They will mostly plate on the cathode. In addition, any material that does not stick will be rendered inert as a sludge. You will not be able to change the hardness this way, but you can remove most of the iron and other similar metals. If you keep track of the pH, you should see the pH decrease as the process works. Sounds like you could use a water softener. By the way, too much iron in the water you drink can cause serious health problems. Regards, Ed > > > cheers... From vortex-l-request eskimo.com Sun Feb 11 11:12:51 2001 Received: (from smartlst localhost) by mx1.eskimo.com (8.9.1a/8.8.8) id LAA29964; Sun, 11 Feb 2001 11:06:46 -0800 Resent-Date: Sun, 11 Feb 2001 11:06:46 -0800 Message-ID: <3A870D4A.28DE bellsouth.net> Date: Sun, 11 Feb 2001 14:08:10 -0800 From: Terry Blanton X-Mailer: Mozilla 3.01C-BLS20 (Win16; U) MIME-Version: 1.0 To: vortex-l eskimo.com Subject: Re: Report: HotWater References: <3A86A49A.10B9DAD@ix.netcom.com> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Resent-Message-ID: <"CLZ9l1.0.1K7.6BkXw" mx1> Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/40728 X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com Status: O X-Status: Edmund Storms wrote: > > While you may not have produced CF, you definitely have found a > way to sterilize your water. Electrolytic action has been known > for many years to kill bacteria in water and to remove many > heavy elements. Indeed, the water thus produced, when mixed > with untreated water, will also kill bacteria. If you use > silver electrodes, the effect will be even larger. You might now > have the luxury of a hot shower. Actually, one silver and one copper works more better. The silver is rough on the fauna and the copper is no friend to the flora. Terry From vortex-l-request eskimo.com Sun Feb 11 12:29:09 2001 Received: (from smartlst localhost) by mx1.eskimo.com (8.9.1a/8.8.8) id MAA25451; Sun, 11 Feb 2001 12:24:13 -0800 Resent-Date: Sun, 11 Feb 2001 12:24:13 -0800 Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1" X-Sender: mjones pop.jump.net (Unverified) Message-Id: In-Reply-To: <3A858151.F81468BD ix.netcom.com> References: <3A6C9BA9.3F2EE932 ix.netcom.com> <9onp6toob4ul639i7qbplu31frdsg4cj12 4ax.com> <3A7C3CC4.6C576A56 ix.netcom.com> <3A7C6FA4.9E2F82AA ix.netcom.com> <3A7D6C64.80C32AF6 ix.netcom.com> <3A8011D6.60DF2DA5 ix.netcom.com> <3A8412F2.A1690733 ix.netcom.com> Date: Sun, 11 Feb 2001 10:13:49 -0600 To: vortex-l eskimo.com From: Mitchell Jones Subject: Arata's Cathodes Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit X-MIME-Autoconverted: from quoted-printable to 8bit by mx1.eskimo.com id MAA25427 Resent-Message-ID: <"tpIfi3.0.bD6.jJlXw" mx1> Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/40729 X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com Status: O X-Status: >Mike Carrell wrote: > >> q037fd4omn 4ax.com> >> Subject: Re: Hydrino based CF >> Date: Sat, 10 Feb 2001 13:17:21 -0800 >> MIME-Version: 1.0 >> Content-Type: text/plain; >> charset="iso-8859-1" >> Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit >> X-Priority: 3 >> X-MSMail-Priority: Normal >> X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook Express 5.50.4522.1200 >> X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V5.50.4522.1200 >> >> About the Arata cathodes: >> >> It is possibly no coincidence that Arata's associate is a professor in a >> metallurgical institute. Arata has evidence that very high pressures develop >> within the cathode cavity. Pd is a very difficult material to machine and >> weld, which are necessary in fabricating the cathode shell. Thus others who >> lacked the necessary metallurgical know-how may have been unable to make a >> suitable cathode shell. >> >> This search for the magic set of parameters suggests some variation on >> combinatorial chemistry, the systematic exploration of parameters which >> mimic evolutionary processes. This will take capital and thinking outside >> the box and test tube. >> >> Unless someone has a theory.... > >All very true, but everyone has a theory including Arata. At present, >insufficient information exists to determine which is correct. Ed Storms wrote: > >My explanation, for what its worth, requires that the surface of the Pd-black >be free of adsorbed impurity. Otherwise, no room exists for the D. Even >Arata >does not do a very good job of cleaning his Pd-black. Therefore, I predict >that only a very small fraction of the material is active. The skill in making >the container is to eliminate all leaks, a condition that is very difficult to >achieve using such materials. Any leak will allow the Pd-black to be >recontaminated. In addition, the Pd-black must not be heated above about 75°C >during the welding process because above this temperature it will sinter, >thereby eliminating the high surface area. ***{I seem to recall that Pd foil is available. If so, why weld at all: simply place some appropriately cleaned Pd-black in the center of a square piece of foil, fold it up, and twist the excess into a spiral around the cathode lead. Result: no weld, no heat, no sintering, etc. (Just a thought! :-) --MJ}*** In addition, Pd-black comes in many >different forms, depending on how it is produced. The form Arata has chosen >seems to work while other forms may not. Once again, we are presented with a >materials problem, not a physics problem. > >Ed Storms ***{An obvious try at cleaning this material would be to employ it as an anode for awhile, thereby encouraging the surface impurities to plate out on the cathode, then pull it out of the solution and employ it as a cathode in a different cell. Since this seems obvious, I assume it has been done. The question is, why doesn't it work? Surely there is a voltage/current combination that is capable of removing surface impurities from these materials! Thus I would tend to suspect that the removal of all impurities is *not* the key--that, instead, there may be bad impurities which need to be removed, and good impurities that need to be attached, and the trick is to somehow do both. --MJ}*** ________________ Quote of the month: "Law is what the authorities use to ride the country." --Anatoly Schransky From vortex-l-request eskimo.com Sun Feb 11 14:18:22 2001 Received: (from smartlst localhost) by mx1.eskimo.com (8.9.1a/8.8.8) id OAA32525; Sun, 11 Feb 2001 14:10:52 -0800 Resent-Date: Sun, 11 Feb 2001 14:10:52 -0800 Message-ID: <3A870055.947C0E1E ix.netcom.com> Date: Sun, 11 Feb 2001 15:13:34 -0600 From: Edmund Storms X-Mailer: Mozilla 4.5 (Macintosh; U; PPC) X-Accept-Language: en,pdf MIME-Version: 1.0 To: vortex-l eskimo.com Subject: Re: Arata's Cathodes References: <3A6C9BA9.3F2EE932 ix.netcom.com> <9onp6toob4ul639i7qbplu31frdsg4cj12 4ax.com> <3A7C3CC4.6C576A56 ix.netcom.com> <3A7C6FA4.9E2F82AA ix.netcom.com> <3A7D6C64.80C32AF6 ix.netcom.com> <3A8011D6.60DF2DA5 ix.netcom.com> <3A8412F2.A1690733 ix.netcom.com> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=iso-8859-1; x-mac-type="54455854"; x-mac-creator="4D4F5353" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit Resent-Message-ID: <"cWI3f3.0.5y7.htmXw" mx1> Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/40730 X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com Status: O X-Status: Mitchell Jones wrote: > >Mike Carrell wrote: > > > >> q037fd4omn 4ax.com> > >> Subject: Re: Hydrino based CF > >> Date: Sat, 10 Feb 2001 13:17:21 -0800 > >> MIME-Version: 1.0 > >> Content-Type: text/plain; > >> charset="iso-8859-1" > >> Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit > >> X-Priority: 3 > >> X-MSMail-Priority: Normal > >> X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook Express 5.50.4522.1200 > >> X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V5.50.4522.1200 > >> > >> About the Arata cathodes: > >> > >> It is possibly no coincidence that Arata's associate is a professor in a > >> metallurgical institute. Arata has evidence that very high pressures develop > >> within the cathode cavity. Pd is a very difficult material to machine and > >> weld, which are necessary in fabricating the cathode shell. Thus others who > >> lacked the necessary metallurgical know-how may have been unable to make a > >> suitable cathode shell. > >> > >> This search for the magic set of parameters suggests some variation on > >> combinatorial chemistry, the systematic exploration of parameters which > >> mimic evolutionary processes. This will take capital and thinking outside > >> the box and test tube. > >> > >> Unless someone has a theory.... > > > >All very true, but everyone has a theory including Arata. At present, > >insufficient information exists to determine which is correct. > > Ed Storms wrote: > > > >My explanation, for what its worth, requires that the surface of the Pd-black > >be free of adsorbed impurity. Otherwise, no room exists for the D. Even > >Arata > >does not do a very good job of cleaning his Pd-black. Therefore, I predict > >that only a very small fraction of the material is active. The skill in making > >the container is to eliminate all leaks, a condition that is very difficult to > >achieve using such materials. Any leak will allow the Pd-black to be > >recontaminated. In addition, the Pd-black must not be heated above about 75°C > >during the welding process because above this temperature it will sinter, > >thereby eliminating the high surface area. > > ***{I seem to recall that Pd foil is available. If so, why weld at all: > simply place some appropriately cleaned Pd-black in the center of a square > piece of foil, fold it up, and twist the excess into a spiral around the > cathode lead. Result: no weld, no heat, no sintering, etc. (Just a thought! > :-) --MJ}*** Pd-black will absorb any gas in the environment onto its surface. As delivered, the material contains mostly H2O, CO2 and CO. CO is the most difficult to remove. The method of cleansing involves pumping on the material until a good vacuum is achieved. The cell is then backfilled with H2 and this gas is again pumped out, taking with it another small fraction of adsorbed gas. The process is called a hydrogen wash and has been studied extensively at LANL. Arata does this process several times. Unfortunately, dozens of times are required to fully clean Pd-black. For the process to work, the container must be leak tight. A piece of foil would not work. > > > In addition, Pd-black comes in many > >different forms, depending on how it is produced. The form Arata has chosen > >seems to work while other forms may not. Once again, we are presented with a > >materials problem, not a physics problem. > > ***{An obvious try at cleaning this material would be to employ it as an > anode for awhile, thereby encouraging the surface impurities to plate out > on the cathode, then pull it out of the solution and employ it as a cathode > in a different cell. Since this seems obvious, I assume it has been done. > The question is, why doesn't it work? Surely there is a voltage/current > combination that is capable of removing surface impurities from these > materials! Thus I would tend to suspect that the removal of all impurities > is *not* the key--that, instead, there may be bad impurities which need to > be removed, and good impurities that need to be attached, and the trick is > to somehow do both. --MJ}*** As I noted above, all materials, including the electrolyte, must be kept away from the Pd-black for it to work as a hydrogen absorber. If this is not done, no hydrogen will be absorbed. Ed Storms From vortex-l-request eskimo.com Sun Feb 11 17:31:05 2001 Received: (from smartlst localhost) by mx1.eskimo.com (8.9.1a/8.8.8) id RAA16534; Sun, 11 Feb 2001 17:26:23 -0800 Resent-Date: Sun, 11 Feb 2001 17:26:23 -0800 From: Robin van Spaandonk To: vortex-l eskimo.com Subject: Re: Sideway drift of a lightray experiment performed Date: Mon, 12 Feb 2001 12:25:47 +1100 Organization: Improving Message-ID: References: <3A854378.E745A1E4 ix.netcom.com> <3A867EC0.80F0953B@ix.netcom.com> <00a301c09434$e8cf8be0$30b342d5@interactiveinstitute.se> In-Reply-To: <00a301c09434$e8cf8be0$30b342d5 interactiveinstitute.se> X-Mailer: Forte Agent 1.8/32.548 MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit X-MIME-Autoconverted: from quoted-printable to 8bit by mx1.eskimo.com id RAA16358 Resent-Message-ID: <"ENxut2.0.924._kpXw" mx1> Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/40731 X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com Status: O X-Status: In reply to David Jonsson's message of Sun, 11 Feb 2001 15:12:32 +0100: >Måns Gauffin (82 years old) in Stockholm has performed some very interesting >measurements. He has projected a 300 meter long laserbeam on a surface and >observed how the spot has moved during 3 months. I have his entire report >here, paper only. It is in Swedish but the tables and graphs are readable >for anyone. [snip] >Gauffin also made the measuremnents 22 meters below ground and detected no >drift. How can we understand this? Do we have inertial systems in this >regard inside earth? The ether drift or frame dragging should not be >noticeable under these circumstances and they should definitely not be as >large as to cancel the entire effect. Perhaps it was the surface that moved, not the laser beam (due to thermal expansion and contraction). When done underground, the temperature was probably fairly constant, so no change was observed. Regards, Robin van Spaandonk A Future For Humanity see: http://users.bigpond.net.au/rvanspaa/ From vortex-l-request eskimo.com Sun Feb 11 19:10:38 2001 Received: (from smartlst localhost) by mx1.eskimo.com (8.9.1a/8.8.8) id TAA25202; Sun, 11 Feb 2001 19:05:42 -0800 Resent-Date: Sun, 11 Feb 2001 19:05:42 -0800 From: "xplorer" To: Subject: RE: Report: HotWater Date: Mon, 12 Feb 2001 10:05:03 +0700 Message-ID: MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-Priority: 3 (Normal) X-MSMail-Priority: Normal X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook IMO, Build 9.0.2416 (9.0.2910.0) X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V4.72.3110.3 In-Reply-To: Importance: Normal Resent-Message-ID: <"rSVNJ3.0.e96.6CrXw" mx1> Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/40732 X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com Status: O X-Status: > From: Horace Heffner [mailto:hheffner mtaonline.net] > Sent: 2001 February 12, Monday 01:38 > Subject: Re: Report: HotWater > > At 4:37 PM 2/11/1, xplorer wrote: > > >In the meantime, I'm gonna mount this unit > > on the bathroom wall and enjoy more hotwater showers... > > > >cheers, > >Paul E. Anderson > > > This may not be a good idea! It is not a good idea to introduce currents > into a water supply system because it can cause corrosion and also > unexpected shocks or electrocution. Hopefully you are running your device > from a GFCI plug. If it won't run from a GFCI plug then it is not safe. This is a serious concern, and I haven't yet decided how to get the thing integrated. We don't have GFCI, but our plumbing is all plastic. I was thinking I could just put a piece of earthed steel at the inlet and outlet to trap any stray currents, but I reckon the safest method might be to make it a 'fill, heat, then drain' setup: suspending the tank under an earthed faucet which we would manually operate to fill the device, with the drain valve running through an earthed segment. The biggest problem with schemes like this is that the grounding points must *never* be allowed to corrode away, losing their ability to contain stray currents. Of course, if I could get the efficiency level to well above 2, then the power source can become completely internal to the unit, eliminating house current from the picture altogether... cheers From vortex-l-request eskimo.com Sun Feb 11 22:35:11 2001 Received: (from smartlst localhost) by mx1.eskimo.com (8.9.1a/8.8.8) id WAA12883; Sun, 11 Feb 2001 22:34:21 -0800 Resent-Date: Sun, 11 Feb 2001 22:34:21 -0800 Date: Mon, 12 Feb 2001 01:40:28 -0500 (EST) From: John Schnurer To: vortex-l eskimo.com Subject: Re: Photon in a cavity? In-Reply-To: <3A85F654.BADA2E94 ix.netcom.com> Message-ID: MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: TEXT/PLAIN; charset=US-ASCII Resent-Message-ID: <"w-b3K1.0.993.jFuXw" mx1> Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/40733 X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com Status: O X-Status: Bravo! A human construct ! We should adopt this guide post... and, when a question comes down the pike ask "Is this a human construct?" .....OR: ITAHC? On Sat, 10 Feb 2001, Edmund Storms wrote: > > > Robin van Spaandonk wrote: > > > Hi, > > > > Suppose that an atom in a cavity in metal tries to emit a photon of a > > wavelength that is larger than the cavity. > > What happens? > > The photon leaves the atom because from an atom's point of view, there > is no such thing as a cavity. The atom is in a sea of electrons with no > boundary. The idea of a boundary is a human construct. > > Regards, > Ed > > From vortex-l-request eskimo.com Sun Feb 11 22:47:01 2001 Received: (from smartlst localhost) by mx1.eskimo.com (8.9.1a/8.8.8) id WAA17640; Sun, 11 Feb 2001 22:44:16 -0800 Resent-Date: Sun, 11 Feb 2001 22:44:16 -0800 Mime-Version: 1.0 Message-Id: In-Reply-To: <3A856DE0.6000406 pacbell.net> References: <3A854378.E745A1E4 ix.netcom.com> <3A856DE0.6000406 pacbell.net> Date: Sun, 11 Feb 2001 12:43:19 -0600 To: vortex-l eskimo.com From: thomas malloy Subject: Re: fusion in the earth Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" ; format="flowed" Resent-Message-ID: <"QN_OB.0.KJ4._OuXw" mx1> Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/40734 X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com Status: O X-Status: The posting on neutrons coming out of the earth leads me to question if they would be doing the sort of damage to my body that being in the vacinity of a neutron emitter, just on a smaller scale? Thomas From vortex-l-request eskimo.com Mon Feb 12 05:10:34 2001 Received: (from smartlst localhost) by mx1.eskimo.com (8.9.1a/8.8.8) id FAA20300; Mon, 12 Feb 2001 05:09:02 -0800 Resent-Date: Mon, 12 Feb 2001 05:09:02 -0800 Message-ID: <001101c094fd$769b4d60$fc8f85ce fjsparber> Reply-To: "Frederick Sparber" From: "Frederick Sparber" To: Cc: Subject: Re: Neutrons from D2K- Hot W? Date: Mon, 12 Feb 2001 06:08:20 -0800 MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-Priority: 3 X-MSMail-Priority: Normal X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook Express 5.00.2615.200 X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V5.00.2615.200 Resent-Message-ID: <"EnBv72.0._y4.j1-Xw" mx1> Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/40735 X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com Status: O X-Status: It is possible that a Deuteron released when D2 strikes a heated Tungsten filament in the presence of Potassium vapor can momentarily form a neutral "Deuterino" or D* species which can cause "stripping" of the Neutron from the Deuteron even though the binding energy of the Neutron is ~ 2.23 Mev. The phenomenon of Deuteron stripping to a Neutron and Proton has been reported at plasma temperatures as low as ~ 0.5 eV (~ 5800 K). When the neutral Deuterino/D* species are formed the two particles are unbound by ~ 70 KeV, thus the Proton can become a neutral Hydrino or a neutral P* particle and cause the transmutation of the Tungsten into lighter elements with the release of energy. If nothing else the Potassium-Tungsten surface can lower the W work function and assist the splitting of D2 into 2 D atoms as well as catalyzing the formation of a Deutrino or D*. Early on when Scott was attempting to replicate Mills' work, the rapid destruction of the W filament in the presence of H2 Might have been due to this effect. However, using D2 instead of H2 Might release Neutrons which should be easier to detect than transmutation products. Regards, Frederick From vortex-l-request eskimo.com Mon Feb 12 07:18:24 2001 Received: (from smartlst localhost) by mx1.eskimo.com (8.9.1a/8.8.8) id HAA00969; Mon, 12 Feb 2001 07:16:30 -0800 Resent-Date: Mon, 12 Feb 2001 07:16:30 -0800 Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1" X-Sender: mjones pop.jump.net Message-Id: In-Reply-To: <3A870055.947C0E1E ix.netcom.com> References: <3A6C9BA9.3F2EE932 ix.netcom.com> <9onp6toob4ul639i7qbplu31frdsg4cj12 4ax.com> <3A7C3CC4.6C576A56 ix.netcom.com> <3A7C6FA4.9E2F82AA ix.netcom.com> <3A7D6C64.80C32AF6 ix.netcom.com> <3A8011D6.60DF2DA5 ix.netcom.com> <3A8412F2.A1690733 ix.netcom.com> Date: Mon, 12 Feb 2001 09:15:28 -0600 To: vortex-l eskimo.com From: Mitchell Jones Subject: Re: Arata's Cathodes Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit X-MIME-Autoconverted: from quoted-printable to 8bit by mx1.eskimo.com id HAA00935 Resent-Message-ID: <"ESDQo3.0.3F.Ev_Xw" mx1> Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/40736 X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com Status: O X-Status: >Mitchell Jones wrote: > >> >Mike Carrell wrote: >> > >> >> q037fd4omn 4ax.com> >> >> Subject: Re: Hydrino based CF >> >> Date: Sat, 10 Feb 2001 13:17:21 -0800 >> >> MIME-Version: 1.0 >> >> Content-Type: text/plain; >> >> charset="iso-8859-1" >> >> Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit >> >> X-Priority: 3 >> >> X-MSMail-Priority: Normal >> >> X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook Express 5.50.4522.1200 >> >> X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V5.50.4522.1200 >> >> >> >> About the Arata cathodes: >> >> >> >> It is possibly no coincidence that Arata's associate is a professor in a >> >> metallurgical institute. Arata has evidence that very high pressures >>develop >> >> within the cathode cavity. Pd is a very difficult material to machine and >> >> weld, which are necessary in fabricating the cathode shell. Thus >>others who >> >> lacked the necessary metallurgical know-how may have been unable to >>make a >> >> suitable cathode shell. >> >> >> >> This search for the magic set of parameters suggests some variation on >> >> combinatorial chemistry, the systematic exploration of parameters which >> >> mimic evolutionary processes. This will take capital and thinking outside >> >> the box and test tube. >> >> >> >> Unless someone has a theory.... >> > >> >All very true, but everyone has a theory including Arata. At present, >> >insufficient information exists to determine which is correct. >> >> Ed Storms wrote: >> > >> >My explanation, for what its worth, requires that the surface of the >>Pd-black >> >be free of adsorbed impurity. Otherwise, no room exists for the D. Even >> >Arata >> >does not do a very good job of cleaning his Pd-black. Therefore, I predict >> >that only a very small fraction of the material is active. The skill in >>making >> >the container is to eliminate all leaks, a condition that is very >>difficult to >> >achieve using such materials. Any leak will allow the Pd-black to be >> >recontaminated. In addition, the Pd-black must not be heated above >>about 75°C >> >during the welding process because above this temperature it will sinter, >> >thereby eliminating the high surface area. >> >> ***{I seem to recall that Pd foil is available. If so, why weld at all: >> simply place some appropriately cleaned Pd-black in the center of a square >> piece of foil, fold it up, and twist the excess into a spiral around the >> cathode lead. Result: no weld, no heat, no sintering, etc. (Just a thought! >> :-) --MJ}*** > >Pd-black will absorb any gas in the environment onto its surface. As >delivered, >the material contains mostly H2O, CO2 and CO. ***{Since the Pd-black is presumably exposed to the air when delivered, the above statement would seem to imply that it does not absorb nitrogen. Is this correct? --MJ}*** CO is the most difficult to >remove. The method of cleansing involves pumping on the material until a good >vacuum is achieved. The cell is then backfilled with H2 and this gas is again >pumped out, taking with it another small fraction of adsorbed gas. The >process is >called a hydrogen wash and has been studied extensively at LANL. Arata >does this >process several times. Unfortunately, dozens of times are required to >fully clean >Pd-black. > > For the process to work, the container must be leak tight. A piece of >foil would >not work. ***{Given that the answer to my question, above, is yes, then a piece of foil should work, if you ran the experiment in a pure nitrogen atmosphere. You would simply do the repeated hydrogen wash, as described above, then place the cleaned Pd-black in the center of a piece of Pd foil, fold the foil up and crumple it around the cathode lead while still in the hydrogen atmosphere, then backfill the chamber with N2, set up your cell, and run the experiment under those conditions. (Why wouldn't this be worth a shot?) --MJ}*** >> In addition, Pd-black comes in many >> >different forms, depending on how it is produced. The form Arata has >>chosen >> >seems to work while other forms may not. Once again, we are presented >>with a >> >materials problem, not a physics problem. >> >> ***{An obvious try at cleaning this material would be to employ it as an >> anode for awhile, thereby encouraging the surface impurities to plate out >> on the cathode, then pull it out of the solution and employ it as a cathode >> in a different cell. Since this seems obvious, I assume it has been done. >> The question is, why doesn't it work? Surely there is a voltage/current >> combination that is capable of removing surface impurities from these >> materials! Thus I would tend to suspect that the removal of all impurities >> is *not* the key--that, instead, there may be bad impurities which need to >> be removed, and good impurities that need to be attached, and the trick is >> to somehow do both. --MJ}*** > >As I noted above, all materials, including the electrolyte, must be kept >away from >the Pd-black for it to work as a hydrogen absorber. ***{Does this include nitrogen? Helium? Literally everything? Surely "all materials" have not been tested, and thus your above statement is based on *theory*, not experiment! In any case, assuming the statement is true, then I guess the foil-wrap idea would require running the experiment in a hydrogen atmosphere, which of course would be rather dangerous, due to the possibility of oxygen infiltration and an explosion. Still, given what is at stake here, I would think it is an avenue worth pursuing. My first thought along those lines would be to maintain the hydrogen atmosphere around the cell at, say, 20 psi, so that any leak would involve hydrogen flowing out of the chamber rather than oxygen flowing in. And make sure that the room is *very* well ventilated, to preclude a buildup of hydrogen. That should work. :-) --MJ}*** If this is not done, no >hydrogen will be absorbed. > >Ed Storms ________________ Quote of the month: "Law is what the authorities use to ride the country." --Anatoly Schransky From vortex-l-request eskimo.com Mon Feb 12 08:01:27 2001 Received: (from smartlst localhost) by mx1.eskimo.com (8.9.1a/8.8.8) id HAA23843; Mon, 12 Feb 2001 07:59:07 -0800 Resent-Date: Mon, 12 Feb 2001 07:59:07 -0800 Message-Id: <200102121558.f1CFwq418032 smtp-2u-1.atlantic.net> Date: Mon, 12 Feb 2001 11:7:58 -0500 From: "Michael T. Huffman" Reply-To: knuke LCIA.COM To: "vortex-l eskimo.com" Subject: Re: Cool application of buoyancy. (fwd) X-mailer: FoxMail 2.1 [en] Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Resent-Message-ID: <"EcSLo3.0.Tq5.AX0Yw" mx1> Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/40737 X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com Status: RO X-Status: At 2/9/01 4:56:00 PM, you wrote: >The Norwegian heavy transport ship "M/V Blue Marlin" did >the job by filling its hull with water, slipping under the disabled >USS Cole and then pumping air into the hull to displace the >water. Effectively scooping up the USS Cole. There are some >remarkable photos of the process at: > >http://geocities.com/rare_photos/ Ahoy Bill! They do this at a few dry docks in Seattle that I know of as well. Just for the record though, they don't pump air back into the hull to displace the water. They pump the water in the hull out, and the air just goes into the vents, naturally. It is much easier to do that way. Knuke From vortex-l-request eskimo.com Mon Feb 12 08:11:53 2001 Received: (from smartlst localhost) by mx1.eskimo.com (8.9.1a/8.8.8) id IAA28322; Mon, 12 Feb 2001 08:08:12 -0800 Resent-Date: Mon, 12 Feb 2001 08:08:12 -0800 Message-ID: <3A87FCB6.C4D99729 ix.netcom.com> Date: Mon, 12 Feb 2001 09:09:47 -0600 From: Edmund Storms X-Mailer: Mozilla 4.5 (Macintosh; U; PPC) X-Accept-Language: en,pdf MIME-Version: 1.0 To: vortex-l eskimo.com Subject: Re: Arata's Cathodes References: <3A6C9BA9.3F2EE932 ix.netcom.com> <9onp6toob4ul639i7qbplu31frdsg4cj12 4ax.com> <3A7C3CC4.6C576A56 ix.netcom.com> <3A7C6FA4.9E2F82AA ix.netcom.com> <3A7D6C64.80C32AF6 ix.netcom.com> <3A8011D6.60DF2DA5 ix.netcom.com> <3A8412F2.A1690733 ix.netcom.com> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=iso-8859-1; x-mac-type="54455854"; x-mac-creator="4D4F5353" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit Resent-Message-ID: <"wpTzv.0.Nw6.hf0Yw" mx1> Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/40738 X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com Status: O X-Status: Mitchell Jones wrote: > >Mitchell Jones wrote: > > > >> >Mike Carrell wrote: > >> > > >> >> q037fd4omn 4ax.com> > >> >> Subject: Re: Hydrino based CF > >> >> Date: Sat, 10 Feb 2001 13:17:21 -0800 > >> >> MIME-Version: 1.0 > >> >> Content-Type: text/plain; > >> >> charset="iso-8859-1" > >> >> Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit > >> >> X-Priority: 3 > >> >> X-MSMail-Priority: Normal > >> >> X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook Express 5.50.4522.1200 > >> >> X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V5.50.4522.1200 > >> >> > >> >> About the Arata cathodes: > >> >> > >> >> It is possibly no coincidence that Arata's associate is a professor in a > >> >> metallurgical institute. Arata has evidence that very high pressures > >>develop > >> >> within the cathode cavity. Pd is a very difficult material to machine and > >> >> weld, which are necessary in fabricating the cathode shell. Thus > >>others who > >> >> lacked the necessary metallurgical know-how may have been unable to > >>make a > >> >> suitable cathode shell. > >> >> > >> >> This search for the magic set of parameters suggests some variation on > >> >> combinatorial chemistry, the systematic exploration of parameters which > >> >> mimic evolutionary processes. This will take capital and thinking outside > >> >> the box and test tube. > >> >> > >> >> Unless someone has a theory.... > >> > > >> >All very true, but everyone has a theory including Arata. At present, > >> >insufficient information exists to determine which is correct. > >> > >> Ed Storms wrote: > >> > > >> >My explanation, for what its worth, requires that the surface of the > >>Pd-black > >> >be free of adsorbed impurity. Otherwise, no room exists for the D. Even > >> >Arata > >> >does not do a very good job of cleaning his Pd-black. Therefore, I predict > >> >that only a very small fraction of the material is active. The skill in > >>making > >> >the container is to eliminate all leaks, a condition that is very > >>difficult to > >> >achieve using such materials. Any leak will allow the Pd-black to be > >> >recontaminated. In addition, the Pd-black must not be heated above > >>about 75°C > >> >during the welding process because above this temperature it will sinter, > >> >thereby eliminating the high surface area. > >> > >> ***{I seem to recall that Pd foil is available. If so, why weld at all: > >> simply place some appropriately cleaned Pd-black in the center of a square > >> piece of foil, fold it up, and twist the excess into a spiral around the > >> cathode lead. Result: no weld, no heat, no sintering, etc. (Just a thought! > >> :-) --MJ}*** > > > >Pd-black will absorb any gas in the environment onto its surface. As > >delivered, > >the material contains mostly H2O, CO2 and CO. > > ***{Since the Pd-black is presumably exposed to the air when delivered, the > above statement would seem to imply that it does not absorb nitrogen. Is > this correct? --MJ}*** The material will absorb anything, N2 included. However, the other molecules are more tightly bound. > > > CO is the most difficult to > >remove. The method of cleansing involves pumping on the material until a good > >vacuum is achieved. The cell is then backfilled with H2 and this gas is again > >pumped out, taking with it another small fraction of adsorbed gas. The > >process is > >called a hydrogen wash and has been studied extensively at LANL. Arata > >does this > >process several times. Unfortunately, dozens of times are required to > >fully clean > >Pd-black. > > > > For the process to work, the container must be leak tight. A piece of > >foil would > >not work. > > ***{Given that the answer to my question, above, is yes, then a piece of > foil should work, if you ran the experiment in a pure nitrogen atmosphere. > You would simply do the repeated hydrogen wash, as described above, then > place the cleaned Pd-black in the center of a piece of Pd foil, fold the > foil up and crumple it around the cathode lead while still in the hydrogen > atmosphere, then backfill the chamber with N2, set up your cell, and run > the experiment under those conditions. (Why wouldn't this be worth a shot?) > --MJ}*** Presumably, you are suggesting that the foil cathode is placed in an electrolyte containing water, hence water vapor. How would you propose to prevent the Pd-black from picking up H2O vapor? > > > >> In addition, Pd-black comes in many > >> >different forms, depending on how it is produced. The form Arata has > >>chosen > >> >seems to work while other forms may not. Once again, we are presented > >>with a > >> >materials problem, not a physics problem. > >> > >> ***{An obvious try at cleaning this material would be to employ it as an > >> anode for awhile, thereby encouraging the surface impurities to plate out > >> on the cathode, then pull it out of the solution and employ it as a cathode > >> in a different cell. Since this seems obvious, I assume it has been done. > >> The question is, why doesn't it work? Surely there is a voltage/current > >> combination that is capable of removing surface impurities from these > >> materials! Thus I would tend to suspect that the removal of all impurities > >> is *not* the key--that, instead, there may be bad impurities which need to > >> be removed, and good impurities that need to be attached, and the trick is > >> to somehow do both. --MJ}*** > > > >As I noted above, all materials, including the electrolyte, must be kept > >away from > >the Pd-black for it to work as a hydrogen absorber. > > ***{Does this include nitrogen? Helium? Literally everything? Surely "all > materials" have not been tested, and thus your above statement is based on > *theory*, not experiment! In any case, assuming the statement is true, then > I guess the foil-wrap idea would require running the experiment in a > hydrogen atmosphere, which of course would be rather dangerous, due to the > possibility of oxygen infiltration and an explosion. Still, given what is > at stake here, I would think it is an avenue worth pursuing. My first > thought along those lines would be to maintain the hydrogen atmosphere > around the cell at, say, 20 psi, so that any leak would involve hydrogen > flowing out of the chamber rather than oxygen flowing in. And make sure > that the room is *very* well ventilated, to preclude a buildup of hydrogen. > That should work. :-) --MJ}*** No one who has any experience with Pd-black would even consider such an approach. Unless you want to try this approach yourself, it is a suggestion that will go nowhere. Ed Storms From vortex-l-request eskimo.com Mon Feb 12 08:20:22 2001 Received: (from smartlst localhost) by mx1.eskimo.com (8.9.1a/8.8.8) id IAA31245; Mon, 12 Feb 2001 08:14:50 -0800 Resent-Date: Mon, 12 Feb 2001 08:14:50 -0800 Message-ID: <3A87FE6C.9AEEA2A6 ix.netcom.com> Date: Mon, 12 Feb 2001 09:17:05 -0600 From: Edmund Storms X-Mailer: Mozilla 4.5 (Macintosh; U; PPC) X-Accept-Language: en,pdf MIME-Version: 1.0 To: vortex-l eskimo.com Subject: Re: fusion in the earth References: <3A854378.E745A1E4 ix.netcom.com> <3A856DE0.6000406 pacbell.net> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii; x-mac-type="54455854"; x-mac-creator="4D4F5353" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Resent-Message-ID: <"8rI8P3.0.5e7.wl0Yw" mx1> Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/40739 X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com Status: O X-Status: Have no fear. Many more neutrons come from cosmic ray bombardment than from the earth, yet you survive. In addition your body is continuously bombarded by radiation from potassium-40. yet you survive. Then there is the radon in the air and the uranium in the water. Clearly, the human body is designed to handle small levels of radiation. In fact, some people cite evidence that this radiation stimulates the immune system. Ed Storms thomas malloy wrote: > The posting on neutrons coming out of the earth leads me to question > if they would be doing the sort of damage to my body that being in > the vacinity of a neutron emitter, just on a smaller scale? > > Thomas From vortex-l-request eskimo.com Mon Feb 12 08:27:17 2001 Received: (from smartlst localhost) by mx1.eskimo.com (8.9.1a/8.8.8) id IAA03116; Mon, 12 Feb 2001 08:22:09 -0800 Resent-Date: Mon, 12 Feb 2001 08:22:09 -0800 Message-Id: <5.0.2.1.2.20010212111959.00b156f0 pop.mindspring.com> X-Sender: jedrothwell pop.mindspring.com X-Mailer: QUALCOMM Windows Eudora Version 5.0.2 Date: Mon, 12 Feb 2001 11:21:50 -0500 To: vortex-L eskimo.com From: Jed Rothwell Subject: S. F. Chronicle: Utilities opposed alternative energy Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"; format=flowed Resent-Message-ID: <"fiTIH3.0.Zm.ms0Yw" mx1> Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/40740 X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com Status: RO X-Status: Not a surprise. See: www.sfgate.com A Lost Opportunity That Worsened Crisis Utilities and federal regulators shut the door on renewable power in California Susan Sward, Chronicle Staff Writer Monday,February 12, 2001 QUOTES: California utilities' long-standing distrust of the renewable energy industry has been a major force discouraging -- and in some case even blocking --wind, solar and other ventures from expanding enough to ease the grip of the state's current energy crisis. The utilities' stance -- along with regulatory actions, market forces and lack of governmental leadership -- have combined in the past two decades to prevent the renewables industry from producing more than 12 percent of state energy supplies, according to experts and industry sources. "If we had invested in the past in more independent power -- especially the renewables -- we would have much more energy today and would be better situated to meet California's current energy challenge," said Marwan Masri, the California Energy Commission's renewables program manager. . . . One of the key setbacks for the renewable industry came in a 1995 Federal Energy Regulatory Commission decision sought by Southern California Edison and San Diego Gas & Electric that resulted in the cancellation of millions of dollars in renewable contracts that were about to take effect. . . . BIG-SMOKESTACK SYNDROME Carl Weinberg, the respected former head of Pacific Gas and Electric Co.'s research department in the 1980s and early '90s, said the utility philosophy was "real men build power plants with big smokestacks on top." "The utilities were extremely successful from 1900 through 1980 by building ever-bigger power plants and dropping the cost of electricity," said Weinberg, who retired in 1993. "When change began to happen with federal law (in 1978 requiring the utilities to sign contracts with the renewable industry), the environmental movement got going, and technological change occurred, the utilities protected their paradigm. They didn't know how to operate in a world that included renewables." . . . From vortex-l-request eskimo.com Mon Feb 12 08:42:24 2001 Received: (from smartlst localhost) by mx1.eskimo.com (8.9.1a/8.8.8) id IAA07854; Mon, 12 Feb 2001 08:31:50 -0800 Resent-Date: Mon, 12 Feb 2001 08:31:50 -0800 From: FZNIDARSIC aol.com Message-ID: <8.1025fe6a.27b969c5 aol.com> Date: Mon, 12 Feb 2001 11:31:01 EST Subject: photon in a cavity To: vortex-l eskimo.com MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: multipart/mixed; boundary="part1_8.1025fe6a.27b969c5_boundary" X-Mailer: AOL 5.0 for Windows sub 128 Resent-Message-ID: <"MO4Y83.0.ew1.r_0Yw" mx1> Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/40741 X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com Status: RO X-Status: --part1_8.1025fe6a.27b969c5_boundary Content-Type: text/plain; charset="US-ASCII" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit The idea of energy in a box is central to my work. The energy presses against the sides of the box. This generates a gravitational field according to: Force = dp/dt = 2E/c field = G/ccr (dp/dt) Newtons formula of gravity was derived from this approach. See "Force and Gravity" Frank Znidarsic, Infinite Energy, Vol 4, Issue #22, 1998 The standard model states that the wavefuntion is held in place by the addition of an infinite series of waves. The Schrodinger wave equation comes from this model. I have derived the Schrodinger wave equation from another approach. My approach is that restoring forces confine the wave functions. Jennision did this with an electromagnetic wave. I extended the idea to all waves in simple harmonic motion. The restoring force produce reflections. Reflections are a result of a change in characteristic impedance. I introduced an elastic limit of space. I then went on to show that this interaction of this elastic quantum produces reflections that confine the wave function. The deBroblie wavelength was shown to be the superposition of the original Compton wave and its doppler shifted reflection. The megahertz meter relationship comes from this analysis. Hal Fox is going to publish the fundamentals of this in the next addition of the Journal of New Energy. This is what I spoke on at ANS. From this analysis I determined that the fundamental degenerate mode of a condensate was one megahertz meter. Stimulation at that DIMENSIONAL frequency reinforces the condensate. In general. the velocity and dinensional freq which the elastic limit of space is exceeded = (Z+1)c/(2(137)) Z=0 for a Bose condensate. A paper is attached that will text well with the DOS editor. Frank Znidarsic --part1_8.1025fe6a.27b969c5_boundary Content-Type: text/plain; name="Sourceof.txt" Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable Content-Disposition: inline; filename="Sourceof.txt" 6/97 THE SOURCE OF INERTIAL AND GRAVITATIONAL MASS =20= =20 by Frank Znidarsic PE =20 2 ABSTRACT =20 Present quantum theory is very exact in its representation of quantum interactions. This theory represents matter as a series of superimposed quantum-mechanical matter waves. These matter waves exist in vector space. It is not easy to reconcile gravity with the current model of matter. All waves (matter, real, and probability) should propagate into space. It author will be shown that the energy of matter is localized by forces. The addition of forces to existing models of matter results in a formulation that requires no infinities, probability waves, or special reconciliation with gravity. The fundamental postulate of the modified model requires the production of a gravitational field. Matter's dynamic deBroglie wavelength also falls out as a natural consequence of the model. 3 INTRODUCTION Present theory identifies matter as a source of gravitational and inertial mass. Einstein's General Theory of Relativity states that an applied force also produces a gravitational field. Energy has no rest mass. According to existing theory energy does, however, have an effective gravitational mass. Present theory states that there are three sources of gravity. These sources are: 1. Rest Energy (Matter) 2. Kinetic energy (Photons and Moving Matter) 3. Force It will be shown that there is only one source of mass. This one source is an applied force. All inertial and gravitational mass is a direct result of an applied force. INERTIAL MASS An analysis will now be done that will describe inertial mass in terms of an applied force. Consider energy trapped in a perfectly reflecting containment. (see fig. #1) ________________ | \ | | P1 \ | | \ | A| /|B X =20 | P2 / | | / | |______________| |<---- L------>|<----- X -----> Matter wave in a box This energy in a containment model is a simplistic representation of matter. In this analysis no distinction will be made between baryonic, leptonic, and electromagnetic waves. =20 4 =20 The wavelength of the energy represents the Compton Compton wavelength of matter. The containment represents the surface of matter. This analysis considers only the momentum of the energy. The containment will be considered to be at rest. The energy is ejected from wall "A" of the containment, its momentum is p(1). The energy now travels to =20= =20 =20 wall "B". It hits wall B and immediately bounces off. Its momentum is p(2) . The energy now travels back to wall "A", =20= =20 =20 immediately bounces off, its momentum is again p(1). This =20= =20 =20 process repeats continuously. If the energy in the containment is evenly distributed throughout the containment,=20 the momentum carried by this energy will be distributed evenly between the forward and backward traveling components. The total momentum of this system is given in equation #1. p(t) =3D(p(1)/2 - p(2)/2) Eq #1 =20= =20 =20 The momentum of a flow of energy is given by equation #2 p =3D E/c Eq #2 E =3D energy c =3D light speed p =3D momentum Substituting Eq. #2 into Eq. #1 yields Eq. #3. 5 p(t) =3D [E(1)/2c - E(2)/2c] Eq. #3 =20 =20 Given the containment is at rest. The amount of energy in the containment remains fixed, the quantity of energy traveling in the forward direction equals the quantity of energy traveling in the reverse direction. This is shown in equation #4. E(1) =3D E(2) Eq #4 =20= =20 =20 Substituting Eq. #4 into Eq. #3 yields Eq #5. p(t) =3D (E/2c)(1 - 1) Eq #5 =20= =20 =20 Equation #5 is the total momentum of the system at rest. If an external force is applied to the system its velocity will change. The forward and the reverse components of the energy will then doppler shift after bouncing off of the moving containment walls. The momentun of a an energy flow varies directly with its frequency. Given that the number of "photons" in containment is conserved, the energy of the reflected "photons"=20 varies directly with their frequency. This is demonstrated by equation #6. E(2) =3D E(1) [f(f) /f(i)] Eq. #= 6 =20 =20 Substituting Eq. #6 into Eq #5. yields eq. #7. 6 p(t) =3D (E/2c)[(f(f)/f(i)) - (f(f)/f(i))] Eq= #7 =20 =20 Equation #7 is the momentum of the system after all of its energy bounces once off of the containment walls. Equation #7 shows a net flow of energy in one direction. Equation #7 is the momentum of a moving system. The reader may desire to analyze the system after successive bounces of its energy. This analysis is quite involved and unnecessary. Momentum is always conserved. Given that no external force is applied to the system after the first bounce of its energy, its momentum will remain constant. Relativistic doppler shift is given by equation #8. .5 (f(f)/f(i)) =3D (1-vv/cc) /(1 +- v/c), Eq #8 =20= =20 =20 v =3D velocity with respect to the observer c =3D light speed f((f)/f(i) =3D frequency ratio =20= =20 =20 + or - depends on the direction of motion Substituting equation #8 into equation #7 yields equation #9 - .5 .5 _ =20= =20 =3D E | (1-vv/cc) (1-vv/cc) | --- | ----------- - ---------- | Eq #9 =20= =20 2c | (1-v/c) (1+v/c) | - _ =20= _ .5 =20= .5_ =20 =3D E |(1+v/c)(1-vv/cc) (1-v/c)(1-vv/cc) | --- | ---------------- - ----------------- | 2c |(1+v/c)(1-v/c) (1-v/c)(1+v/c) | - - - .5 - E | (1-vv/cc) (1+v/c-1+v/c) | -- | ----------------------- | 2C | (1-vv/cc) | - -=20 ___ Ev________ .5 cc(1-vv/cc) =20 7 Substituting mass for energy, M =3D E/cc =3D ___Mv______ .5 (1-vv/cc) Eq #10 =20 =20 The result, equation #10 is the relativistic momentum of moving matter. This first analysis graphically demonstrates that inertial mass is produced by a containment force at the surface of matter. A fundamental change in the frame of reference is produced by the force of containment. This containment force converts energy, which can only travel at light speed, into mass, which can travel at any speed but light speed. 1,2,3 GRAVITATIONAL MASS Einstein's principle of equivalence states that gravitational and inertial mass are the same . 4 Gravitational mass then must be generated by the same mechanism that produces inertial mass. The reflection of the energy off of the walls of the containment must also generate the gravitational mass of the energy in the box. It is well known that the gravitational field can generate a force. This the gravitational force is given by equation #11. The force of gravity =3D mg Eq #11 8 It is less well known that the application of a force also induces a gravitation field. The application of a force must induce gravity in order to conserve a symmetrical relationship between the forces. For example, a changing magnetic field will induce an electrical field and conversely a changing electrical field will induce a magnetic field. Likewise the application of a force also =20= =20 5 induces a gravitational field. The application of a force must also produce gravity in order to conserve momentum. If mass is pushed into the established field of other mass time is required for the gravitational field of pushed matter to reach the other mass. To conserve momentum during this interval an induced gravitational field is required. The relationship between the induced gravitational field and the force of acceleration as demonstrated by General Relativity is given by equation #12. 6 Eg =3D (G/(ccr))(dp/dt) Eq #12 G =3D the grav constant r =3D the grav radius dp/dt =3D Force Eg =3D The gravitational field in Newtons/kg Each time the energy strikes the wall of the containment (or the surface of matter) it produces a gravitation field according to equation #12. An exact mathematical analysis of the gravitational field produced by the photon in the box will now be undertaken. Ref figure #1 9 =20 L =3D The dimensions of the box p =3D momentum t =3D the time required for the photon to directly traverse the box= =3D L/c r =3D the distance to point X The far gravitational field at point X is the vector sum of the field produced by the impacts on walls A and B. This field is given by Equation #13. Field =3D 1/r field from wall A - 1/r field from wall B =20= =20 (at X) Eq #13 =3D (G/(cc(r+L))) dp/dt - (G/(ccr)) dp/dt =3D -(G/cc)(dp/dt)(L/(rr+rL)) Taking the limit to obtain the far field yields Eq 14 . =20= 7 lim -(G/cc)(dp/dt)(k/(rr+rL)) =3D -(G/cc)(dp/dt)(L/rr) as r>>k Eq #14 The change in momentum in the simplistic box modelis given by Eq. #= 15. dp/dt =3D /\ p / /\ t =3D (2E/c)/(L/c) =3D 2E/L Eq #15 In order to remain consistent with the first argument only half of the energy will be considered to be impacting on wall "A" of the containment. The other half of the energy will be considered to impacting on wall "B" of the containment. Substituting Eq #15 into Eq #14 and adding a factor of 1/2 is yields Equation #16. Field =3D1/2(G/cc)(2E/L)(L/rr) Eq 16 =20 (at X) Substituting mass for energy yields Equation #17. Field =3D -GM/rr Eq #17 =20= =20 (at X) The result, equation #17, is Newton's formula of gravity . =20= 8 This second analysis clearly shows that gravitational mass is produced by the force of containment at the surface of matter. 10 PHOTONIC MASS A photon has no rest mass therefore the source of the gravitation mass of a photon cannot be mass. The source of the gravitational mass of a photon will now be demonstrated. Hubbles' constant expresses the expansion space in units of 1/time. Ordinarily, the effects resulting for the Hubble expansion are quite tiny. At great distances and at high velocities significant effects do, however, take place. As a photon travels through space at the high velocity of light it red shifts. This red shift may be considered to be the result of an applied force. This force is produced by the acceleration given in equation #18. Acceleration =3D Hc Eq #18 H =3D Hubble's constant, given in units of (1/sec) c =3D light speed To demonstrate the gravitational relationships of a photon the principle of the conservation of momentum will be employed. According to this principle exploding bodies conserve there center of gravitational mass. Mass M ejects a photon while over the pivot I. (Ref fig #2) The gravitational center of mass must remain balanced over the pivot point I. Mass M is propelled to the left velocity at v and the photon travels to the right at velocity c. The =20= =20 1 product of the velocity and time is the displacement S. <---S1--> <---------S2----------> Mass photon ---------------------------------------- =20 I 11 Photon and matter on a balance beam Setting the products of the displacements S and the gravitational masses Mg equal yields equation #19. Mg(1) S(1) =3D Mg(2) S(2) Eq #19 =20= =20 =20 GMS /rr(1) =3D (G/cc) (force) S /r(2) =20 =20 GMS /rr(1) =3D (G/cc) dp/dt S /r(2) =20 =20 GM(v(1) t) =3D (G/cc) dp/dt (ct)r Eq #20 =20 =20 Substituting, dp/dt =3D Ma =3D MHc =3D (E/cc)Hc =3D EH/c Eq #21 G(Mv(1))t =3D (G/cc)(E/c)Hctr =20 =20 Setting momentums equal, p(1) =3D p(2) =3D Mv(1) =3D E/c =20= =20 =20 Gp(1) t =3D (G/cc)p(2) Hctr =20 =20 c =3D Hr Eq #22 =20 The result, equation #22, shows the gravitational mass of a photon is produced by the force it experiences as it accelerates through Hubble's constant. The result is true only under the condition where the speed of light is equal to the product of Hubble's constant and the radius of the universe. The gravitational radius of the photon is the radius of the universe. These qualifications are essentially consistent with the known cosmological constants. 12 MATTERS DYNAMIC ATTRIBUTES A dynamic attribute of matter, its wavelength, also results from an applied force. As stated, the original wavelength of the photon represents the Compton wavelength of matter. Equation #23 expresses the Compton wavelength. L(c) =3D h/Mc Eq #23 =20= =20 =20 Equation #24 gives the relationship between frequency f and wavelength L. f(c) =3D (f)(L) Eq #24 Substituting Eq #24 into Eq. #23 yields Eq #25 the Compton frequency of matter. f(c) =3D Mcc/h Eq. #25 =20 =20 A doppler shifted component of the original frequency is produced by the reflection at matter's surface. Classical doppler shift is given by Eq #26. f(2) =3D f(1) (1 +- v/c) Eq #26 =20= =20 =20 A beat note is formed by the mixing of the doppler shifted and original components. This beat note is the deBroglie wave of matter. 13 Equation #27 and Figure #3 express a function "F" involving the sum of two sin waves. F(L,t)| =3D amplitude orig. wave + amplitude reflected wave =20= =20 | | L held constant F(t) =3D sin(6.28 f(c) t + 3.14) + sin[6.26 f(c) t(1 +- v/c)] =20= Eq #27 =20 =20 Substituting Eq #25 into Eq #27 yields Eq #28. F(t) =3D sin[6.28 t(Mcc/h)+ 3.14] + sin[6.28 t(Mcc/h)(1 +- v/c)] E= q #28 A minimum in the beat note envelope occurs when the component waves are opposed in phase. At time zero the angles differ by 3.14 radians. Time zero is a minimum in the beat note envelope. A maximum in the beat envelope occurs when the component waves are aligned in phase. The phases were set equal, in Equation #29, to determine the time at which the aligned phase "p" condition occurs. p(1) =3D p(2) Eq #29 =20= =20 =20 6.28 tMcc/h + 3.14 =3D 6.28 tMcc/h +- 6.28 tMcv/h Eq #30 ct =3D +- h/2Mv Eq #31 L(d) =3D h/Mv Eq #32 =20= =20 =20 The result, Equation #32, is the deBroglie wavelength of matter 9 14 GRAVITATIONAL APPLICATIONS The movement of ordinary matter does not produce a net magnetic field. The movement of charged matter does produce a net magnetic field. Charged matter is produced by the separation of positive and negative charges. The derivation used to develop Newton's formula of gravity (Eq #13) shows that matter may harbor near field positive and negative gravitational components. A similar analysis with the strong nuclear force, in fact, demonstrates the known repulsive component of the nuclear force. In superconductors the length of the wavefunction "L" is longer. These longer wavefunctions produce near field components that are macroscopic in dimension. As in the case with electrically charged matter, the rotation of these separate gravitational components should induce a strong gravitomagnetic field. This gravitomagnetic field appears to have been detected by an experiment conducted at Tampere University. 7 NUCLEAR APPLICATIONS Low level nuclear reactions appear to have been discovered. These low level nuclear reactions take place in systems containing condensed electrons. =20= =20 10 This author's model shows that the length of the wavefunction "L" increases in condensed systems. This effect may "soften up the nucleus" and allow unexpected low level nuclear reactions to take place. 15 CONCLUSION It has been shown that the application of a force is the exclusive mechanism by which all inertial and gravitational mass is generated. A reflection takes place at the surface of matter. The force produced by this reflection induces the gravitational and the inertial mass associated with matter. This concept is so simple that once it is seen it appears to be almost self evident. The gravitational mass of a photon was shown to be produced by the acceleration of a photon through Hubble's constant. This analysis shows that there is a relationship between the speed of light, Hubbles's constant, and the radius of the universe. Remarkably the model also yields, a factor unrelated to mass, matters dynamic wavelength. A profound, yet simple, model has been developed. This model demonstrates the mechanism though which all mass (gravitational and inertial) is generated. The scope of the symmetrical relationship that exists between force and gravity has been exposed. This author believes that this new understanding will lead to the development of gravitational technologies. 11 =20 =20 NOTES =20 1. Jennison demonstrated the previously unestablished fact a trapped electromagnetic standing wave has rest mass and inertia. =20 Jennison & Drinkwater Journal of Physics A, vol 10, pp.(167-179) 1977 Jennison & Drinkwater Journal of Physics A, vol 13, pp.(2247-2250) 1980 Jennison & Drinkwater Journal of Physics A, vol 16, pp.(3635-3638) 1983 2. Puthoff has shown that force produced by the reflection and adsorption of zero point energy at the surface of matter generates mass. This author's model is an extension version of Puthoff's work. H.E. Puthoff, "Ground State Hydrogen as a Zero-Point-Fluctuation-Determined State" Physical Review D, vol 35, Number 3260, 1987 H. E. Puthoff "GRAVITY AS A ZERO-POINT FLUCTUATION FORCE", Physical Review A, vol 39, Number 5, March 1989 18 =20 3. Gilbert N. Lewis demonstrated the relationship between external radiation pressure and momentum. Gilbert N. Lewis, Philosophical Magazine, Nov. 1908 4. Einstein's principle of equivalence was experimentally confirmed by R.v. Eotos in the 1920's R.v. Eotvos, D. Pekar, and Feteke, Ann. d. Phys 1922 Roll, Krotkov and Dicke followed up on the Eotvos experiment and confirmed the principle of equivalence 11 to an accuracy of 10 in the 1960's R.G. Roll, R. Krotkow & Dicke, Ann. of Physics 26, 1964 5. Danish physicist Han Christian Oersted first discovered that and electric current produces a magnetic field in 1820. English scientist Michael Faraday demonstrated that a changing magnetic field produces an electric current in 1831. 6. A. Einstein, Ann. d. Physics 49, 1916. 19 7. This author proposes that the rotation of the near field components resulted in gravitomagnetic effects observed at The University of Tampere in Finland. "A Possibility of Gravitational Force Shielding by Bulk YBa2Cu307-x", E. Podkletnov and R. Nieminen, Physica C, vol 203 (1992), pp 441-444. 8. Sir I. Newton, PHILOSOPHICA NATURALIS PRINCIPIA MATHEMATICA (1687) 9. French aristocrat Louis de Broglie described the electrons wavelength in his Ph.D. thesis in 1924. De Broglie's hypothesis was verified by C. J. Davisson and L. H. Germer at Bell Labs. The mechanism through which elementary particles can possess dynamic attributes, such as the de Broglie wavelength, has been a central mystery in the field of quantum physics. 10. Preprint Miley George H., Nuclear Transmutations in Thin-Film Nickel Coatings Undergoing Electrolysis, Preprint The Fusion Studies Laboratory of the University of Illinois USA 11. The discovery of the symmetrical relationship between the electric and magnetic fields by Oersted and Faraday is the basis of our current electro-technologies. --part1_8.1025fe6a.27b969c5_boundary-- From vortex-l-request eskimo.com Mon Feb 12 14:01:13 2001 Received: (from smartlst localhost) by mx1.eskimo.com (8.9.1a/8.8.8) id NAA00579; Mon, 12 Feb 2001 13:52:33 -0800 Resent-Date: Mon, 12 Feb 2001 13:52:33 -0800 Message-ID: <000701c09546$976c9960$98b4bfa8 fjsparber> Reply-To: "Frederick Sparber" From: "Frederick Sparber" To: Cc: Subject: Re: Neutrons from D2-Ar-N2-Hot W? Date: Mon, 12 Feb 2001 14:51:53 -0800 MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-Priority: 3 X-MSMail-Priority: Normal X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook Express 5.00.2615.200 X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V5.00.2615.200 Resent-Message-ID: <"c6mbZ.0.u8.Xi5Yw" mx1> Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/40742 X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com Status: O X-Status: With a small amount of D2/D2O injected into an ordinary incandescent light bulb, there should be some neutrons emitted due to the "catalytic" action of Argon-N2 in stripping of the Deuterons during formation of the "Deuterino" or D*. Since most off-the-shelf light bulbs are already pressurized with about 2/3 atm of N2-Argon, if there is any H2O present there should be transmutation of the Hot Tungsten occurring in bulbs that have been running for hundreds of hours. The black deposit on the bulbs may show this when analyzed. Regards, Frederick From vortex-l-request eskimo.com Mon Feb 12 16:43:40 2001 Received: (from smartlst localhost) by mx1.eskimo.com (8.9.1a/8.8.8) id QAA02390; Mon, 12 Feb 2001 16:38:24 -0800 Resent-Date: Mon, 12 Feb 2001 16:38:24 -0800 X-Sender: rmuha mail Message-Id: Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1" Date: Mon, 12 Feb 2001 19:37:59 -0500 To: vortex-l eskimo.com From: ralph muha Subject: Speed Of Light Might Change Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit X-MIME-Autoconverted: from quoted-printable to 8bit by mx1.eskimo.com id QAA02353 Resent-Message-ID: <"KLE2L2.0.Gb._78Yw" mx1> Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/40743 X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com Status: O X-Status: Reprinted from ScienceDaily Magazine ... Source: Texas A&M University Date Posted: Monday, February 12, 2001 Web Address: http://www.sciencedaily.com/releases/2001/02/010212075309.htm Einstein In Need Of Update? Calculations Show The Speed Of Light Might Change In 1905, Einstein made major changes to laws of physics when he established his theory of relativity. Now Einstein's laws might also undergo significant changes. Dimitri Nanopoulos, who holds the rank of Distinguished Professor of Physics at Texas A&M University and heads the Houston Advanced Research Center's Group for Astroparticle Physics, established, along with other physicists, that the speed of light, instead of being the constant value of 186,282 miles per second, might change. In 1905, Einstein established that light was the only object to have a constant speed in all reference frames. This idea was the cornerstone to his theory of relativity, and later to laws of physics. "If the speed of light proves not to be constant any more, even by a very small changeable amount, laws of physics - the theory of relativity included - will have to undergo significant changes," says Nanopoulos. Nanopoulos, who chairs the Theoretical Physics Division of the Academy of Athens, is among the many physicists who are trying to establish the basis of quantum gravity, a theory that has been dreamed of by physicists since the 1920s. While they were doing mathematical calculations, Nanopoulos and physicists Nikolaos Mavromatos of King's College in London and John Ellis of the European Center for Particle Physics (CERN) in Geneva, discovered a new expression for the speed of light, which depends on its frequency. "Through our calculations, we found that the speed of light is frequency-dependent," says Nanopoulos. "But a change in the usual speed of light value of 186,282 miles per second is noticeable only for light coming from astronomical objects situated very far from Earth, which is why this frequency dependence has not been noticed so far." Physicists are setting up the theory of quantum gravity to put together two major discoveries of physics in the 20th century: the theory of relativity and quantum physics. The theory of relativity explains both how space and time are related to each other and how gravitation works. Quantum physics describes the workings of the microscopic world, where laws of probability replace the deterministic view used to describe our everyday world. Until now, physicists have been considering many scenarios for quantum gravity, but these scenarios have never been experimentally confirmed. The hypotheses put forward by Nanopoulos and his collaborators has been under experimental scrutiny, and the results obtained during the last few months are encouraging. "One way to experimentally test our hypothesis is to consider galaxies or other objects in the sky that are very far from us," says Nanopoulos. "Then we collect the photons (particles of light) simultaneously emitted by these sources, and we look at differences of arrival times in a detector on earth between photons of different frequencies. The photons of higher frequencies should come later." The frequency-dependent expression of the speed of light depends on the gravitational constant, a quantity that is known since Newton established his law of gravitation. By using the differences in photon arrival times of six astronomical sources, Nanopoulos and his collaborators estimated an upper bound of the value of the gravitational constant from the data, and compared their results with the expected value. "We were amazed to see that if we use all these astronomical data, we find very reasonable values for the gravitational constant," says Nanopoulos. "That was our first surprise: the fact that, put together, a bunch of data that had nothing to do with the gravitational constant, gave us values so close to what we would expect to find." A second experimental encouraging result about the frequency-dependence of the speed of light was provided by the HEGRA (High Energy Gamma Ray Astronomy) experiment, which is detecting photons from outer space, and is situated in La Palma, Canary Islands. The frequency-dependent expression of the speed of light was used to solve a problem faced by three physicists: Tadashi Kifune, from the University of Tokyo in Japan, Ray Protheroe, from the University of Adelaide in Australia, and Hinrich Meyer, from the University of Wuppertal in Germany. The problem occurred when HEGRA physicists detected very energetic photons emitted by the galaxy Markarian 501. "The most energetic of these photons were expected to interact with other very low-energy photons from the infrared background radiation, which is a radiation present since the early universe," says Nanopoulos. "When a very energetic photon interacts with a low-energy photon, they have just the right quantity of energy to create an electron-antielectron pair. But physicists at HEGRA did not see any of the expected electron-antielectron pairs, but did observe very energetic photons instead. "By using the frequency-dependent expression of the speed of light, Kifune, Protheroe and Meyer found that the combined energy of each type of photon was not enough to create an electron-antielectron pair," adds Nanopoulos. "That is why no electron-antielectron pair has been observed." If by looking at more energetic photons, HEGRA never detects the expected electron-antielectron pairs, this would provide further support of the new hypothesis put forward by Nanopoulos and his collaborators. "This frequency-dependence of the speed of light changes drastically our view of the theory of relativity," Nanopoulos says. "It is also the first time that we have a window of opportunity to study quantum gravity, and thus scientifically study the origin of the Universe. It is a fantastic thing that we can experimentally magnify such a tiny effect." Nanopoulos says that if the frequency-dependence of the speed of light is further confirmed by other experiments, the theory of relativity would still be valid under certain circumstances. "There is nothing wrong with Einstein's theory of relativity. If the energy of an object is much smaller than 1019 proton masses or if the distance between two objects is smaller than millions of light-years, Einstein's equations are still valid," he says. Copyright © 1995-2001 ScienceDaily Magazine Email: editor sciencedaily.com From vortex-l-request eskimo.com Mon Feb 12 17:19:59 2001 Received: (from smartlst localhost) by mx1.eskimo.com (8.9.1a/8.8.8) id RAA24633; Mon, 12 Feb 2001 17:16:21 -0800 Resent-Date: Mon, 12 Feb 2001 17:16:21 -0800 X-Authentication-Warning: eskimo.com: billb owned process doing -bs Date: Mon, 12 Feb 2001 17:16:14 -0800 (PST) From: William Beaty To: freenrg-l eskimo.com Subject: Rex Research (fwd) Message-ID: MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: MULTIPART/ALTERNATIVE; BOUNDARY="part1_c7.700e41b.27b99815_boundary" Content-ID: Resent-Message-ID: <"cPhRQ.0.e06.ah8Yw" mx1> Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/40744 X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com Status: O X-Status: This message is in MIME format. The first part should be readable text, while the remaining parts are likely unreadable without MIME-aware tools. Send mail to mime docserver.cac.washington.edu for more info. --part1_c7.700e41b.27b99815_boundary Content-Type: TEXT/PLAIN; CHARSET=US-ASCII Content-ID: Robert Nelson and his "Infolios" business is finally online! These are the ones that I grew up on. *NOT* a ripoff like a couple of other companies I could mention. ---------- Forwarded message ---------- Date: Mon, 12 Feb 2001 14:48:37 EST From: Alkemy618 aol.com To: billb eskimo.com Subject: Rex Research Greetings from Rex Research! You are invited to visit www.rexresearch.com, a new website dedicated to representing unconventional technologies! The site features the Infolios; Catalog 2012-Z and the collected writings of Robert Nelson (founder of Rex Research, established in 1982) on alchemy, transmutations, hemp, prophecy, free energy, &c... Reprints of hard-to-find information will be added till as much as possible of the archives become available online! Signed, Robert Nelson --part1_c7.700e41b.27b99815_boundary-- From vortex-l-request eskimo.com Mon Feb 12 20:00:16 2001 Received: (from smartlst localhost) by mx1.eskimo.com (8.9.1a/8.8.8) id TAA23652; Mon, 12 Feb 2001 19:59:48 -0800 Resent-Date: Mon, 12 Feb 2001 19:59:48 -0800 X-Apparently-From: Message-Id: <4.2.0.58.20010212221018.00984cc0 postoffice.swbell.net> X-Sender: cjford1 pop.mail.yahoo.com X-Mailer: QUALCOMM Windows Eudora Pro Version 4.2.0.58 Date: Mon, 12 Feb 2001 22:10:23 -0600 To: vortex-l eskimo.com From: Charles Ford Subject: Re: Photon in a cavity? Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"; format=flowed Resent-Message-ID: <"L60Lr.0.Un5.q4BYw" mx1> Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/40746 X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com Status: O X-Status: In order to show someone that they need to keep an open mind I use this little poser. Place 9 dots in a square grid. * * * * * * * * * Now take a pencil and without lifting the pencil from the page connect the dots with 4 straight lines. Lets see who can pull it off. At 01:40 AM 2/12/01 -0500, you wrote: > Bravo! A human construct ! > > We should adopt this guide post... and, when a question comes down >the pike ask "Is this a human construct?" .....OR: ITAHC? > > > >On Sat, 10 Feb 2001, Edmund Storms wrote: > > > > > > > Robin van Spaandonk wrote: > > > > > Hi, > > > > > > Suppose that an atom in a cavity in metal tries to emit a photon of a > > > wavelength that is larger than the cavity. > > > What happens? > > > > The photon leaves the atom because from an atom's point of view, there > > is no such thing as a cavity. The atom is in a sea of electrons with no > > boundary. The idea of a boundary is a human construct. > > > > Regards, > > Ed > > > > _________________________________________________________ Do You Yahoo!? Get your free yahoo.com address at http://mail.yahoo.com From vortex-l-request eskimo.com Mon Feb 12 20:00:19 2001 Received: (from smartlst localhost) by mx1.eskimo.com (8.9.1a/8.8.8) id TAA23516; Mon, 12 Feb 2001 19:59:40 -0800 Resent-Date: Mon, 12 Feb 2001 19:59:40 -0800 X-Apparently-From: Message-Id: <4.2.0.58.20010212221009.00a031c0 postoffice.swbell.net> X-Sender: cjford1 pop.mail.yahoo.com X-Mailer: QUALCOMM Windows Eudora Pro Version 4.2.0.58 Date: Mon, 12 Feb 2001 22:10:14 -0600 To: vortex-l eskimo.com From: Charles Ford Subject: RE: Report: HotWater Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"; format=flowed Resent-Message-ID: <"3sXv63.0.Ml5.i4BYw" mx1> Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/40745 X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com Status: O X-Status: Bzzzdt Wo hooo (cheap thrill) Grounding will never be adequate because the water (unpure) will be resistave and a certin amount of current will travel past the grounding equipment. You must totally isolate the source current from the water. Do you have an isolation transformer? Also UL used to use an isolation test probe. UL isolation probe. Make a series circuit of a .1uF cap and a 10K resister. ground the resister and attach the cap to the probe. Measue across the resister with an AC voltmeter while touching any part of the device that may touch you. (including the water) Any voltage measured in access of 1V will be unacceptable. This represents an isolation fault of 100uA Probably fill heat and drop is the best. Make the final container out of stainless steal and ground it. At 10:05 AM 2/12/01 +0700, you wrote: > > From: Horace Heffner [mailto:hheffner mtaonline.net] > > Sent: 2001 February 12, Monday 01:38 > > Subject: Re: Report: HotWater > > > > At 4:37 PM 2/11/1, xplorer wrote: > > > > >In the meantime, I'm gonna mount this unit > > > on the bathroom wall and enjoy more hotwater showers... > > > > > >cheers, > > >Paul E. Anderson > > > > > > This may not be a good idea! It is not a good idea to introduce currents > > into a water supply system because it can cause corrosion and also > > unexpected shocks or electrocution. Hopefully you are running your device > > from a GFCI plug. If it won't run from a GFCI plug then it is not safe. > >This is a serious concern, and I haven't yet decided how > to get the thing integrated. >We don't have GFCI, but our plumbing is all plastic. >I was thinking I could just put a piece of earthed > steel at the inlet and outlet to trap any stray currents, > but I reckon the safest method might be to make it > a 'fill, heat, then drain' setup: > suspending the tank under an earthed faucet which we would > manually operate to fill the device, with the drain valve > running through an earthed segment. >The biggest problem with schemes like this is that > the grounding points must *never* be allowed to corrode > away, losing their ability to contain stray currents. > >Of course, if I could get the efficiency level to well above 2, > then the power source can become completely internal > to the unit, eliminating house current from the picture > altogether... > >cheers _________________________________________________________ Do You Yahoo!? Get your free yahoo.com address at http://mail.yahoo.com From vortex-l-request eskimo.com Mon Feb 12 20:17:12 2001 Received: (from smartlst localhost) by mx1.eskimo.com (8.9.1a/8.8.8) id UAA30982; Mon, 12 Feb 2001 20:13:17 -0800 Resent-Date: Mon, 12 Feb 2001 20:13:17 -0800 Message-Id: <5.0.2.1.0.20010212220628.038b5d28 earthtech.org> X-Sender: little earthtech.org X-Mailer: QUALCOMM Windows Eudora Version 5.0.2 Date: Mon, 12 Feb 2001 22:15:19 -0600 To: vortex-l eskimo.com, vortex-l@eskimo.com From: Scott Little Subject: Re: Photon in a cavity? In-Reply-To: <4.2.0.58.20010212221018.00984cc0 postoffice.swbell.net> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"; format=flowed Resent-Message-ID: <"0iOrV1.0.0a7.SHBYw" mx1> Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/40747 X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com Status: O X-Status: At 10:10 PM 2/12/2001 -0600, Charles Ford wrote: >Place 9 dots in a square grid. /| / | * * * \ / | \/ | /\ | * * * / \ | / \ | / \| ----*---*--* Had to distort the grid a little to get ASCII slanted lines to show the solution...an old favorite of mine. Scott Little EarthTech International, Inc. 4030 Braker Lane West, Suite 300 Austin TX 78759 512-342-2185 512-346-3017 (FAX) http://www.earthtech.org From vortex-l-request eskimo.com Mon Feb 12 20:18:54 2001 Received: (from smartlst localhost) by mx1.eskimo.com (8.9.1a/8.8.8) id UAA31522; Mon, 12 Feb 2001 20:14:43 -0800 Resent-Date: Mon, 12 Feb 2001 20:14:43 -0800 Message-ID: <3A88B4B7.DBFCB702 groupz.net> Date: Mon, 12 Feb 2001 23:14:47 -0500 From: sno X-Mailer: Mozilla 4.76 [en] (Win98; U) X-Accept-Language: en,x-ns1siWpfcUINhQ,x-ns2r2d09OnmPe2 MIME-Version: 1.0 To: vortex-l eskimo.com Subject: Re: Photon in a cavity? References: <4.2.0.58.20010212221018.00984cc0 postoffice.swbell.net> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Resent-Message-ID: <"eSfRb3.0.Ii7.oIBYw" mx1> Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/40748 X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com Status: O X-Status: *....*....*. . . . . . * * * . . * * * . . . . I figured this out when presented by teacher in high school....steve Charles Ford wrote: > > In order to show someone that they need to keep an open mind I use this > little poser. > > Place 9 dots in a square grid. > > * * * > * * * > * * * > > Now take a pencil and without lifting the pencil from the page connect the > dots with 4 straight lines. > > Lets see who can pull it off. > > At 01:40 AM 2/12/01 -0500, you wrote: > > > Bravo! A human construct ! > > > > We should adopt this guide post... and, when a question comes down > >the pike ask "Is this a human construct?" .....OR: ITAHC? > > > > > > > >On Sat, 10 Feb 2001, Edmund Storms wrote: > > > > > > > > > > > Robin van Spaandonk wrote: > > > > > > > Hi, > > > > > > > > Suppose that an atom in a cavity in metal tries to emit a photon of a > > > > wavelength that is larger than the cavity. > > > > What happens? > > > > > > The photon leaves the atom because from an atom's point of view, there > > > is no such thing as a cavity. The atom is in a sea of electrons with no > > > boundary. The idea of a boundary is a human construct. > > > > > > Regards, > > > Ed > > > > > > > > _________________________________________________________ > Do You Yahoo!? > Get your free yahoo.com address at http://mail.yahoo.com From vortex-l-request eskimo.com Mon Feb 12 20:24:08 2001 Received: (from smartlst localhost) by mx1.eskimo.com (8.9.1a/8.8.8) id UAA00301; Mon, 12 Feb 2001 20:17:39 -0800 Resent-Date: Mon, 12 Feb 2001 20:17:39 -0800 Message-ID: <000f01c09573$d12def00$3919d7d2 ibmbn145hv> From: "Greg Watson" To: References: <4.2.0.58.20010212221018.00984cc0 postoffice.swbell.net> Subject: Re: Photon in a cavity? Date: Tue, 13 Feb 2001 14:47:01 +1030 MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: multipart/mixed; boundary="----=_NextPart_000_000C_01C095CB.D31D8200" X-Priority: 3 X-MSMail-Priority: Normal X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook Express 5.50.4133.2400 X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V5.50.4133.2400 Resent-Message-ID: <"MnUKJ1.0.r_7.ZLBYw" mx1> Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/40749 X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com Status: O X-Status: This is a multi-part message in MIME format. ------=_NextPart_000_000C_01C095CB.D31D8200 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit ----- Original Message ----- From: "Charles Ford" To: Sent: Tuesday, February 13, 2001 2:40 PM Subject: Re: Photon in a cavity? > In order to show someone that they need to keep an open mind I use this > little poser. > > Place 9 dots in a square grid. > > * * * > * * * > * * * See attached. ------=_NextPart_000_000C_01C095CB.D31D8200 Content-Type: image/gif; name="NineDots.gif" Content-Transfer-Encoding: base64 Content-Disposition: attachment; filename="NineDots.gif" R0lGODdhKgEKAfcAAAAAAAAAQAAAgAAA/wAgAAAgQAAggAAg/wBAAABAQABAgABA/wBgAABgQABg gABg/wCAAACAQACAgACA/wCgAACgQACggACg/wDAAADAQADAgADA/wD/AAD/QAD/gAD//yAAACAA QCAAgCAA/yAgACAgQCAggCAg/yBAACBAQCBAgCBA/yBgACBgQCBggCBg/yCAACCAQCCAgCCA/yCg ACCgQCCggCCg/yDAACDAQCDAgCDA/yD/ACD/QCD/gCD//0AAAEAAQEAAgEAA/0AgAEAgQEAggEAg /0BAAEBAQEBAgEBA/0BgAEBgQEBggEBg/0CAAECAQECAgECA/0CgAECgQECggECg/0DAAEDAQEDA gEDA/0D/AED/QED/gED//2AAAGAAQGAAgGAA/2AgAGAgQGAggGAg/2BAAGBAQGBAgGBA/2BgAGBg QGBggGBg/2CAAGCAQGCAgGCA/2CgAGCgQGCggGCg/2DAAGDAQGDAgGDA/2D/AGD/QGD/gGD//4AA AIAAQIAAgIAA/4AgAIAgQIAggIAg/4BAAIBAQIBAgIBA/4BgAIBgQIBggIBg/4CAAICAQICAgICA /4CgAICgQICggICg/4DAAIDAQIDAgIDA/4D/AID/QID/gID//6AAAKAAQKAAgKAA/6AgAKAgQKAg gKAg/6BAAKBAQKBAgKBA/6BgAKBgQKBggKBg/6CAAKCAQKCAgKCA/6CgAKCgQKCggKCg/6DAAKDA QKDAgKDA/6D/AKD/QKD/gKD//8AAAMAAQMAAgMAA/8AgAMAgQMAggMAg/8BAAMBAQMBAgMBA/8Bg AMBgQMBggMBg/8CAAMCAQMCAgMCA/8CgAMCgQMCggMCg/8DAAMDAQMDAgMDA/8D/AMD/QMD/gMD/ //8AAP8AQP8AgP8A//8gAP8gQP8ggP8g//9AAP9AQP9AgP9A//9gAP9gQP9ggP9g//+AAP+AQP+A gP+A//+gAP+gQP+ggP+g///AAP/AQP/AgP/A////AP//QP//gP///yH5BAAAAAAALAAAAAAqAQoB AAivAP8JHEiwoMGDCBMqXMiwocOHECNKnEixosWLGDNq3Mixo8ePIEOKHEmypMmTKFOqXMmypcuX MGPKnEmzps2bOHPq3Mmzp8+fQIMKHUq0qNGjSJMqXcq0qdOnUKNKnUq1qtWrWLNq3cq1q9evYMOK HUu2rNmzaNOqXcu2rdu3cOPKnUu3rt27ePPq3cu3r9+/gAMLHky4sOHDiBMrXsy4sePHkCNLnky5 suXLmDNr3v/MubPnz6BDix5NurTp06hTpwWg2i+A160PwiY5e2RtkK9vxx6o22Lu38CDCx9OvLjx 48h7q07OvLnz59CjK28tvbr169h/75adXTv36Ru9hxe/nWDwkOdxAx+fu/x38hxng8con3VG+O7N Cx+7Pj/C9v19FaB/BrX3T3pcDUhgQQYKpKBVDy6on328RRiVhRI6qByGTXGYYYMM4ueUiBmGSOF7 JzLlYYkHztciiEqtyCKMKKZolIwzulghjULhyOKLD/l4k5A52rgQkTIhWSKPR5KYk5M/JsRkk1DO pOSPUzJ05UlbFulblyKBuaSOWla5kplRKpRlkGiaJCaWZDot9OZFc3rJXpzqrZlmQ3pGhCCXbe5J 5Ufr4flln4KWaeR9f+ZpaKI1Pirnfh4N/wfpoYhO1KhGll6KqW11arippxCNyimljHZKqkSmMipq pv9pV9+qFMGaqqQ74kprrIuGGeiEuu76HUtC/iqsoi3JGOqxtnbU6ovBHssrTBYuK22zhMJnrbRA Jundttxiix5x3OZZE6rlVhqto+umK2W7zqrq7qm9nimrsfOqCe+tJ4LL7L50iugvreLG5+TApBZM b72vAvwvw75minCiCmMKsYkOE5zxpOJOHGXFrOKL8cX5iorSm8+WbDJtKfvp8YIg8ymyojELKu+d M1P5cnktV9RzrT9fW3ONoAatcc7vohvvzfMaLfO3JGtqH9PpDp1r1OyqbDW03m7t39A7cx+8Mc/7 hs2m19vFbHapa4MGMtKAor1ctG0DDbd7BddtlLGwHd9NrN+xNas3zqvaOrjBcosG6+FLJ/6ZxI67 xPhjfU4+buSb6Wl50WN3tubmLGN+2ZSgu1k6YUyeHnfnmPGo+smvu9Yb4EnFzheIttsrOuW15Z4s 7aPXtztRvtdFtVnFz6X0WqxD5rTKQwEPvU7NT2/99dhnr/323Hfv/ffghy/++OSXb/756Kev/vrs t+/++/A/xy///PTXb//9+Oev//789+///wAMoAAHSMACGvCACEygAhfIwAY68IEQjKAEJ0jBClrw ghjMoAY3yMEOevCDNyAMoQhHSMISmvCEKEyhClfIwha68IUwjKEMZ0jDGtrwhjjMoQ53yMMe+vCH QAyiEIdIxCIa8YgcSEyiEpfIxCY68YlQjKIUp0jFKlrxiljMImgCAgA7 ------=_NextPart_000_000C_01C095CB.D31D8200-- From vortex-l-request eskimo.com Mon Feb 12 21:32:59 2001 Received: (from smartlst localhost) by mx1.eskimo.com (8.9.1a/8.8.8) id VAA02249; Mon, 12 Feb 2001 21:26:22 -0800 Resent-Date: Mon, 12 Feb 2001 21:26:22 -0800 X-Apparently-From: Message-Id: <4.2.0.58.20010212231255.009ab820 postoffice.swbell.net> X-Sender: cjford1 pop.mail.yahoo.com X-Mailer: QUALCOMM Windows Eudora Pro Version 4.2.0.58 Date: Mon, 12 Feb 2001 23:36:54 -0600 To: vortex-l eskimo.com From: Charles Ford Subject: Re: Photon in a cavity? In-Reply-To: <4.2.0.58.20010212221018.00984cc0 postoffice.swbell.net> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"; format=flowed Resent-Message-ID: <"PUj591.0.3Z.-LCYw" mx1> Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/40750 X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com Status: O X-Status: At 10:10 PM 2/12/01 -0600, you wrote: >In order to show someone that they need to keep an open mind I use this >little poser. > >Place 9 dots in a square grid. > >* * * >* * * >* * * > >Now take a pencil and without lifting the pencil from the page connect the >dots with 4 straight lines. > >Lets see who can pull it off. > > >At 01:40 AM 2/12/01 -0500, you wrote: > > >> Bravo! A human construct ! >> >> We should adopt this guide post... and, when a question comes down >>the pike ask "Is this a human construct?" .....OR: ITAHC? Ok So I didn't fool anybody here... But here is the point Most folks will screw around with it for about a half an hour then say its impressible. I spent several hours on it based on the constant reassurance of my friend that he knew how to do it and that there where several different ways to solve it. Finally I measured out exact 2 inch dots and 4 pencels. Laying them down on the page it suddenly became clear. He explained this to me like this. "You placed an imaginary boundary around the figure and simply would not attempt anything past that." This little poser triggered a turning point for me some 15 years back but that is a much longer story. _________________________________________________________ Do You Yahoo!? Get your free yahoo.com address at http://mail.yahoo.com From vortex-l-request eskimo.com Tue Feb 13 04:51:49 2001 Received: (from smartlst localhost) by mx1.eskimo.com (8.9.1a/8.8.8) id EAA27633; Tue, 13 Feb 2001 04:50:28 -0800 Resent-Date: Tue, 13 Feb 2001 04:50:28 -0800 Message-ID: <003001c095c4$08c300e0$aa8f85ce fjsparber> Reply-To: "Frederick Sparber" From: "Frederick Sparber" To: Subject: Re: Hydrogen Thyratron Technology Date: Tue, 13 Feb 2001 05:51:02 -0800 MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: multipart/mixed; boundary="----=_NextPart_000_0005_01C09580.F299EBA0" X-Priority: 3 X-MSMail-Priority: Normal X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook Express 5.00.2615.200 X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V5.00.2615.200 Resent-Message-ID: <"7zCte1.0.fl6.KsIYw" mx1> Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/40751 X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com Status: O X-Status: This is a multi-part message in MIME format. ------=_NextPart_000_0005_01C09580.F299EBA0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Hydrinos in one of these, if you add Potassium or Argon? http://www.marconitech.com/thyratrons/technology.html FJS ------=_NextPart_000_0005_01C09580.F299EBA0 Content-Type: application/octet-stream; name="Marconi Applied Technologies - Products - Thyratron Technology.url" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Content-Disposition: attachment; filename="Marconi Applied Technologies - Products - Thyratron Technology.url" [DEFAULT] BASEURL=http://www.marconitech.com/thyratrons/technology.html [InternetShortcut] URL=http://www.marconitech.com/thyratrons/technology.html Modified=001935B9C395C00120 ------=_NextPart_000_0005_01C09580.F299EBA0-- From vortex-l-request eskimo.com Tue Feb 13 09:07:32 2001 Received: (from smartlst localhost) by mx1.eskimo.com (8.9.1a/8.8.8) id JAA03192; Tue, 13 Feb 2001 09:01:32 -0800 Resent-Date: Tue, 13 Feb 2001 09:01:32 -0800 Message-ID: <004a01c095e7$196e0ac0$aa8f85ce fjsparber> Reply-To: "Frederick Sparber" From: "Frederick Sparber" To: References: Subject: Re: Neutrons from D2-Ar-N2-Hot W? Date: Tue, 13 Feb 2001 10:02:06 -0800 MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-Priority: 3 X-MSMail-Priority: Normal X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook Express 5.00.2615.200 X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V5.00.2615.200 Resent-Message-ID: <"yGbx03.0.en.iXMYw" mx1> Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/40752 X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com Status: O X-Status: ----- Original Message ----- From: Mitchell Jones To: Frederick Sparber Sent: Tuesday, February 13, 2001 7:28 AM Subject: Re: Neutrons from D2-Ar-N2-Hot W? You're posts are still not getting to vortex, Mitchell. ??? FJS > >With a small amount of D2/D2O injected into an ordinary incandescent > >light bulb, there should be some neutrons emitted due to the > >"catalytic" action of Argon-N2 in stripping of the Deuterons > >during formation of the "Deuterino" or D*. > > > >Since most off-the-shelf light bulbs are already pressurized > >with about 2/3 atm of N2-Argon, if there is any H2O present > >there should be transmutation of the Hot Tungsten occurring in > >bulbs that have been running for hundreds of hours. > > > >The black deposit on the bulbs may show this when analyzed. > > > >Regards, Frederick > > ***{Ernest Sternglass did an experiment back in the '50's in which he > passed 35000 volts between two tungsten electrodes inside a hydrogen-filled > tube, and generated lots of neutrons. This result had physicists scratching > their heads at the time because, according to theory, an electron needs to > be accelerated through a potential of roughly 780000 volts in order to slam > into a proton with enough energy to produce a neutron. Nobody ever came up > with an explanation for the result that accorded well with prevailing > theory, and so they simply stopped talking about it. In my view, however, > they were looking for the explanation in the wrong place--in the > plasma--rather than inside the tungsten lattice at the cathode end of the > setup, where CF may have been taking place. This experiment, in fact, is > one of the major reasons why I have never been able to reach a firm > conclusion about whether CF is real or not. (I have given the reference > here before, but can't place my hands on the book right now. As I recall, > this was discussed in one of Sternglass' books that had "Black Holes" in > the title, plus some other words that I do not recall.) --MJ}*** > > > ________________ > Quote of the month: > > "Law is what the authorities use to ride the country." --Anatoly Schransky > From vortex-l-request eskimo.com Tue Feb 13 09:55:06 2001 Received: (from smartlst localhost) by mx1.eskimo.com (8.9.1a/8.8.8) id JAA02265; Tue, 13 Feb 2001 09:53:08 -0800 Resent-Date: Tue, 13 Feb 2001 09:53:08 -0800 Message-Id: Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Date: Tue, 13 Feb 2001 09:02:58 -0900 To: vortex-l eskimo.com From: hheffner mtaonline.net (Horace Heffner) Subject: RE: Report: HotWater Resent-Message-ID: <"3MC8r1.0.IZ.3INYw" mx1> Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/40753 X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com Status: O X-Status: At 10:10 PM 2/12/1, Charles Ford wrote: >Bzzzdt Wo hooo (cheap thrill) > >Grounding will never be adequate because the water (unpure) will be >resistave and a certin amount of current will travel past the grounding >equipment. You must totally isolate the source current from the water. Do >you have an isolation transformer? Also UL used to use an isolation test >probe. You must have missed the original posts. Paul's main intent is to pass current through the water to change its quality. >UL isolation probe. >Make a series circuit of a .1uF cap and a 10K resister. ground the >resister and attach the cap to the probe. Measue across the resister with >an AC voltmeter while touching any part of the device that may touch you. >(including the water) Any voltage measured in access of 1V will be >unacceptable. This represents an isolation fault of 100uA Paul is also using DC instead of AC sometimes in his experiments. Low voltage smoothed DC is better, but it can cause severe corrosion somewhere in the system, if there are any grounded metal parts. There is also the possibility of an accidental AC path through the water to ground in the event of rectifier failure, and other possible accidents. Also, I don't think pulsed DC is any better than AC when it comes to electrocution. > >Probably fill heat and drop is the best. Yes. >Make the final container out of >stainless steal and ground it. Conventional water softener and water heater would probably be a lot better. Also, GFCI recepticals are cheap and easy to install, and should be used in bathrooms and kitchens. Regards, Horace Heffner From vortex-l-request eskimo.com Tue Feb 13 10:19:03 2001 Received: (from smartlst localhost) by mx1.eskimo.com (8.9.1a/8.8.8) id KAA13669; Tue, 13 Feb 2001 10:12:25 -0800 Resent-Date: Tue, 13 Feb 2001 10:12:25 -0800 Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" X-Sender: mjones pop.jump.net Message-Id: Date: Tue, 13 Feb 2001 12:11:25 -0600 To: vortex-l eskimo.com From: Mitchell Jones Subject: Re: Neutrons from D2-Ar-N2-Hot W? Resent-Message-ID: <"mZp8w3.0.RL3.9aNYw" mx1> Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/40754 X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com Status: O X-Status: ***{Here is the misdirected post. --MJ}*** >With a small amount of D2/D2O injected into an ordinary incandescent >light bulb, there should be some neutrons emitted due to the >"catalytic" action of Argon-N2 in stripping of the Deuterons >during formation of the "Deuterino" or D*. > >Since most off-the-shelf light bulbs are already pressurized >with about 2/3 atm of N2-Argon, if there is any H2O present >there should be transmutation of the Hot Tungsten occurring in >bulbs that have been running for hundreds of hours. > >The black deposit on the bulbs may show this when analyzed. > >Regards, Frederick ***{Ernest Sternglass did an experiment back in the '50's in which he passed 35000 volts between two tungsten electrodes inside a hydrogen-filled tube, and generated lots of neutrons. This result had physicists scratching their heads at the time because, according to theory, an electron needs to be accelerated through a potential of roughly 780000 volts in order to slam into a proton with enough energy to produce a neutron. Nobody ever came up with an explanation for the result that accorded well with prevailing theory, and so they simply stopped talking about it. In my view, however, they were looking for the explanation in the wrong place--in the plasma--rather than inside the tungsten lattice at the cathode end of the setup, where CF may have been taking place. This experiment, in fact, is one of the major reasons why I have never been able to reach a firm conclusion about whether CF is real or not. (I have given the reference here before, but can't place my hands on the book right now. As I recall, this was discussed in one of Sternglass' books that had "Black Holes" in the title, plus some other words that I do not recall.) --MJ}*** ________________ Quote of the month: "Law is what the authorities use to ride the country." --Anatoly Schransky From vortex-l-request eskimo.com Tue Feb 13 10:20:49 2001 Received: (from smartlst localhost) by mx1.eskimo.com (8.9.1a/8.8.8) id KAA14438; Tue, 13 Feb 2001 10:14:25 -0800 Resent-Date: Tue, 13 Feb 2001 10:14:25 -0800 Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" X-Sender: mjones pop.jump.net Message-Id: Date: Tue, 13 Feb 2001 12:13:18 -0600 To: vortex-l eskimo.com From: Mitchell Jones Subject: Re: Neutrons from D2-Ar-N2-Hot W? Resent-Message-ID: <"bwceE1.0.WX3.1cNYw" mx1> Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/40755 X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com Status: O X-Status: ***{I had to send this one twice also. AAAUGH!!!!!!!! --MJ}*** >----- Original Message ----- >From: Mitchell Jones >To: Frederick Sparber >Sent: Tuesday, February 13, 2001 7:28 AM >Subject: Re: Neutrons from D2-Ar-N2-Hot W? > >You're posts are still not getting to vortex, Mitchell. ??? > >FJS ***{You still have your "reply-to" header set to divert replies to your private e-mail, Fred. (Here is what it says: "Reply-To: "Frederick Sparber" .") Result: I have to watch like a hawk when replying to your stuff, or my reply doesn't go to vortex, as was the case here. Therefore, *please* leave the reply-to header blank in the future. Thanks. --MJ}*** > > >> >With a small amount of D2/D2O injected into an ordinary incandescent >> >light bulb, there should be some neutrons emitted due to the >> >"catalytic" action of Argon-N2 in stripping of the Deuterons >> >during formation of the "Deuterino" or D*. >> > >> >Since most off-the-shelf light bulbs are already pressurized >> >with about 2/3 atm of N2-Argon, if there is any H2O present >> >there should be transmutation of the Hot Tungsten occurring in >> >bulbs that have been running for hundreds of hours. >> > >> >The black deposit on the bulbs may show this when analyzed. >> > >> >Regards, Frederick >> >> ***{Ernest Sternglass did an experiment back in the '50's in which he >> passed 35000 volts between two tungsten electrodes inside a hydrogen-filled >> tube, and generated lots of neutrons. This result had physicists scratching >> their heads at the time because, according to theory, an electron needs to >> be accelerated through a potential of roughly 780000 volts in order to slam >> into a proton with enough energy to produce a neutron. Nobody ever came up >> with an explanation for the result that accorded well with prevailing >> theory, and so they simply stopped talking about it. In my view, however, >> they were looking for the explanation in the wrong place--in the >> plasma--rather than inside the tungsten lattice at the cathode end of the >> setup, where CF may have been taking place. This experiment, in fact, is >> one of the major reasons why I have never been able to reach a firm >> conclusion about whether CF is real or not. (I have given the reference >> here before, but can't place my hands on the book right now. As I recall, >> this was discussed in one of Sternglass' books that had "Black Holes" in >> the title, plus some other words that I do not recall.) --MJ}*** >> >> >> ________________ >> Quote of the month: >> >> "Law is what the authorities use to ride the country." --Anatoly Schransky >> ________________ Quote of the month: "Law is what the authorities use to ride the country." --Anatoly Schransky From vortex-l-request eskimo.com Tue Feb 13 10:31:50 2001 Received: (from smartlst localhost) by mx1.eskimo.com (8.9.1a/8.8.8) id KAA18718; Tue, 13 Feb 2001 10:22:11 -0800 Resent-Date: Tue, 13 Feb 2001 10:22:11 -0800 Message-Id: Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Date: Tue, 13 Feb 2001 09:32:00 -0900 To: vortex-l eskimo.com From: hheffner mtaonline.net (Horace Heffner) Subject: Re: Neutrons from D2-Ar-N2-Hot W? Resent-Message-ID: <"nRd-f2.0.Na4.IjNYw" mx1> Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/40756 X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com Status: O X-Status: At 12:11 PM 2/13/1, Mitchell Jones wrote: >***{Ernest Sternglass did an experiment back in the '50's in which he >passed 35000 volts between two tungsten electrodes inside a hydrogen-filled >tube, and generated lots of neutrons. This result had physicists scratching >their heads at the time because, according to theory, an electron needs to >be accelerated through a potential of roughly 780000 volts in order to slam >into a proton with enough energy to produce a neutron. Nobody ever came up >with an explanation for the result that accorded well with prevailing >theory, and so they simply stopped talking about it. In my view, however, >they were looking for the explanation in the wrong place--in the >plasma--rather than inside the tungsten lattice at the cathode end of the >setup, where CF may have been taking place. This experiment, in fact, is >one of the major reasons why I have never been able to reach a firm >conclusion about whether CF is real or not. (I have given the reference >here before, but can't place my hands on the book right now. As I recall, >this was discussed in one of Sternglass' books that had "Black Holes" in >the title, plus some other words that I do not recall.) --MJ}*** This experiment would only be mysterious if isotopically pure protium were used, because deuterium present in ordinary hydrogen will strip neutrons upon hitting the tungsten at that high energy. If there are more neutrons than would be obtained from stipping in deuterioum at its partial pressure in the tube then maybe something special is going on. Regards, Horace Heffner From vortex-l-request eskimo.com Tue Feb 13 10:55:10 2001 Received: (from smartlst localhost) by mx1.eskimo.com (8.9.1a/8.8.8) id KAA03211; Tue, 13 Feb 2001 10:50:19 -0800 Resent-Date: Tue, 13 Feb 2001 10:50:19 -0800 Message-ID: <3A89745C.27A95611 ix.netcom.com> Date: Tue, 13 Feb 2001 11:52:48 -0600 From: Edmund Storms X-Mailer: Mozilla 4.5 (Macintosh; U; PPC) X-Accept-Language: en,pdf MIME-Version: 1.0 To: vortex-l eskimo.com Subject: Re: Report: HotWater References: Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii; x-mac-type="54455854"; x-mac-creator="4D4F5353" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Resent-Message-ID: <"p89jV2.0.5o.g7OYw" mx1> Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/40757 X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com Status: O X-Status: The best voltage for electrolysis is less than 12 V DC. Do not use AC. The current should not be above about 50 mA to prevent excessive corrosion of the anode. Use a resistor in series if necessary. A car battery can be used and electrocution is eliminated. The anode electrode will be slowly dissolved so that its composition is important. Use of silver will produce good germicide properties to the water. Use of copper should be avoided because copper in water is too poisonous. Carbon is best if cost is important. The cathode can be any metal. Good luck. Ed Storms Horace Heffner wrote: > At 10:10 PM 2/12/1, Charles Ford wrote: > >Bzzzdt Wo hooo (cheap thrill) > > > >Grounding will never be adequate because the water (unpure) will be > >resistave and a certin amount of current will travel past the grounding > >equipment. You must totally isolate the source current from the water. Do > >you have an isolation transformer? Also UL used to use an isolation test > >probe. > > You must have missed the original posts. Paul's main intent is to pass > current through the water to change its quality. > > >UL isolation probe. > >Make a series circuit of a .1uF cap and a 10K resister. ground the > >resister and attach the cap to the probe. Measue across the resister with > >an AC voltmeter while touching any part of the device that may touch you. > >(including the water) Any voltage measured in access of 1V will be > >unacceptable. This represents an isolation fault of 100uA > > Paul is also using DC instead of AC sometimes in his experiments. Low > voltage smoothed DC is better, but it can cause severe corrosion somewhere > in the system, if there are any grounded metal parts. There is also the > possibility of an accidental AC path through the water to ground in the > event of rectifier failure, and other possible accidents. Also, I don't > think pulsed DC is any better than AC when it comes to electrocution. > > > > >Probably fill heat and drop is the best. > > Yes. > > >Make the final container out of > >stainless steal and ground it. > > Conventional water softener and water heater would probably be a lot > better. Also, GFCI recepticals are cheap and easy to install, and should be > used in bathrooms and kitchens. > > Regards, > > Horace Heffner From vortex-l-request eskimo.com Tue Feb 13 13:05:30 2001 Received: (from smartlst localhost) by mx1.eskimo.com (8.9.1a/8.8.8) id MAA05440; Tue, 13 Feb 2001 12:48:20 -0800 Resent-Date: Tue, 13 Feb 2001 12:48:20 -0800 From: Robin van Spaandonk To: vortex-l eskimo.com Subject: Re: Report: HotWater Date: Wed, 14 Feb 2001 07:47:45 +1100 Organization: Improving Message-ID: <8a7j8t8k63sllt1o8g7rojhsonq288ukdt 4ax.com> References: <3A86A49A.10B9DAD@ix.netcom.com> In-Reply-To: <3A86A49A.10B9DAD ix.netcom.com> X-Mailer: Forte Agent 1.8/32.548 MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit X-MIME-Autoconverted: from quoted-printable to 8bit by mx1.eskimo.com id MAA05376 Resent-Message-ID: <"jJVk_3.0.qK1.KsPYw" mx1> Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/40758 X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com Status: O X-Status: In reply to Edmund Storms's message of Sun, 11 Feb 2001 08:41:33 -0600: >While you may not have produced CF, you definitely have found a >way to sterilize your water. Electrolytic action has been known >for many years to kill bacteria in water and to remove many >heavy elements. Indeed, the water thus produced, when mixed >with untreated water, will also kill bacteria. Possibly due to creation of H2O2 in solution? Regards, Robin van Spaandonk A Future For Humanity see: http://users.bigpond.net.au/rvanspaa/ From vortex-l-request eskimo.com Tue Feb 13 13:35:52 2001 Received: (from smartlst localhost) by mx1.eskimo.com (8.9.1a/8.8.8) id NAA23596; Tue, 13 Feb 2001 13:21:52 -0800 Resent-Date: Tue, 13 Feb 2001 13:21:52 -0800 Message-ID: <3A8997E1.2A168C73 ix.netcom.com> Date: Tue, 13 Feb 2001 14:24:12 -0600 From: Edmund Storms X-Mailer: Mozilla 4.5 (Macintosh; U; PPC) X-Accept-Language: en,pdf MIME-Version: 1.0 To: vortex-l eskimo.com Subject: Re: Report: HotWater References: <3A86A49A.10B9DAD@ix.netcom.com> <8a7j8t8k63sllt1o8g7rojhsonq288ukdt@4ax.com> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii; x-mac-type="54455854"; x-mac-creator="4D4F5353" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Resent-Message-ID: <"spKpY1.0.bm5.lLQYw" mx1> Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/40760 X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com Status: O X-Status: Robin van Spaandonk wrote: > In reply to Edmund Storms's message of Sun, 11 Feb 2001 08:41:33 -0600: > > >While you may not have produced CF, you definitely have found a > >way to sterilize your water. Electrolytic action has been known > >for many years to kill bacteria in water and to remove many > >heavy elements. Indeed, the water thus produced, when mixed > >with untreated water, will also kill bacteria. > > Possibly due to creation of H2O2 in solution? Perhaps, although very little is detected and the germicide effects are claimed to be greater than would be expected from such a dilute solution of H2O2. People have speculated that the basic nature of the water is changed, perhaps by creating complex structures. In any case, the water thus produced is an excellent germicide. Indeed, it is claimed to be better and cheaper than any commercial product. People now use this effect to keep swimming pools clean and to purify drinking water, rather than using chlorine. I understand Russian doctors are now using such water for wound sterilization with good effect. Regards, Ed Storms > > > Regards, > > Robin van Spaandonk > > A Future For Humanity see: http://users.bigpond.net.au/rvanspaa/ From vortex-l-request eskimo.com Tue Feb 13 13:37:06 2001 Received: (from smartlst localhost) by mx1.eskimo.com (8.9.1a/8.8.8) id NAA23587; Tue, 13 Feb 2001 13:21:51 -0800 Resent-Date: Tue, 13 Feb 2001 13:21:51 -0800 Message-ID: <3A89A71F.6A1BC3DE bellsouth.net> Date: Tue, 13 Feb 2001 16:29:03 -0500 From: Terry Blanton X-Mailer: Mozilla 4.73 [en] (WinNT; U) X-Accept-Language: en MIME-Version: 1.0 To: vortex-l eskimo.com Subject: New Jersey Wants New Energy Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Resent-Message-ID: <"AOmd91.0.Rm5.lLQYw" mx1> Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/40759 X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com Status: O X-Status: They have simply contacted the wrong person. See: http://cjonline.com/stories/020801/bus_energyplan.shtml I would think that Gene Mallove might want to contact Senate Utilities Chairman Stan Clark. Terry From vortex-l-request eskimo.com Tue Feb 13 13:56:56 2001 Received: (from smartlst localhost) by mx1.eskimo.com (8.9.1a/8.8.8) id NAA04099; Tue, 13 Feb 2001 13:46:59 -0800 Resent-Date: Tue, 13 Feb 2001 13:46:59 -0800 Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" X-Sender: mjones pop.jump.net Message-Id: In-Reply-To: Date: Tue, 13 Feb 2001 15:45:57 -0600 To: vortex-l eskimo.com From: Mitchell Jones Subject: Re: Neutrons from D2-Ar-N2-Hot W? Resent-Message-ID: <"v2v4k3.0.z_.IjQYw" mx1> Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/40761 X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com Status: O X-Status: >At 12:11 PM 2/13/1, Mitchell Jones wrote: > >>***{Ernest Sternglass did an experiment back in the '50's in which he >>passed 35000 volts between two tungsten electrodes inside a hydrogen-filled >>tube, and generated lots of neutrons. This result had physicists scratching >>their heads at the time because, according to theory, an electron needs to >>be accelerated through a potential of roughly 780000 volts in order to slam >>into a proton with enough energy to produce a neutron. Nobody ever came up >>with an explanation for the result that accorded well with prevailing >>theory, and so they simply stopped talking about it. In my view, however, >>they were looking for the explanation in the wrong place--in the >>plasma--rather than inside the tungsten lattice at the cathode end of the >>setup, where CF may have been taking place. This experiment, in fact, is >>one of the major reasons why I have never been able to reach a firm >>conclusion about whether CF is real or not. (I have given the reference >>here before, but can't place my hands on the book right now. As I recall, >>this was discussed in one of Sternglass' books that had "Black Holes" in >>the title, plus some other words that I do not recall.) --MJ}*** > >This experiment would only be mysterious if isotopically pure protium were >used, because deuterium present in ordinary hydrogen will strip neutrons >upon hitting the tungsten at that high energy. ***{Sez who? The required energy, Q, would be based on the following: 1H2 + Q --> 1H1 + n Thus we would have 2.0140 + Q = 1.007825 + 1.008665, and so Q = .00249 amu, or 2.32 MeV. How is a deuterium atom going to acquire 2.32 MeV by free falling through a potential difference of 35 keV? --Mitchell Jones}*** If there are more neutrons >than would be obtained from stipping in deuterioum at its partial pressure >in the tube then maybe something special is going on. > >Regards, > >Horace Heffner ________________ Quote of the month: "Law is what the authorities use to ride the country." --Anatoly Schransky From vortex-l-request eskimo.com Tue Feb 13 15:14:45 2001 Received: (from smartlst localhost) by mx1.eskimo.com (8.9.1a/8.8.8) id PAA16606; Tue, 13 Feb 2001 15:07:50 -0800 Resent-Date: Tue, 13 Feb 2001 15:07:50 -0800 Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary="============_-1230016875==_ma============" X-Sender: mjones pop.jump.net Message-Id: In-Reply-To: References: Date: Tue, 13 Feb 2001 17:06:42 -0600 To: vortex-l eskimo.com From: Mitchell Jones Subject: Re: Report: HotWater, Run 3 =1.20 Resent-Message-ID: <"dtu7i3.0.E34.6vRYw" mx1> Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/40762 X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com Status: O X-Status: --============_-1230016875==_ma============ Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" >Third measured run > (other than normal domestic use) > >After small geometry modification... > >2000.02.11-22:00 187 Vdc 20 Kg H2O > t T A Ttheory Efficiency > 0 26.7 2.40 26.7 1.00 > 900 2.30 31.5 >1800 38.8 2.30 36.1 1.29 >2700 2.20 40.7 >3600 48.8 2.15 45.1 1.12 > 1.20 ***{In order to get the data in your table to line up, I had to convert it to Courier, a fixed-length font. Having done that, I take the leftmost column, under t, to be the elapsed time in seconds; I take the second column, under T, to give the temperature in deg. C of your 20 Kg of water in the cell; I take the third column, under A, to be the electrolysis current in amps; I take the fourth column, under Ttheory, to give the expected temperature based on some theoretical calculation, assuming that the cell is not OU; and I take the fifth column to give the COP's (coefficients of performance) that you calculated. Let's see: (1) After 1800 seconds, the temperature was up by 12.1 deg. C, so the heat output, ignoring various losses, was (12.1)(20000) = 242000 calories, or 1012770 joules. (2) Energy input was (2.3)(187)(1800) = 774180 joules. (3) Thus the COP for row three of your table would be 1012770/774180 = 1.31, which is close to the number that you obtained. OK, I dig. Very interesting. Now how about some details? For starters: (1) You hinted at one point that, while the unit is at background according to your Geiger counter, the background count in the area is abnormal. Is it abnormally high, or abnormally low? (Exactly what area of the planet are you in, by the way?) (2) You said you ran the experiment in a 20 liter bucket. What kind of bucket? Plastic? Galvanized iron? (3) You said you used a bridge to rectify AC current into DC. Did you use a full-wave bridge? Did you do anything to convert the resulting bumpy waveform into a smooth waveform, so that your current readings will be meaningful? (If not, then I would not be surprised if your current measurements were *way* too low, thereby invalidating your OU numbers.) (4) What did you use for your anode and cathode? (5) You said you used tap water. From what source? A well? A cistern? A city water supply? --Mitchell Jones}*** ________________ Quote of the month: "Law is what the authorities use to ride the country." --Anatoly Schransky --============_-1230016875==_ma============ Content-Type: text/html; charset="us-ascii" Re: Report: HotWater, Run 3 =1.20
>Third measured run
> (other than normal domestic use)
>
>After small geometry modification...
>
>2000.02.11-22:00        187 Vdc  20 Kg H2O
>   t     T      A     Ttheory  Efficiency
>   0    26.7    2.40    26.7    1.00
> 900            2.30    31.5
>1800    38.8    2.30    36.1    1.29
>2700            2.20    40.7
>3600    48.8    2.15    45.1    1.12
>                                1.20

***{In order to get the data in your table to line up, I had to convert it to Courier, a fixed-length font. Having done that, I take the leftmost column, under t, to be the elapsed time in seconds; I take the second column, under T, to give the temperature in deg. C of your 20 Kg of water in the cell; I take the third column, under A, to be the electrolysis current in amps; I take the fourth column, under Ttheory, to give the expected temperature based on some theoretical calculation, assuming that the cell is not OU; and I take the fifth column to give the COP's (coefficients of performance) that you calculated.

Let's see:

(1) After 1800 seconds, the temperature was up by 12.1 deg. C, so the heat output, ignoring various losses, was (12.1)(20000) = 242000 calories, or 1012770 joules.

(2) Energy input was (2.3)(187)(1800) = 774180 joules.

(3) Thus the COP for row three of your table would be 1012770/774180 = 1.31, which is close to the number that you obtained.

OK, I dig. Very interesting. Now how about some details? For starters:

(1) You hinted at one point that, while the unit is at background according to your Geiger counter, the background count in the area is abnormal. Is it abnormally high, or abnormally low? (Exactly what area of the planet are you in, by the way?)

(2) You said you ran the experiment in a 20 liter bucket. What kind of bucket? Plastic? Galvanized iron?

(3) You said you used a bridge to rectify AC current into DC. Did you use a full-wave bridge? Did you do anything to convert the resulting bumpy waveform into a smooth waveform, so that your current readings will be meaningful? (If not, then I would not be surprised if your current measurements were *way* too low, thereby invalidating your OU numbers.)

(4) What did you use for your anode and cathode?

(5) You said you used tap water. From what source? A well? A cistern? A city water supply?

--Mitchell Jones}***
________________
Quote of the month:

"Law is what the authorities use to ride the country." --Anatoly Schransky
--============_-1230016875==_ma============-- From vortex-l-request eskimo.com Tue Feb 13 16:34:01 2001 Received: (from smartlst localhost) by mx1.eskimo.com (8.9.1a/8.8.8) id QAA00939; Tue, 13 Feb 2001 16:27:38 -0800 Resent-Date: Tue, 13 Feb 2001 16:27:38 -0800 Message-Id: Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Date: Tue, 13 Feb 2001 15:37:26 -0900 To: vortex-l eskimo.com From: hheffner mtaonline.net (Horace Heffner) Subject: Re: Neutrons from D2-Ar-N2-Hot W? Resent-Message-ID: <"AS3zo.0.ZE.v3TYw" mx1> Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/40763 X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com Status: O X-Status: At 3:45 PM 2/13/1, Mitchell Jones wrote: >>This experiment would only be mysterious if isotopically pure protium were >>used, because deuterium present in ordinary hydrogen will strip neutrons >>upon hitting the tungsten at that high energy. > >***{Sez who? Sez me, dat's who! 8^) (Ref: Foghorn Leghorn) >The required energy, Q, would be based on the following: > >1H2 + Q --> 1H1 + n > >Thus we would have 2.0140 + Q = 1.007825 + 1.008665, and so Q = .00249 amu, >or 2.32 MeV. > >How is a deuterium atom going to acquire 2.32 MeV by free falling through a >potential difference of 35 keV? First some speculation: my personal belief is that in all cases it doesn't have to. There is kinetic energy sored in the nucleus that can be tapped in some of the reactions. Stripping has a high cross section in a 1 MeV deuteron beam environment. Further, when a D2+ molecule (that's 2 deuterium atoms, one electron) is accelerated to 1 MeV there may be some kind of synergistic effect involved from a three bodiy interaction that neutralizes the magnetic portion of the bonds. Another thought is that the majority of the binding energy may be due to the magnetic moment of the neutron and protron, assuming they retain their identities in the D nucleus. The high energy electron rich environment offers an opportunity for the electrons to catalyse the stripping reaction by superpositioning in an inverted postion to either the neutron or protron, thus momentarily neutralizing the magnetic bond. At any rate, stripping was a bit of a surprise to the firstStellerator builders. They thought the neutron signature logically had to be from fusion. However, my main answer is this: you are describing a plasma device, not a beam device. There is thus a wide range of energies and 1 MeV or more is out in the tail of the distribution. It is not uncommon to obtain neutrons from a 20 keV plasma device - like the Farnsworth Fusor, for example. Regards, Horace Heffner From vortex-l-request eskimo.com Tue Feb 13 17:54:04 2001 Received: (from smartlst localhost) by mx1.eskimo.com (8.9.1a/8.8.8) id RAA07032; Tue, 13 Feb 2001 17:49:02 -0800 Resent-Date: Tue, 13 Feb 2001 17:49:02 -0800 Message-ID: <002301c09630$c8b9f2c0$138f85ce fjsparber> Reply-To: "Frederick Sparber" From: "Frederick Sparber" To: References: Subject: Re: Neutrons from D2-Ar-N2-Hot W? Date: Tue, 13 Feb 2001 18:49:26 -0800 MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-Priority: 3 X-MSMail-Priority: Normal X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook Express 5.00.2615.200 X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V5.00.2615.200 Resent-Message-ID: <"1mSis3.0.hj1.DGUYw" mx1> Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/40764 X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com Status: O X-Status: ----- Original Message ----- From: Horace Heffner To: Sent: Tuesday, February 13, 2001 4:37 PM Subject: Re: Neutrons from D2-Ar-N2-Hot W? Horace wrote: > At 3:45 PM 2/13/1, Mitchell Jones wrote: > > >>This experiment would only be mysterious if isotopically pure protium were > >>used, because deuterium present in ordinary hydrogen will strip neutrons > >>upon hitting the tungsten at that high energy.> > > >The required energy, Q, would be based on the following: > > > >1H2 + Q --> 1H1 + n > > > >Thus we would have 2.0140 + Q = 1.007825 + 1.008665, and so Q = .00249 amu, > >or 2.32 MeV. > > > >How is a deuterium atom going to acquire 2.32 MeV by free falling through a > >potential difference of 35 keV? For Deuteron "Stripping" which can occur at ~0.5 eV (~ 5800K) if the Neutral Deuterino (Hydrino Analog) D* is formed, Stripping Neutrons such as seen with the Columbus II (early 50s) are easy to explain: 1, D + e- (or LL-) ---> D* 2, D* + D ---> Tritium + Neutron + e- (or LL-) + Energy (~ 3.0 Mev) Or 3, D* + P ---> 3 He + e- (or LL-) + Energy (~ 3.0 Mev) Or 4, Hydrino or P* + D ---> 3 He + e- (or LL-) + Energy (3.0 Mev) If the energy was carried by an e- (Beta Particle) it would be easily measured. OTOH, due to it's large rest radius and low rest mass/energy an LL- at ~ 3.0 Mev couldn't go over over a few millimeters before being dissipated as heat. > > However, my main answer is this: you are describing a plasma device, not a > beam device. There is thus a wide range of energies and 1 MeV or more is > out in the tail of the distribution. It is not uncommon to obtain neutrons > from a 20 keV plasma device - like the Farnsworth Fusor, for example. Or a 0.5 eV to 200 eV Tokamak. :-) Regards, Frederick > > Regards, > > Horace Heffner > > > From vortex-l-request eskimo.com Tue Feb 13 19:22:09 2001 Received: (from smartlst localhost) by mx1.eskimo.com (8.9.1a/8.8.8) id TAA16910; Tue, 13 Feb 2001 19:16:49 -0800 Resent-Date: Tue, 13 Feb 2001 19:16:49 -0800 Message-Id: <200102140316.f1E3Gi426200 smtp-2u-1.atlantic.net> Date: Tue, 13 Feb 2001 22:26:1 -0500 From: "Michael T. Huffman" Reply-To: knuke LCIA.COM To: "vortex-l eskimo.com" Subject: Re: Re: Report: HotWater X-mailer: FoxMail 2.1 [en] Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Resent-Message-ID: <"yvrIz2.0.884.XYVYw" mx1> Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/40765 X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com Status: O X-Status: At 2/13/01 2:24:00 PM, you wrote: > > >Robin van Spaandonk wrote: > >> In reply to Edmund Storms's message of Sun, 11 Feb 2001 08:41:33 -0600: >> >> >While you may not have produced CF, you definitely have found a >> >way to sterilize your water. Electrolytic action has been known >> >for many years to kill bacteria in water and to remove many >> >heavy elements. Indeed, the water thus produced, when mixed >> >with untreated water, will also kill bacteria. >> >> Possibly due to creation of H2O2 in solution? > >Perhaps, although very little is detected and the germicide effects are >claimed to be greater than would be expected from such a dilute solution of >H2O2. People have speculated that the basic nature of the water is >changed, perhaps by creating complex structures. In any case, the water >thus produced is an excellent germicide. Indeed, it is claimed to be >better and cheaper than any commercial product. People now use this effect >to keep swimming pools clean and to purify drinking water, rather than >using chlorine. I understand Russian doctors are now using such water for >wound sterilization with good effect. > >Regards, > >Ed Storms > >> >> >> Regards, >> >> Robin van Spaandonk >> >> A Future For Humanity see: http://users.bigpond.net.au/rvanspaa/ Ahoy There, If there were any H2O2 in the solution, even at levels as low as 200 ppm, he should be able to taste it. Another quick and dirty field test for the presence of H2O2 is to pour a little of the solution over a really grungy, bacteria covered, flat area. If there is any H2O2 in the solution, the solution will produce numerous, visible bubbles. If you see bubbles, and you have the money, you can get a pretty accurate quantification with a Hach Chemical test lab kit ~ $50US. Don't get the test strips, they go bad almost instantly upon opening the packaging. Get the liquid reagent test kit. The cost is about the same for both. Knuke From vortex-l-request eskimo.com Tue Feb 13 19:37:21 2001 Received: (from smartlst localhost) by mx1.eskimo.com (8.9.1a/8.8.8) id TAA22792; Tue, 13 Feb 2001 19:29:49 -0800 Resent-Date: Tue, 13 Feb 2001 19:29:49 -0800 X-Apparently-From: Message-Id: <4.2.0.58.20010213213827.00b86420 postoffice.swbell.net> X-Sender: cjford1 pop.mail.yahoo.com X-Mailer: QUALCOMM Windows Eudora Pro Version 4.2.0.58 Date: Tue, 13 Feb 2001 21:40:23 -0600 To: vortex-l eskimo.com From: Charles Ford Subject: Re: Report: HotWater In-Reply-To: <3A89745C.27A95611 ix.netcom.com> References: Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"; format=flowed Resent-Message-ID: <"UkLKr3.0.2a5.ikVYw" mx1> Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/40766 X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com Status: O X-Status: If you are using a plug in power supply you still need to know if there is line leakage Use the UL probe for that. As far as your 12V source the leakage current limit should be the same. 100uA You will not even feel that. At 11:52 AM 2/13/01 -0600, you wrote: >The best voltage for electrolysis is less than 12 V DC. Do not use AC. The >current should not be above about 50 mA to prevent excessive corrosion of the >anode. Use a resistor in series if necessary. A car battery can be used and >electrocution is eliminated. The anode electrode will be slowly dissolved so >that its composition is important. Use of silver will produce good germicide >properties to the water. Use of copper should be avoided because copper in >water is too poisonous. Carbon is best if cost is important. The cathode can >be any metal. > >Good luck. > >Ed Storms > >Horace Heffner wrote: > > > At 10:10 PM 2/12/1, Charles Ford wrote: > > >Bzzzdt Wo hooo (cheap thrill) > > > > > >Grounding will never be adequate because the water (unpure) will be > > >resistave and a certin amount of current will travel past the grounding > > >equipment. You must totally isolate the source current from the > water. Do > > >you have an isolation transformer? Also UL used to use an isolation test > > >probe. > > > > You must have missed the original posts. Paul's main intent is to pass > > current through the water to change its quality. > > > > >UL isolation probe. > > >Make a series circuit of a .1uF cap and a 10K resister. ground the > > >resister and attach the cap to the probe. Measue across the resister with > > >an AC voltmeter while touching any part of the device that may touch you. > > >(including the water) Any voltage measured in access of 1V will be > > >unacceptable. This represents an isolation fault of 100uA > > > > Paul is also using DC instead of AC sometimes in his experiments. Low > > voltage smoothed DC is better, but it can cause severe corrosion somewhere > > in the system, if there are any grounded metal parts. There is also the > > possibility of an accidental AC path through the water to ground in the > > event of rectifier failure, and other possible accidents. Also, I don't > > think pulsed DC is any better than AC when it comes to electrocution. > > > > > > > >Probably fill heat and drop is the best. > > > > Yes. > > > > >Make the final container out of > > >stainless steal and ground it. > > > > Conventional water softener and water heater would probably be a lot > > better. Also, GFCI recepticals are cheap and easy to install, and should be > > used in bathrooms and kitchens. > > > > Regards, > > > > Horace Heffner _________________________________________________________ Do You Yahoo!? Get your free yahoo.com address at http://mail.yahoo.com From vortex-l-request eskimo.com Tue Feb 13 21:31:35 2001 Received: (from smartlst localhost) by mx1.eskimo.com (8.9.1a/8.8.8) id VAA02200; Tue, 13 Feb 2001 21:18:14 -0800 Resent-Date: Tue, 13 Feb 2001 21:18:14 -0800 Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" X-Sender: mjones pop.jump.net Message-Id: In-Reply-To: Date: Tue, 13 Feb 2001 23:15:49 -0600 To: vortex-l eskimo.com From: Mitchell Jones Subject: Re: Neutrons from D2-Ar-N2-Hot W? Resent-Message-ID: <"vyScN1.0.IY.LKXYw" mx1> Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/40767 X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com Status: O X-Status: >At 3:45 PM 2/13/1, Mitchell Jones wrote: > >>>This experiment would only be mysterious if isotopically pure protium were >>>used, because deuterium present in ordinary hydrogen will strip neutrons >>>upon hitting the tungsten at that high energy. >> >>***{Sez who? > > >Sez me, dat's who! 8^) (Ref: Foghorn Leghorn) > > >>The required energy, Q, would be based on the following: >> >>1H2 + Q --> 1H1 + n >> >>Thus we would have 2.0140 + Q = 1.007825 + 1.008665, and so Q = .00249 amu, >>or 2.32 MeV. >> >>How is a deuterium atom going to acquire 2.32 MeV by free falling through a >>potential difference of 35 keV? > > >First some speculation: my personal belief is that in all cases it doesn't >have to. There is kinetic energy sored in the nucleus that can be tapped >in some of the reactions. Stripping has a high cross section in a 1 MeV >deuteron beam environment. Further, when a D2+ molecule (that's 2 >deuterium atoms, one electron) is accelerated to 1 MeV there may be some >kind of synergistic effect involved from a three bodiy interaction that >neutralizes the magnetic portion of the bonds. Another thought is that >the majority of the binding energy may be due to the magnetic moment of the >neutron and protron, assuming they retain their identities in the D >nucleus. The high energy electron rich environment offers an opportunity >for the electrons to catalyse the stripping reaction by superpositioning in >an inverted postion to either the neutron or protron, thus momentarily >neutralizing the magnetic bond. At any rate, stripping was a bit of a >surprise to the firstStellerator builders. They thought the neutron >signature logically had to be from fusion. > >However, my main answer is this: you are describing a plasma device, not a >beam device. There is thus a wide range of energies and 1 MeV or more is >out in the tail of the distribution. It is not uncommon to obtain neutrons >from a 20 keV plasma device - like the Farnsworth Fusor, for example. ***{Hi Horace. I originally had assumed that, by referring to the stripping of neutrons, you were referring to reactions in which a deuteron bounced off of a tungsten atom, and separated into a proton and a neutron--i.e., that you were referring to the reaction 1H2 --> 1H1 + n, as indicated in my original reply. However, after doing some reading about stripping reactions, I realized that you were referring to the situation in which the deuteron strikes the tungsten atom with its proton being absorbed, leaving only the neutron to fly off. Not having a ready answer to that possibility, I engaged in a massive search for the missing book by Sternglass, and finally found it, buried under a pile of books on an unrelated subject. The book in question is entitled *Before the Big Bang*, and on pg. 85 he addressed your objection, as follows: "The possibility that a small normal admixture of deuterium, a form of heavy hydrogen, was the source of neutrons was eliminated both theoretically and subsequently by deliberately adding known amounts of this gas and measuring the neutron production rate. To everyone's consternation, no one in the physics department was able to suggest a known nuclear reaction that might explain the observed activity." Bottom line: your comments appear to have been correct, but the possibility you raised was discounted by a specific experimental test. It therefore appears that CF may have been involved here, as I said originally. (I believe the Sternglass book is out of print, but I see it fairly frequently in used book stores, so if you want a copy it should be fairly easy to obtain.) --Mitchell Jones}*** > > > >Regards, > >Horace Heffner ________________ Quote of the month: "Law is what the authorities use to ride the country." --Anatoly Schransky From vortex-l-request eskimo.com Tue Feb 13 23:41:33 2001 Received: (from smartlst localhost) by mx1.eskimo.com (8.9.1a/8.8.8) id XAA22682; Tue, 13 Feb 2001 23:38:06 -0800 Resent-Date: Tue, 13 Feb 2001 23:38:06 -0800 Date: Mon, 12 Feb 2001 09:03:56 -0800 From: Jones Beene Subject: Re: photon in a cavity To: vortex-l eskimo.com Message-id: <3A88177C.4020508 pacbell.net> MIME-version: 1.0 Content-type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii; format=flowed Content-transfer-encoding: 7bit User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (Windows; U; Win98; en-US; m18) Gecko/20001108 Netscape6/6.0 X-Accept-Language: en References: <8.1025fe6a.27b969c5 aol.com> Resent-Message-ID: <"hciIO.0.GY5.UNZYw" mx1> Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/40768 X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com Status: O X-Status: Frank Znidarsic writes: > The standard model states that the wavefuntion is held in place by the > addition of an infinite series of waves. The Schrodinger wave equation comes > from this model. I have derived the Schrodinger wave equation from another > approach. My approach is that restoring forces confine the wave functions. > Jennision did this with an electromagnetic wave. I extended the idea to all > waves in simple harmonic motion. > The restoring force produce reflections. Reflections are a result of a > change in characteristic impedance. I introduced an elastic limit of space. > I then went on to show that this interaction of this elastic quantum produces > reflections that confine the wave function. The deBroblie wavelength was > shown to be the superposition of the original Compton wave and its doppler > shifted reflection. The megahertz meter relationship comes from this > analysis. Hey Frank, A suggestion FWIW: If your are really quick, and if one of the implications of your theory is what I think it is, then perhaps you can try to tie it into the following news story - which is just out today and making quite a stir. If you can issue your own press release in time, it should give you a quite a bit ot free publicity.... Source: Texas A&M University (http://www.tamu.edu/) Einstein In Need Of Update? Calculations Show The Speed Of Light Might Change In 1905, Einstein made major changes to laws of physics when he established his theory of relativity. Now Einstein's laws might also undergo significant changes. Dimitri Nanopoulos, who holds the rank of Distinguished Professor of Physics at Texas A&M University and heads the Houston Advanced Research Center's Group for Astroparticle Physics, established, along with other physicists, that the speed of light, instead of being the constant value of 186,282 miles per second, might change. In 1905, Einstein established that light was the only object to have a constant speed in all reference frames. This idea was the cornerstone to his theory of relativity, and later to laws of physics. "If the speed of light proves not to be constant any more, even by a very small changeable amount, laws of physics - the theory of relativity included - will have to undergo significant changes," says Nanopoulos. Nanopoulos, who chairs the Theoretical Physics Division of the Academy of Athens, is among the many physicists who are trying to establish the basis of quantum gravity, a theory that has been dreamed of by physicists since the 1920s. While they were doing mathematical calculations, Nanopoulos and physicists Nikolaos Mavromatos of King's College in London and John Ellis of the European Center for Particle Physics (CERN) in Geneva, discovered a new expression for the speed of light, which depends on its frequency. "Through our calculations, we found that the speed of light is frequency-dependent," says Nanopoulos. "But a change in the usual speed of light value of 186,282 miles per second is noticeable only for light coming from astronomical objects situated very far from Earth, which is why this frequency dependence has not been noticed so far." Physicists are setting up the theory of quantum gravity to put together two major discoveries of physics in the 20th century: the theory of relativity and quantum physics. The theory of relativity explains both how space and time are related to each other and how gravitation works. Quantum physics describes the workings of the microscopic world, where laws of probability replace the deterministic view used to describe our everyday world. Until now, physicists have been considering many scenarios for quantum gravity, but these scenarios have never been experimentally confirmed. The hypotheses put forward by Nanopoulos and his collaborators has been under experimental scrutiny, and the results obtained during the last few months are encouraging. "One way to experimentally test our hypothesis is to consider galaxies or other objects in the sky that are very far from us," says Nanopoulos. "Then we collect the photons (particles of light) simultaneously emitted by these sources, and we look at differences of arrival times in a detector on earth between photons of different frequencies. The photons of higher frequencies should come later." The frequency-dependent expression of the speed of light depends on the gravitational constant, a quantity that is known since Newton established his law of gravitation. By using the differences in photon arrival times of six astronomical sources, Nanopoulos and his collaborators estimated an upper bound of the value of the gravitational constant from the data, and compared their results with the expected value. "We were amazed to see that if we use all these astronomical data, we find very reasonable values for the gravitational constant," says Nanopoulos. "That was our first surprise: the fact that, put together, a bunch of data that had nothing to do with the gravitational constant, gave us values so close to what we would expect to find." A second experimental encouraging result about the frequency-dependence of the speed of light was provided by the HEGRA (High Energy Gamma Ray Astronomy) experiment, which is detecting photons from outer space, and is situated in La Palma, Canary Islands. The frequency-dependent expression of the speed of light was used to solve a problem faced by three physicists: Tadashi Kifune, from the University of Tokyo in Japan, Ray Protheroe, from the University of Adelaide in Australia, and Hinrich Meyer, from the University of Wuppertal in Germany. The problem occurred when HEGRA physicists detected very energetic photons emitted by the galaxy Markarian 501. "The most energetic of these photons were expected to interact with other very low-energy photons from the infrared background radiation, which is a radiation present since the early universe," says Nanopoulos. "When a very energetic photon interacts with a low-energy photon, they have just the right quantity of energy to create an electron-antielectron pair. But physicists at HEGRA did not see any of the expected electron-antielectron pairs, but did observe very energetic photons instead. "By using the frequency-dependent expression of the speed of light, Kifune, Protheroe and Meyer found that the combined energy of each type of photon was not enough to create an electron-antielectron pair," adds Nanopoulos. "That is why no electron-antielectron pair has been observed." If by looking at more energetic photons, HEGRA never detects the expected electron-antielectron pairs, this would provide further support of the new hypothesis put forward by Nanopoulos and his collaborators. "This frequency-dependence of the speed of light changes drastically our view of the theory of relativity," Nanopoulos says. "It is also the first time that we have a window of opportunity to study quantum gravity, and thus scientifically study the origin of the Universe. It is a fantastic thing that we can experimentally magnify such a tiny effect." Nanopoulos says that if the frequency-dependence of the speed of light is further confirmed by other experiments, the theory of relativity would still be valid under certain circumstances. "There is nothing wrong with Einstein's theory of relativity. If the energy of an object is much smaller than 1019 proton masses or if the distance between two objects is smaller than millions of light-years, Einstein's equations are still valid," he says. From vortex-l-request eskimo.com Wed Feb 14 00:23:56 2001 Received: (from smartlst localhost) by mx1.eskimo.com (8.9.1a/8.8.8) id AAA32744; Wed, 14 Feb 2001 00:21:19 -0800 Resent-Date: Wed, 14 Feb 2001 00:21:19 -0800 Message-Id: Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Date: Tue, 13 Feb 2001 23:31:17 -0900 To: vortex-l eskimo.com From: hheffner mtaonline.net (Horace Heffner) Subject: Re: Report: HotWater Resent-Message-ID: <"4Dl2p1.0.X_7.__ZYw" mx1> Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/40770 X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com Status: O X-Status: At 9:40 PM 2/13/1, Charles Ford wrote: >If you are using a plug in power supply you still need to know if there is >line leakage >Use the UL probe for that. As far as your 12V source the leakage current >limit should be the same. 100uA You will not even feel that. You are overlooking the fact that home made non-UL tested junk might be expected to fail. Regards, Horace Heffner From vortex-l-request eskimo.com Wed Feb 14 00:24:23 2001 Received: (from smartlst localhost) by mx1.eskimo.com (8.9.1a/8.8.8) id AAA32681; Wed, 14 Feb 2001 00:21:11 -0800 Resent-Date: Wed, 14 Feb 2001 00:21:11 -0800 Message-Id: Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Date: Tue, 13 Feb 2001 23:31:02 -0900 To: vortex-l eskimo.com From: hheffner mtaonline.net (Horace Heffner) Subject: Re: Neutrons from D2-Ar-N2-Hot W? Resent-Message-ID: <"UmpnU2.0.Y-7.s_ZYw" mx1> Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/40769 X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com Status: O X-Status: At 11:15 PM 2/13/1, Mitchell Jones wrote: >"The possibility that a small normal admixture of deuterium, a form of >heavy hydrogen, was the source of neutrons was eliminated both >theoretically and subsequently by deliberately adding known amounts of this >gas and measuring the neutron production rate. To everyone's consternation, >no one in the physics department was able to suggest a known nuclear >reaction that might explain the observed activity." Very interesting stuff! Does it give a clue as to what the results were or where they can be found? I take it the neutron production rate did not increase in proportion to the amount of D2. BTW, I was referring to the standard deuterium stripping reaction characterized by: 2 D+ ---> D+ + n + p+ however, there indeed are other stripping (like) reactions, called exchange reactions, where it is suggested that energy is obtained from the heavy target nucleus of the exchange. My speculations are based roughly on the idea that the high energy 35 keV electrons would have, in proximity to the nucleus, a kinetic energy of about 511 keV + 35 kev = 546 keV, and, including rest mass of 511 keV, a total energy of 1057 keV for use in the relativistic momentum calculation: E^2 = E0^2 + (pc)^2 or p = ([E^2 - E0^2]^0.5)/c p = ([(1.057x10^6 ev)^2 - (5.11x10^5 eV)^2]^0.5)/c p = 6.274x10^-22 kg-m/s giving a deBroglie wavelength of: lambda = h/p = h/(6.274 kg-m/s) = 1.056x10^-12 m and thus, given a nuclear radius of about 10^-4 m, about a 1/10,000 chance of being "found in the nucleus" at any moment during the interaction, and thus a similar probability of stripping a neutron electromagnetically by cancelling the magnetic moment of the neutron or protron. In addition, that small an electron can catalyse a fusion reaction in a D2 pair, via screening mechanisms I have posted in the past. Obtaining a high fusion or neutron production rate is then a matter of obtaining a high electron flux into the nucleus. Regards, Horace Heffner From vortex-l-request eskimo.com Wed Feb 14 04:39:54 2001 Received: (from smartlst localhost) by mx1.eskimo.com (8.9.1a/8.8.8) id EAA28740; Wed, 14 Feb 2001 04:37:13 -0800 Resent-Date: Wed, 14 Feb 2001 04:37:13 -0800 Message-ID: <005b01c0968b$563665c0$138f85ce fjsparber> Reply-To: "Frederick Sparber" From: "Frederick Sparber" To: Cc: Subject: Re: Neutrons from D2-Ar-N2-Hot W? Date: Wed, 14 Feb 2001 05:37:45 -0800 MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-Priority: 3 X-MSMail-Priority: Normal X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook Express 5.00.2615.200 X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V5.00.2615.200 Resent-Message-ID: <"CZjAH2.0.-07.uldYw" mx1> Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/40771 X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com Status: O X-Status: FWIW, Mitchell: Under the right conditions a Hydrino (or P*) could effect the reaction: Proton-(Electron-Proton) ---> Proton + Neutron + e+ + Antineutrino + Energy in a hydrogen-tungsten electrode discharge such as that reported by Sternglass. In this situation the Neutron could be formed without becoming bound to a Proton to make Deuterium. The P-e-P reaction is well established in the Solar Model. Perhaps Mills' Hydrino or Hydrino Hydride does this under high energy bombardment of a Tungsten cathode. Possibly if a catalyst such as Potassium or Argon is present this reaction can occur at much lower energies such as in the Mizuno-Ohmori effects. Regards, Frederick From vortex-l-request eskimo.com Wed Feb 14 07:15:48 2001 Received: (from smartlst localhost) by mx1.eskimo.com (8.9.1a/8.8.8) id HAA16998; Wed, 14 Feb 2001 07:09:55 -0800 Resent-Date: Wed, 14 Feb 2001 07:09:55 -0800 From: FZNIDARSIC aol.com Message-ID: Date: Wed, 14 Feb 2001 10:09:03 EST Subject: Re: photon in a cavity To: vortex-l eskimo.com MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="US-ASCII" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-Mailer: AOL 5.0 for Windows sub 128 Resent-Message-ID: <"Gc-fg2.0.Q94.3_fYw" mx1> Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/40772 X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com Status: O X-Status: In a message dated 2/14/01 2:41:51 AM Eastern Standard Time, jonesb9 pacbell.net writes: << Hey Frank, A suggestion FWIW: If your are really quick, and if one of the implications of your theory is what I think it is, then perhaps you can try to tie it into the following news story - which is just out today and making quite a stir. If you can issue your own press release in time, it should give you a quite a bit ot free publicity.... >> Thank you Jones but I cannot issue my own news bulletin. I can't get published in most scientific journals. If it were not for Hal Fox, Tom Vallone, Gene Mallove and George Miley I would not be published at all. Miley stuck his neck way out to have me to speak at UIUC and ANS. He gave me a real break. I owe him. I also owe Lot Brantley of NASA Marshall. He invited me to witness the gravitational experiments. This gave me a chance to see bath the cold fusion and gravitational experiments. For this unique vantage point I was able to develop a more global perspective. This helped a lot. I'm going to keep working with these people. There is no use expending more wasted effort with the others. I thought that Howard Haden Gallian Electrodynamics would be receptive. I was disappointed by him. He delayed the publication of some material for 8 years. He had it first and it took 8 years to come out in other places. I've been waiting for Lattice energy. My very beautiful and intelligent female companion says "Wait It will happen." With no funds resources and the likes of Robert Parks on our back I'm beginning to wonder. Take a hiking trip with me in Johnstown PA. ParksJohnstown Johnstown PA Stackhouse and Hillside Parks Incline Cambri Frank Znidarsic From vortex-l-request eskimo.com Wed Feb 14 08:41:07 2001 Received: (from smartlst localhost) by mx1.eskimo.com (8.9.1a/8.8.8) id IAA27707; Wed, 14 Feb 2001 08:37:46 -0800 Resent-Date: Wed, 14 Feb 2001 08:37:46 -0800 From: "xplorer" To: Subject: RE: Report: HotWater, Run 3 =1.20 txt Date: Wed, 14 Feb 2001 23:37:29 +0700 Message-ID: MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-Priority: 3 (Normal) X-MSMail-Priority: Normal X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook IMO, Build 9.0.2416 (9.0.2910.0) X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V4.72.3110.3 Importance: Normal In-Reply-To: Resent-Message-ID: <"54zGe2.0.mm6.QHhYw" mx1> Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/40774 X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com Status: O X-Status: > From: Mitchell Jones [mailto:mjones jump.net] > Sent: 2001 February 14, Wednesday 06:07 > Subject: Re: Report: HotWater, Run 3 =1.20 txt > > > >Third measured run > > (other than normal domestic use) > > > >After small geometry modification... > > > >2000.02.11-22:00 187 Vdc 20 Kg H2O > > t T A Ttheory Efficiency > > 0 26.7 2.40 26.7 1.00 > > 900 2.30 31.5 > >1800 38.8 2.30 36.1 1.29 > >2700 2.20 40.7 > >3600 48.8 2.15 45.1 1.12 > > 1.20 > > > ***{In order to get the data in your table to line up, I had to > convert it to Courier, a fixed-length font. Having done that, I > take the leftmost column, under t, to be the elapsed time in > seconds; I take the second column, under T, to give the > temperature in deg. C of your 20 Kg of water in the cell; I take > the third column, under A, to be the electrolysis current in > amps; I take the fourth column, under Ttheory, to give the > expected temperature based on some theoretical calculation, > assuming that the cell is not OU; and I take the fifth column to > give the COP's (coefficients of performance) that you calculated. > Correct > > Let's see: > > > (1) After 1800 seconds, the temperature was up by 12.1 deg. C, so > the heat output, ignoring various losses, was (12.1)(20000) = > 242000 calories, or 1012770 joules. > > > (2) Energy input was (2.3)(187)(1800) = 774180 joules. > > > (3) Thus the COP for row three of your table would be > 1012770/774180 = 1.31, which is close to the number that you obtained. > > > OK, I dig. Very interesting. Now how about some details? For starters: > > > (1) You hinted at one point that, while the unit is at background > according to your Geiger counter, the background count in the > area is abnormal. Is it abnormally high, or abnormally low? > (Exactly what area of the planet are you in, by the way?) The background is Jakarta, which, according to my velleman counter, has for the past week had strong cyclic variations in the background levels, from a minimum of 20 to 60 seconds per count to erratic periods which tend more towards 15 to 20 seconds per count. I haven't mapped it, as I have been quite busy with many other projects, but the trend definitely seems to come and go over a period of several hours. There have been heavy rains causing flooding from the nearby rivers draining out of the mountains which could be a source of this, along with three days of continuously brisk winds which might also be bringing the source of the higher counts. I have been using this counter for the past two years as a curiousity piece kept over the doorframe. I have never bothered to track the counts before as they have always been rather stable until recently. Of course, I just replaced the schmitt trigger in it due to an accident I had with it, so this is a more likely bit to look to for increased sensitivity... Although I have yet to see any difference in count levels when the counter is near the hotwater heater, I am collecting the 'sludge' to check for any unusual levels there. I don't actually expect any - but it doesn't cost anything ;) > (2) You said you ran the experiment in a 20 liter bucket. What > kind of bucket? Plastic? Galvanized iron? I measured 20 liters of tap water into a plastic pail which the unit was inside. This was done carefully, to ensure I had an accurate mass of water. > (3) You said you used a bridge to rectify AC current into DC. Did > you use a full-wave bridge? Did you do anything to convert the > resulting bumpy waveform into a smooth waveform, so that your > current readings will be meaningful? (If not, then I would not be > surprised if your current measurements were *way* too low, > thereby invalidating your OU numbers.) I used a full-wave bridge, yes, and no - I didn't use anything to smooth the waveform - so this could be a distortion. However: the capacitive action of the unit is considerable, and measurements of the voltage drop across the unit as well as the current flow are all very stable. Fluctuations are generally on the order of 5 mA. I haven't gotten a data-logging system up just yet, but when I do it should settle the story of fluctuation when I track voltage/current/temperature simultaneously. Mostly it's been a matter of me looking at this from a viewpoint of "there's something obviously wrong here - I shouldn't need lab facilities to sort out where the number have gone wrong". Perhaps I am just too lazy. > (4) What did you use for your anode and cathode? The anode is steel pipe, the cathode is a steel bolt. The bolt is embedded in a concrete insulation plug. If you're interested, I have a .jpg of the beast > (5) You said you used tap water. From what source? A well? A > cistern? A city water supply? It's the city water, which is allegedly treated but we all believe that the treatment is only notional. I have seen swarms of worms, microscopic mite-like creatures, and various shades of algae associated with this water, as well as having to replace faucets every 90 days due to extensive corrosion. cheers PA From vortex-l-request eskimo.com Wed Feb 14 08:41:30 2001 Received: (from smartlst localhost) by mx1.eskimo.com (8.9.1a/8.8.8) id IAA27691; Wed, 14 Feb 2001 08:37:45 -0800 Resent-Date: Wed, 14 Feb 2001 08:37:45 -0800 From: "xplorer" To: Subject: RE: Report: HotWater Date: Wed, 14 Feb 2001 23:37:32 +0700 Message-ID: MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-Priority: 3 (Normal) X-MSMail-Priority: Normal X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook IMO, Build 9.0.2416 (9.0.2910.0) X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V4.72.3110.3 Importance: Normal In-Reply-To: Resent-Message-ID: <"GIoCd2.0.bm6.PHhYw" mx1> Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/40773 X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com Status: O X-Status: > From: Horace Heffner [mailto:hheffner mtaonline.net] > Sent: 2001 February 14, Wednesday 15:31 > Subject: Re: Report: HotWater > > > At 9:40 PM 2/13/1, Charles Ford wrote: > >If you are using a plug in power supply you still need to know > if there is > >line leakage > >Use the UL probe for that. As far as your 12V source the leakage current > >limit should be the same. 100uA You will not even feel that. > > > You are overlooking the fact that home made non-UL tested junk might be > expected to fail. Actually, that hits fairly close to home. Considering that this heater is going to be used by other people, I need to ensure their safety. I make a living off of making 'non-UL tested junk' perform in primitive environments, but the consequences of failure are, in those cases, sleepless nights finding a solution (nobody gets hurt). In this case, I suppose I'll try to find a way out of using house current altogether, perhaps by using a battery system. Back to the planning table.... From vortex-l-request eskimo.com Wed Feb 14 08:54:17 2001 Received: (from smartlst localhost) by mx1.eskimo.com (8.9.1a/8.8.8) id IAA02190; Wed, 14 Feb 2001 08:52:31 -0800 Resent-Date: Wed, 14 Feb 2001 08:52:31 -0800 From: "xplorer" To: "Vortex-L Eskimo. Com" Subject: FW: H2O2: Report: HotWater Date: Wed, 14 Feb 2001 23:52:17 +0700 Message-ID: MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-Priority: 3 (Normal) X-MSMail-Priority: Normal X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook IMO, Build 9.0.2416 (9.0.2910.0) X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V4.72.3110.3 Importance: Normal Resent-Message-ID: <"oRNO43.0.7Y.FVhYw" mx1> Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/40775 X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com Status: O X-Status: -----Original Message----- From: xplorer [mailto:xplorer indo.net.id] Sent: 2001 February 14, Wednesday 23:38 To: knuke lcia.com Subject: RE: H2O2: Report: HotWater My first 'bubbles' test was inconclusive - I just recovered from two days of sleep and I didn't have but some residual treated water to test with - I will make another batch in few moments and try that. If I can, I will test for this as soon as I can allocate funds. > -----Original Message----- > From: Michael T. Huffman [mailto:knuke lcia.com] > Sent: 2001 February 14, Wednesday 10:00 > To: vortex-l eskimo.com > Subject: Re: Re: Report: HotWater > > > At 2/13/01 2:24:00 PM, you wrote: > > > > > >Robin van Spaandonk wrote: > > > >> In reply to Edmund Storms's message of Sun, 11 Feb 2001 > 08:41:33 -0600: > >> > >> >While you may not have produced CF, you definitely have found a > >> >way to sterilize your water. Electrolytic action has been known > >> >for many years to kill bacteria in water and to remove many > >> >heavy elements. Indeed, the water thus produced, when mixed > >> >with untreated water, will also kill bacteria. > >> > >> Possibly due to creation of H2O2 in solution? > > > >Perhaps, although very little is detected and the germicide effects are > >claimed to be greater than would be expected from such a dilute > solution of > >H2O2. People have speculated that the basic nature of the water is > >changed, perhaps by creating complex structures. In any case, the water > >thus produced is an excellent germicide. Indeed, it is claimed to be > >better and cheaper than any commercial product. People now use > this effect > >to keep swimming pools clean and to purify drinking water, rather than > >using chlorine. I understand Russian doctors are now using such > water for > >wound sterilization with good effect. > > > >Regards, > > > >Ed Storms > > > >> > >> > >> Regards, > >> > >> Robin van Spaandonk > >> > >> A Future For Humanity see: http://users.bigpond.net.au/rvanspaa/ > > Ahoy There, > > If there were any H2O2 in the solution, even at levels as low as > 200 ppm, he should be able to > taste it. Another quick and dirty field test for the presence of > H2O2 is to pour a little of the > solution over a really grungy, bacteria covered, flat area. If > there is any H2O2 in the solution, the > solution will produce numerous, visible bubbles. If you see > bubbles, and you have the money, > you can get a pretty accurate quantification with a Hach Chemical > test lab kit ~ $50US. Don't > get the test strips, they go bad almost instantly upon opening > the packaging. Get the liquid > reagent test kit. The cost is about the same for both. > > Knuke > > From vortex-l-request eskimo.com Wed Feb 14 09:03:02 2001 Received: (from smartlst localhost) by mx1.eskimo.com (8.9.1a/8.8.8) id IAA05486; Wed, 14 Feb 2001 08:58:48 -0800 Resent-Date: Wed, 14 Feb 2001 08:58:48 -0800 Message-Id: <200102141658.f1EGwh417851 smtp-2u-1.atlantic.net> Date: Wed, 14 Feb 2001 12:8:4 -0500 From: "Michael T. Huffman" Reply-To: knuke LCIA.COM To: "vortex-l eskimo.com" Subject: Fw: RE: H2O2: Report: HotWater X-mailer: FoxMail 2.1 [en] Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Resent-Message-ID: <"XtlKk2.0.cL1.8bhYw" mx1> Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/40776 X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com Status: O X-Status: >From: Michael T. Huffman >To: xplorer >Subject: Re: RE: H2O2: Report: HotWater >At 2/14/01 11:37:00 PM, you wrote: >> >>My first 'bubbles' test was inconclusive - >> I just recovered from two days of sleep >> and I didn't have but some residual treated >> water to test with - I will make another >> batch in few moments and try that. >> >>If I can, I will test for this as soon >> as I can allocate funds. > >The H2O2 molecule starts to disintegrate more rapidly at temps higher than 90F, and also when >exposed to light. You might want to keep those two things in mind as well, when making your >next "batch". I wouldn't spend any money on a test lab kit unless I could actually taste it. It has a >definite "flavor", unless it is masked by any other ingredients in the water, such as minerals, etc.. > >Regards, >Knuke > From vortex-l-request eskimo.com Wed Feb 14 11:27:49 2001 Received: (from smartlst localhost) by mx1.eskimo.com (8.9.1a/8.8.8) id LAA26518; Wed, 14 Feb 2001 11:23:06 -0800 Resent-Date: Wed, 14 Feb 2001 11:23:06 -0800 Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" X-Sender: mjones pop.jump.net Message-Id: In-Reply-To: Date: Wed, 14 Feb 2001 13:22:07 -0600 To: vortex-l eskimo.com From: Mitchell Jones Subject: Re: Neutrons from D2-Ar-N2-Hot W? Resent-Message-ID: <"IPouR.0.GU6.QijYw" mx1> Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/40777 X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com Status: O X-Status: >At 11:15 PM 2/13/1, Mitchell Jones wrote: > >>"The possibility that a small normal admixture of deuterium, a form of >>heavy hydrogen, was the source of neutrons was eliminated both >>theoretically and subsequently by deliberately adding known amounts of this >>gas and measuring the neutron production rate. To everyone's consternation, >>no one in the physics department was able to suggest a known nuclear >>reaction that might explain the observed activity." > > >Very interesting stuff! Does it give a clue as to what the results were >or where they can be found? ***{He mentions that the experiment was replicated by Edward Trounson at the Naval Ordinance Laboratory, but I have no idea whether any of the work was ever published. I think Sternglass is still alive, so if someone can come up with his e-mail address, maybe we can obtain the details from him directly. This has always struck me as a much more potent CF result than any of the modern stuff, despite the fact that it was swept under the rug half a century ago. --MJ}*** I take it the neutron production rate did not >increase in proportion to the amount of D2. ***{That would be the implication. --MJ}*** > > >BTW, I was referring to the standard deuterium stripping reaction >characterized by: > > 2 D+ ---> D+ + n + p+ > >however, there indeed are other stripping (like) reactions, called exchange >reactions, where it is suggested that energy is obtained from the heavy >target nucleus of the exchange. ***{I had forgotten most of what I had read, long ago, about stripping reactions, and so I re-read some of that material yesterday. Based on what you said, above, there is some disagreement among experts regarding what a standard deuterium stripping reaction is. I say that because, in *Concepts of Nuclear Physics*, by Bernard Cohen, pg. 351, he gives the following definition: "An incident deuteron comes close enough to a nucleus for one of the two nucleons of which it is composed to enter the nucleus, while the other is deflected but continues on its way." In other words, reactions of type (d,p) and (d,n) are the standard deuterium stripping reactions, according to Cohen. [Note: by this notation, the particle before the comma is the incoming particle, and the particle after the comma is the outgoing particle. The target nucleus is not specified, but in the present context it would be a nucleus of tungsten.] These reactions bear little resemblance to the one given by you, above. For example: 1H2 + 74W184 --> 75Re185 + n + Q Thus we have: 2.0141022 + 183.95098 = 184.95301 + 1.0086653 + Q Solving, we find that Q = .00341 amu, or 3.17 MeV That means this reaction is exothermic, and we get neutrons in the bargain! Unfortunately, it would have a very low branching ratio, due to the repulsion between the incoming proton and the target nucleus. Thus a (d,p) stripping reaction would be vastly more likely than (d,n), because the neutron would much more easily penetrate the nucleus. Thus the vastly more probable outcome would be the following: 1H2 + 74W184 --> 74W185* + 1H1 + Q That gives: 2.0141022 + 183.95098 = 184.95374 + 1.0078252 + Q, and Q = .003517 amu, or 3.28 MeV. Thus the most likely outcome is a 3.28 MeV proton, and the vastly less likely outcome is a 3.17 MeV neutron. In addition, when the 74W185* goes through its isomeric transition, we get a .368 MeV photon, followed by a .432 MeV beta- particle, and wind up with 75Re185, exactly as before. Bottom line: my guess is that the probability of the (d,n) branch is vanishingly low when the incoming deuteron carries a mere 35 keV, due to the difficulty of the proton getting into the nucleus. --Mitchell Jones}*** [snip] ***{Your mathematical scribblings left me scratching my head. I will try to post a response to that part of your message later. --MJ}*** > >Regards, > >Horace Heffner ________________ Quote of the month: "Law is what the authorities use to ride the country." --Anatoly Schransky From vortex-l-request eskimo.com Wed Feb 14 13:22:27 2001 Received: (from smartlst localhost) by mx1.eskimo.com (8.9.1a/8.8.8) id NAA19564; Wed, 14 Feb 2001 13:18:59 -0800 Resent-Date: Wed, 14 Feb 2001 13:18:59 -0800 Message-ID: <3A8A55E8.39C2F7CA ix.netcom.com> Date: Wed, 14 Feb 2001 01:54:48 -0800 From: Akira Kawasaki X-Mailer: Mozilla 4.72 [en]C-CCK-MCD NSCPCD472 (Win95; U) X-Accept-Language: en MIME-Version: 1.0 To: Vortex Subject: ZPE harnessed Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Resent-Message-ID: <"MK7fZ3.0.Wn4.2PlYw" mx1> Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/40778 X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com Status: RO X-Status: Feb. 14, 2001, Vortex, This should be right up Puthoff and Little's field of interest. The Feb. 9th issue of Science News carries a 2/3 page news item by Peter Weiss titled "Force from empty space drives a machine". Quantum Theory holds that empty space is not empty and predicts that random energy fluctuations causes virtual particles to continually pop in and out of the vacuum space. Casimer predicted that these particles would be detectable as forces between conductive but neutral objects. Lucent Technologies' Capasso, Chan, and colleagues built a gold plated silicon platform like a Tee shaped see-saw balance. Above one side was introduced a gold plated ball. When the platform was, in a vacuum, raised close to the ball, one side of the platform tilted closer to the ball. "The extent to which the plate tilted as it was raised provided a clear sign that an attractive Casimir force becomes operative, the scientists say". The whole thing was built on a micro miniature scale. References can be found at the Science News web site. -ak- From vortex-l-request eskimo.com Wed Feb 14 19:14:11 2001 Received: (from smartlst localhost) by mx1.eskimo.com (8.9.1a/8.8.8) id TAA16288; Wed, 14 Feb 2001 19:12:55 -0800 Resent-Date: Wed, 14 Feb 2001 19:12:55 -0800 Message-ID: <3A8AA978.6EB5057C ix.netcom.com> Date: Wed, 14 Feb 2001 07:51:20 -0800 From: Akira Kawasaki X-Mailer: Mozilla 4.72 [en]C-CCK-MCD NSCPCD472 (Win95; U) X-Accept-Language: en MIME-Version: 1.0 To: vortex-l eskimo.com Subject: Re: ZPE harnessed References: <3A8A55E8.39C2F7CA ix.netcom.com> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Resent-Message-ID: <"4nRG71.0.Q-3.saqYw" mx1> Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/40779 X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com Status: RO X-Status: Feb 14, 2001. Vortex, On Science Online (of AAAS), if you are a subscibed member, an advance (ahead of Science print of several weeks) full paper by Capasso et al is available via PDF format on their new Science Express site. Can recognition of CF be far behind? -AK- I wrote earlier: > Feb. 14, 2001, > > Vortex, > > This should be right up Puthoff and Little's field of interest. > > The Feb. 9th issue of Science News carries a 2/3 page news item by Peter > Weiss titled "Force from empty space drives a machine". > > Quantum Theory holds that empty space is not empty and predicts that > random energy fluctuations causes virtual particles to continually pop > in and out of the vacuum space. Casimer predicted that these particles > would be detectable as forces between conductive but neutral objects. > > Lucent Technologies' Capasso, Chan, and colleagues built a gold plated > silicon platform like a Tee shaped see-saw balance. Above one side was > introduced a gold plated ball. When the platform was, in a vacuum, > raised close to the ball, one side of the platform tilted closer to the > ball. "The extent to which the plate tilted as it was raised provided a > clear sign that an attractive Casimir force becomes operative, the > scientists say". The whole thing was built on a micro miniature scale. > References can be found at the Science News web site. > > -ak- From vortex-l-request eskimo.com Thu Feb 15 01:13:13 2001 Received: (from smartlst localhost) by mx1.eskimo.com (8.9.1a/8.8.8) id BAA06014; Thu, 15 Feb 2001 01:12:45 -0800 Resent-Date: Thu, 15 Feb 2001 01:12:45 -0800 Mime-Version: 1.0 Message-Id: In-Reply-To: <3A8A55E8.39C2F7CA ix.netcom.com> References: <3A8A55E8.39C2F7CA ix.netcom.com> Date: Wed, 14 Feb 2001 15:11:26 -0600 To: vortex-l eskimo.com From: thomas malloy Subject: Re: ZPE harnessed Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" ; format="flowed" Resent-Message-ID: <"bAWJd3.0.qT1.CsvYw" mx1> Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/40780 X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com Status: O X-Status: >A K Wrote; >Lucent Technologies' Capasso, Chan, and colleagues built a gold plated >silicon platform like a Tee shaped see-saw balance. Above one side was >introduced a gold plated ball. When the platform was, in a vacuum, >raised close to the ball, one side of the platform tilted closer to the >ball. "The extent to which the plate tilted as it was raised provided a >clear sign that an attractive Casimir force becomes operative, the >scientists say". The whole thing was built on a micro miniature scale. >References can be found at the Science News web site. > >-ak- Great, now let's see them get some useful energy out of it. I was going to do this in a seperate posting, however. I visited Keely net and linked to the site of Peter A. Lindeman, http://free-energy.ws/contact.html . He has written several books, one of which is on cold electricity. I was absolutely fascinated with Sparky Sweet's assertion that he had developed a cold electricity generator. Unfortunately Mark Goldes, in a private correspondence, told me that he had investigated Mr. Sweet's claims and dismissed them as fraudlent. Do any of you Vortexian's know any thing about this? He ( Dr. Lindeman ) also claims to have seen a working Gray motor, and has consulted with Adams, inventor of the Adams motor. I wrote him a letter and recounted my final letter to Mr. Adams. He was going on about the marvelous things that he was going to do. I told him that there were two researchers who had built Adams motors for the '95 INE conference. Since neither one of them worked I suggested that he help them figure out why, and get them to work, I never heard from him again. From vortex-l-request eskimo.com Thu Feb 15 01:15:03 2001 Received: (from smartlst localhost) by mx1.eskimo.com (8.9.1a/8.8.8) id BAA06390; Thu, 15 Feb 2001 01:14:44 -0800 Resent-Date: Thu, 15 Feb 2001 01:14:44 -0800 Mime-Version: 1.0 Message-Id: Date: Wed, 14 Feb 2001 15:11:26 -0600 To: vortex-l eskimo.com From: thomas malloy Subject: Fwd: Feb MN Tesla Society Newsletter Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" ; format="flowed" Resent-Message-ID: <"kT_ZN3.0.mZ1.3uvYw" mx1> Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/40781 X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com Status: O X-Status: Fellow Vortexians; I am excerpting this part of our newsletter for two reasons. One is the upcoming KeelyNet conference, the other is Mike McGlinskey's website. > >Subject: Feb MN Tesla Society Newsletter > > MN Tesla Society > Electronic Newsletter > Email tesla infodine.net to >be put on the list. > This is the February 2001 Issue. > > > >Upcoming Conference > KeelyNet Convergence 2001 June 16/17 Dallas, TX. Alternative >science and hardware conference. Admission is $130.00. The >Conference will be held at the Holiday Inn Select at Stemmons and >LBJ. Questions? - email Jerry Decker or call FAX 927-324-3501. Tom >will have more info available at the meeting or go to >www.keelynet.com. > > Scheduled speakers; >1 - Norman Wootan - will bring two of the original EV Gray motors >and the repulsor disc, also Patrick Gray, Ed Grays son will give a >brief talk about his fathers work and the mystery around his death. > >2 - Peter Lindeman - will discuss his connection between Tesla's >'Electro-Radiant Effect' and the patented EV Gray power conversion >tube. > >3 - Doug Konzen - will discuss and demonstrate his Pulse Motor which >appears to produce overunity, he will also have books, videos, cds, >kits and motors for sale in the bookstore. > >4 - George Wiseman - will discuss and demonstrate the Browns gas >generators he has been experimenting with and now manufactures. > >5 - Bill Beaty - will discuss alternative science, weird science and >demonstrate various devices that he will be bringing. > >6 - Dan Comstock - will discuss and demonstrate his heat pump engine >based on the work of the late Ralph Schlictig. > >7 - Lee Crock - will discuss and demonstrate his Reiki method of >enhancing the aura for healing as well as his patented machine. > >8 - Jerry Decker - will discuss connections and correlations between >quantum nanostructures and gravity, energy and time as well as some >alt science items. > >9 - Dan Davidson - will discuss and demonstrate his gravity wave >detector research and his discoveries with shape power along with >the correlations to quantum nanostructures. > >There will also be an hour or so at the end of Sunday for surprise >demonstrations. Contact Jerry Decker if you plan on bringing >something so we can arrange a demonstration time. As you can see, >the emphasis for the KeelyNet conference is on hardware so we've >tried to get knowledgeable speakers with machines to show and/or >demonstrate during the Sunday workshops. > >Website > The Website was updated with a few things. You will now find the >newsletters on it in ZIP format and a crossword puzzle. I still have >to get the "original" newsletters out on the web along with the >Tesla Word Find. Also if you people recall we were doing a Tesla >Time Line. I have resurrected this and plan to put this on the web. >If any one has any ideals as to what they want it to look like or >want to add something then send Tom a email. I will have a printout >of the Time Line so far at the February meeting. > >HaMenorah Project: Mark Mcglinsky's current project. >HaMenorah www.what-if.net/newpower email: zer what-if.net >kindly offering help machining the parabolic lamp stand. From vortex-l-request eskimo.com Thu Feb 15 02:30:58 2001 Received: (from smartlst localhost) by mx1.eskimo.com (8.9.1a/8.8.8) id CAA23291; Thu, 15 Feb 2001 02:30:30 -0800 Resent-Date: Thu, 15 Feb 2001 02:30:30 -0800 Message-Id: Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Date: Thu, 15 Feb 2001 01:40:26 -0900 To: vortex-l eskimo.com From: hheffner mtaonline.net (Horace Heffner) Subject: Re: Neutrons from D2-Ar-N2-Hot W? Resent-Message-ID: <"_7vuO.0.mh5.5_wYw" mx1> Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/40782 X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com Status: O X-Status: At 1:22 PM 2/14/1, Mitchell Jones wrote: > >Bottom line: my guess is that the probability of the (d,n) branch is >vanishingly low when the incoming deuteron carries a mere 35 keV, due to >the difficulty of the proton getting into the nucleus. The point I was making was that the tail of a plasma energy distribution contains much higher energies. The reaction to which I refer is called a stripping reaction: 2 D+ ---> D+ + n + p+ but it is not an exchange reacition and it occurs even in a pure hydrogen environment. There is no apparent source of nuclear energy from the target nucleii, so it is distinguished from the stripping reactions to which you refer in that it is not an exchange reaction. For that reason I would think the target would be immaterial - it could be anything, including tungsten. In the 1-2 MeV range in deuterium the non-exchange stripping reaction has a bigger cross section than fusion, and the Stellerator folks were very surprised to find neutrons in abundance, or even that they were producing 1 MeV deuterons in the plasma, if I recall correctly. I have no ref. handy, but info might be found under "Project Sherwood." I think there are a variety of low energy (less than 1 MeV) devices which produce neutrons in abundance, some of which are patented, published, and commercially available. My personal feeling is that it is just common sense that electrons are or can be involved in catalysing deuteron stripping reactions, and that it takes a special environment to get the needed high energy electrons into a much lower temperature plasma to catalyse the reaction. It would be interesting to design a reactor on that basis. It might be far more effective than blasting little balls with lasers. Regards, Horace Heffner From vortex-l-request eskimo.com Thu Feb 15 05:26:18 2001 Received: (from smartlst localhost) by mx1.eskimo.com (8.9.1a/8.8.8) id FAA00881; Thu, 15 Feb 2001 05:25:43 -0800 Resent-Date: Thu, 15 Feb 2001 05:25:43 -0800 Message-ID: <00bd01c0975b$2e8a2f40$138f85ce fjsparber> Reply-To: "Frederick Sparber" From: "Frederick Sparber" To: Cc: Subject: Re: Neutrons from D2-Ar-N2-Hot W? Date: Thu, 15 Feb 2001 06:23:31 -0800 MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-Priority: 3 X-MSMail-Priority: Normal X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook Express 5.00.2615.200 X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V5.00.2615.200 Resent-Message-ID: <"5d9yU1.0.hD.MZzYw" mx1> Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/40783 X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com Status: O X-Status: The Proton-(Electron-Proton) reaction: P-(e-P) ---> D + Neutrino + ~ 1.7 Mev sure looks like Mills' Hydrino Hydride that hasn't gone all the way to Deuterium to form the Neutron-Proton couple which releases 2.23 Mev. The potential V of an electron at a radius of separation, R from a proton: V = kq/R = 1.44E-9/5.64E-15 = 256 Kev at an "fractional orbit radius" of 5.64 Fermi, ie., twice the classical radius of the electron. IOW, under the 35 Kev energy that Sternglass used in his 1950s experiment with a hydrogen discharge that produced neutrons he might have produced Hydrino Hydride that could go all the way to deuterium or produced a neutron which didn't couple to a proton to form deuterium: Proton = 1.007825 AMU Neutron = 1.008665 AMU Electron = 0.000550 AMU Deuteron = 2.01410 AMU Proton + "Neutron" = Proton + (Proton + Electron) = 1.007825 +(1.007825 + 0.00055) = 2.01620 AMU 2.01620 AMU - 2.01410 AMU = 1.955 Mev - 1.70Mev = 0.255 Mev the potential V of an electron at a 5.64 Fermi "orbit" from a proton. This just says that a neutron is a proton joined to an electron and an antineutrino the 1.70 Mev neutrino carried off the energy of formation of the Deuteron. Or, Pseudo Deuterium is Mills' Hydrino Hydride, and the Pseudo Neutrons that Sternglass observed were from the Hydrino Hydride formed in the Hydrogen Discharge at 35 Kev. Regards, Frederick From vortex-l-request eskimo.com Thu Feb 15 06:28:54 2001 Received: (from smartlst localhost) by mx1.eskimo.com (8.9.1a/8.8.8) id GAA22165; Thu, 15 Feb 2001 06:28:17 -0800 Resent-Date: Thu, 15 Feb 2001 06:28:17 -0800 Message-Id: <5.0.2.1.0.20010215080402.03460680 earthtech.org> X-Sender: little earthtech.org X-Mailer: QUALCOMM Windows Eudora Version 5.0.2 Date: Thu, 15 Feb 2001 08:30:15 -0600 To: vortex-l eskimo.com, vortex-l@eskimo.com From: Scott Little Subject: Re: ZPE harnessed In-Reply-To: References: <3A8A55E8.39C2F7CA ix.netcom.com> <3A8A55E8.39C2F7CA ix.netcom.com> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"; format=flowed Resent-Message-ID: <"hu3BG.0.AQ5.0U-Yw" mx1> Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/40784 X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com Status: O X-Status: At 03:11 PM 2/14/2001 -0600, thomas malloy wrote: >>A K Wrote; > >>Lucent Technologies' Capasso, Chan, and colleagues built a gold plated >>silicon platform like a Tee shaped see-saw balance. Above one side was >>introduced a gold plated ball. When the platform was, in a vacuum, >>raised close to the ball, one side of the platform tilted closer to the >>ball. "The extent to which the plate tilted as it was raised provided a >>clear sign that an attractive Casimir force becomes operative, the >>scientists say". The whole thing was built on a micro miniature scale. >>References can be found at the Science News web site. > >Great, now let's see them get some useful energy out of it. These demonstrations of the Casimir force are important verifications of the existence of the ZPF but it will not be possible to make a "Casimir device" which operates cyclically and extracts a net flow of energy from the ZPF. The problem is that the Casimir force is conservative...as is the gravitational force. Thus, the possibility of obtaining a net extraction of energy with any CYCLIC manipulation of Casimir plates is the same as it is with a cyclic manipulation of weights in a gravitational field...zero. No matter how complex the cycle, once you bring the system back to its starting point, you've had to put back in just as much energy as you got out. The remaining hope for energy extraction from the ZPF lies in processes and interactions we don't understand yet. Scott Little EarthTech International, Inc. 4030 Braker Lane West, Suite 300 Austin TX 78759 512-342-2185 512-346-3017 (FAX) http://www.earthtech.org From vortex-l-request eskimo.com Thu Feb 15 07:28:11 2001 Received: (from smartlst localhost) by mx1.eskimo.com (8.9.1a/8.8.8) id HAA19266; Thu, 15 Feb 2001 07:26:52 -0800 Resent-Date: Thu, 15 Feb 2001 07:26:52 -0800 Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" X-Sender: mjones pop.jump.net Message-Id: In-Reply-To: References: Date: Thu, 15 Feb 2001 09:25:55 -0600 To: vortex-l eskimo.com From: Mitchell Jones Subject: RE: Report: HotWater, Run 3 =1.20 txt Resent-Message-ID: <"wLk2M3.0.yi4.yK_Yw" mx1> Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/40785 X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com Status: O X-Status: [snip] >> (3) You said you used a bridge to rectify AC current into DC. Did >> you use a full-wave bridge? Did you do anything to convert the >> resulting bumpy waveform into a smooth waveform, so that your >> current readings will be meaningful? (If not, then I would not be >> surprised if your current measurements were *way* too low, >> thereby invalidating your OU numbers.) > >I used a full-wave bridge, yes, and no - I didn't use anything > to smooth the waveform - so this could be a distortion. >However: the capacitive action of the unit is considerable, > and measurements of the voltage drop across the unit > as well as the current flow are all very stable. ***{Capacitance will smooth out fluctuations in voltage, but you need inductors to smooth out the current. I suggest that you kludge together an inductor and place it in the circuit, and see if your OU numbers go down. If they do, it is likely that your meter expects flat DC and cannot handle the bumpy variety that you are giving it. --MJ}*** > Fluctuations are generally on the order of 5 mA. ***{The kind of fluctuations you can see on the readout aren't the kind I am worried about here. All readouts are dampened, of necessity, to enable the human eye to make use of them. (For example, if the DC readout jumped from zero to 8 amps 50 times per second, all you would see would be a blur.) My concern is that your meter may not be giving you a true average of the amplitudes of those 50 cycle current fluctuations. --MJ}*** >I haven't gotten a data-logging system up just yet, > but when I do it should settle the story of fluctuation > when I track voltage/current/temperature simultaneously. >Mostly it's been a matter of me looking at this > from a viewpoint of "there's something obviously wrong here - > I shouldn't need lab facilities to sort out where the numbers > have gone wrong". Perhaps I am just too lazy. > >> (4) What did you use for your anode and cathode? > >The anode is steel pipe, the cathode is a steel bolt. >The bolt is embedded in a concrete insulation plug. >If you're interested, I have a .jpg of the beast ***{If your OU numbers persist after you have eliminated the apparent flaws in your design, I will be *very* interested. Based on lengthy experience discussing these sorts of things, however, I would say that the chances of that happening are virtually zero. (If anything has become clear about CF, it is that it is not easy to achieve. Thus a fellow in Jakarta who sticks a pipe and a bolt in a bucket *ain't hardly* gonna do it! :-) --MJ}*** >> (5) You said you used tap water. From what source? A well? A >> cistern? A city water supply? > >It's the city water, which is allegedly treated but > we all believe that the treatment is only notional. >I have seen swarms of worms, microscopic mite-like creatures, > and various shades of algae associated with this water ***{What in the name of Zeus do you drink? More importantly, what are you doing in a pest-hole like that? I would pack my bags and be on the next flight (or boat, or donkey cart, or whatever) out of there. --MJ}*** , > as well as having to replace faucets every 90 days due to > extensive corrosion. > > >cheers >PA ________________ Quote of the month: "Law is what the authorities use to ride the country." --Anatoly Schransky From vortex-l-request eskimo.com Thu Feb 15 08:10:39 2001 Received: (from smartlst localhost) by mx1.eskimo.com (8.9.1a/8.8.8) id IAA07449; Thu, 15 Feb 2001 08:06:37 -0800 Resent-Date: Thu, 15 Feb 2001 08:06:37 -0800 From: "David Rosignoli" Sender: drdaveor enter.net Reply-to: drdaveor enter.net To: Scott Little , vortex-l@eskimo.com, vortex-l eskimo.com Date: Thu, 15 Feb 2001 11:06:22 -0500 Subject: Re: ZPE harnessed X-Mailer: DMailWeb Web to Mail Gateway 2.6k, http://netwinsite.com/top_mail.htm Message-id: <3a8bfe7e.2c6d.0 enter.net> X-User-Info: 192.91.146.34 MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Resent-Message-ID: <"zPLxp2.0.Iq1.Cw_Yw" mx1> Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/40786 X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com Status: O X-Status: So, it is possible to prove analytically that the Casimir effect, and all variations on this effect must be energy conservative in nature? Isn't there a NASA BPP physics sponsored project to see if it is possible to do just that, by providing a Casimir force on one end of a trampoline looking device, and the spring force of the trampoline on the other end? So, if these forces are conservative, it should be theoretically impossible to extract any net energy out of it. What happened to this research, then? >These demonstrations of the Casimir force are important verifications of >the existence of the ZPF but it will not be possible to make a "Casimir >device" which operates cyclically and extracts a net flow of energy from >the ZPF. The problem is that the Casimir force is conservative...as is the >gravitational force. Thus, the possibility of obtaining a net extraction >of energy with any CYCLIC manipulation of Casimir plates is the same as it >is with a cyclic manipulation of weights in a gravitational >field...zero. No matter how complex the cycle, once you bring the system >back to its starting point, you've had to put back in just as much energy >as you got out. > >The remaining hope for energy extraction from the ZPF lies in processes and >interactions we don't understand yet. > > >Scott Little >EarthTech International, Inc. >4030 Braker Lane West, Suite 300 >Austin TX 78759 >512-342-2185 >512-346-3017 (FAX) >http://www.earthtech.org > > From vortex-l-request eskimo.com Thu Feb 15 08:23:08 2001 Received: (from smartlst localhost) by mx1.eskimo.com (8.9.1a/8.8.8) id IAA16690; Thu, 15 Feb 2001 08:22:02 -0800 Resent-Date: Thu, 15 Feb 2001 08:22:02 -0800 Message-ID: <3A8C03BD.F5297AF8 bellsouth.net> Date: Thu, 15 Feb 2001 11:28:45 -0500 From: Terry Blanton X-Mailer: Mozilla 4.73 [en] (WinNT; U) X-Accept-Language: en MIME-Version: 1.0 To: vortex-l eskimo.com Subject: Power from Little Nukes? Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Resent-Message-ID: <"GLlpK2.0.h44.g80Zw" mx1> Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/40787 X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com Status: O X-Status: From: http://www.fas.org/sgp/news/2001/02/ru021101.html <><><><><><><><><><><> Russian researchers to declassify thermonuclear technology Interfax News Agency February 11, 2001 Russian researchers have made the decision to declassify the principle of operation of the so-called explosive ignition thermonuclear facility, developed by the research institute of technical physics in Snezhinsk, Andrei Lumpov, the deputy director of the Republic Research and Consulting Center's State Center of Market Research, has told Interfax. The authors of the project argue, he said, that "certain forces plan to put the United States, not Russia, in charge of implementing this project." Due to an information leak back in the sixties the facility was patented in various other countries as well as Russia, Lumov said. "Nevertheless, only Russia has the secret of creating the small energy charges necessary to launch the facility," he said, describing these as "miniature nuclear bombs." The explosive ignition facility is based on the fusion of deuterium, ignited by a small energy charge, Lumpov said. The industrial facility will have a capacity of 30 million kilowatts, which is equal to the capacity of 20-30 nuclear power plants. The construction of such a facility will cost about $3 billion. "Calculations have shown that in the next few years we can build industrial power stations on the basis of the explosive ignition facility and sell energy at 1 cent per kilowatt-hour, which is very cheap," he said. The facility is absolutely safe. The basis of its construction is a shock-absorbing pad and the walls are resilient. "The facility cannot be broken or strongly shaken by internal explosions, or earthquakes measuring 8-9 on the Richter scale," the expert said. The project could enable Russia to provide energy for two thirds of the world's population at $1 trillion - $3 trillion per annum by the middle of the twenty-first century. From vortex-l-request eskimo.com Thu Feb 15 11:32:49 2001 Received: (from smartlst localhost) by mx1.eskimo.com (8.9.1a/8.8.8) id LAA19490; Thu, 15 Feb 2001 11:26:25 -0800 Resent-Date: Thu, 15 Feb 2001 11:26:25 -0800 Message-ID: <006b01c09781$b670e040$d7b342d5 interactiveinstitute.se> From: "David Jonsson" To: References: <3A854378.E745A1E4 ix.netcom.com> <3A867EC0.80F0953B@ix.netcom.com> <00a301c09434$e8cf8be0$30b342d5@interactiveinstitute.se> Subject: Re: Sideway drift of a lightray experiment performed Date: Mon, 12 Feb 2001 20:58:45 +0100 MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit X-Priority: 3 X-MSMail-Priority: Normal X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook Express 5.50.4522.1200 X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V5.50.4522.1200 Resent-Message-ID: <"9R5OS.0.Mm4.Xr2Zw" mx1> Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/40788 X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com Status: O X-Status: From: "Robin van Spaandonk" Sent: Monday, February 12, 2001 2:25 AM > In reply to David Jonsson's message of Sun, 11 Feb 2001 15:12:32 +0100: > > >Måns Gauffin (82 years old) in Stockholm has performed some very interesting > >measurements. He has projected a 300 meter long laserbeam on a surface and > >observed how the spot has moved during 3 months. I have his entire report > >here, paper only. It is in Swedish but the tables and graphs are readable > >for anyone. > [snip] > >Gauffin also made the measuremnents 22 meters below ground and detected no > >drift. How can we understand this? Do we have inertial systems in this > >regard inside earth? The ether drift or frame dragging should not be > >noticeable under these circumstances and they should definitely not be as > >large as to cancel the entire effect. > > Perhaps it was the surface that moved, not the laser beam (due to thermal > expansion and contraction). When done underground, the temperature was > probably fairly constant, so no change was observed. In that case we would not have had the structured drift that was measured. It corresponds well to the rotation around the earth axis and around the sun. David From vortex-l-request eskimo.com Thu Feb 15 11:47:37 2001 Received: (from smartlst localhost) by mx1.eskimo.com (8.9.1a/8.8.8) id LAA26004; Thu, 15 Feb 2001 11:38:05 -0800 Resent-Date: Thu, 15 Feb 2001 11:38:05 -0800 Message-Id: Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Date: Thu, 15 Feb 2001 10:47:54 -0900 To: vortex-l eskimo.com From: hheffner mtaonline.net (Horace Heffner) Subject: Re: Neutrons from D2-Ar-N2-Hot W? Resent-Message-ID: <"prSxc3.0.CM6.S03Zw" mx1> Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/40789 X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com Status: O X-Status: At 12:11 PM 2/13/1, Mitchell Jones wrote: [snip] >***{Ernest Sternglass did an experiment back in the '50's in which he >passed 35000 volts between two tungsten electrodes inside a hydrogen-filled >tube, and generated lots of neutrons. [snip] Say, it just occurred to me, how can this be done? If 35,000 volts were applied to a gas across a short enough gap to have any effect, then an avalanche would occur, a plasma would be formed, and the resistance across the gap would drop to near zero. The 35,000 volt supply would have to be current limited, like neon sign transformers are, so the voltage applied to the gap would thus quickly drop to near zero. This kind of device could only operate in a pulsed mode where the delay between pulses is long enough for an arc to quench. To be efficient, the pulse would have to be very short. Regards, Horace Heffner From vortex-l-request eskimo.com Thu Feb 15 12:07:03 2001 Received: (from smartlst localhost) by mx1.eskimo.com (8.9.1a/8.8.8) id MAA07182; Thu, 15 Feb 2001 12:03:05 -0800 Resent-Date: Thu, 15 Feb 2001 12:03:05 -0800 X-Apparently-From: Message-Id: <4.2.0.58.20010215135441.0095a840 postoffice.swbell.net> X-Sender: cjford1 pop.mail.yahoo.com X-Mailer: QUALCOMM Windows Eudora Pro Version 4.2.0.58 Date: Thu, 15 Feb 2001 14:03:10 -0600 To: vortex-l eskimo.com From: Charles Ford Subject: Re: Sideway drift of a lightray experiment performed In-Reply-To: <006b01c09781$b670e040$d7b342d5 interactiveinstitute.se> References: <3A854378.E745A1E4 ix.netcom.com> <3A867EC0.80F0953B ix.netcom.com> <00a301c09434$e8cf8be0$30b342d5 interactiveinstitute.se> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1"; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit X-MIME-Autoconverted: from quoted-printable to 8bit by mx1.eskimo.com id MAA07117 Resent-Message-ID: <"HKphQ1.0.8m1.uN3Zw" mx1> Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/40790 X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com Status: O X-Status: David: If the drift was caused by variations in G then would have ben no difference between the above ground drift and the below ground drift. This is not the case. The surface of the earth is subject to warp and shift due to weather. As the ground moistens or drys or warms and heats its position will change. (very easy to detect with a 300M long light beam) But underground 22M is below the "Weather effected crust" This problem will disappear. Remember the last 5 M or so of the earths crust is relatively soft and is also effected by gravity. Therefore the test stand will also have ben effected by this movement. causing your structured matching of gravitational effects. At 08:58 PM 2/12/01 +0100, you wrote: >From: "Robin van Spaandonk" >Sent: Monday, February 12, 2001 2:25 AM > > In reply to David Jonsson's message of Sun, 11 Feb 2001 15:12:32 +0100: > > > > >Måns Gauffin (82 years old) in Stockholm has performed some very >interesting > > >measurements. He has projected a 300 meter long laserbeam on a surface >and > > >observed how the spot has moved during 3 months. I have his entire report > > >here, paper only. It is in Swedish but the tables and graphs are readable > > >for anyone. > > [snip] > > >Gauffin also made the measuremnents 22 meters below ground and detected >no > > >drift. How can we understand this? Do we have inertial systems in this > > >regard inside earth? The ether drift or frame dragging should not be > > >noticeable under these circumstances and they should definitely not be as > > >large as to cancel the entire effect. > > > > Perhaps it was the surface that moved, not the laser beam (due to thermal > > expansion and contraction). When done underground, the temperature was > > probably fairly constant, so no change was observed. > >In that case we would not have had the structured drift that was measured. >It corresponds well to the rotation around the earth axis and around the >sun. > >David Charlie Ford KC5-OWZ cjford1 yahoo.com cjford1 swbell.net _________________________________________________________ Do You Yahoo!? Get your free yahoo.com address at http://mail.yahoo.com From vortex-l-request eskimo.com Thu Feb 15 12:25:53 2001 Received: (from smartlst localhost) by mx1.eskimo.com (8.9.1a/8.8.8) id MAA17989; Thu, 15 Feb 2001 12:21:21 -0800 Resent-Date: Thu, 15 Feb 2001 12:21:21 -0800 Date: Thu, 15 Feb 2001 12:11:33 -0800 From: Jones Beene Subject: Re: Power from Little Nukes? To: vortex-l eskimo.com Message-id: <3A8C37F5.7040608 pacbell.net> MIME-version: 1.0 Content-type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii; format=flowed Content-transfer-encoding: 7bit User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (Windows; U; Win98; en-US; m18) Gecko/20001108 Netscape6/6.0 X-Accept-Language: en References: <3A8C03BD.F5297AF8 bellsouth.net> Resent-Message-ID: <"3D6dL1.0.uO4._e3Zw" mx1> Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/40791 X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com Status: O X-Status: Terry Blanton wrote: > From: http://www.fas.org/sgp/news/2001/02/ru021101.html > [snip] Due to an information leak back in the sixties the > facility was patented in various other countries... Well this kind of thing is too early for "April fools" but the Russian calendar is probably a bit more "advanced" than ours. Why am I not surprised that no patent number is mentioned? The most similar "leak" to come out of Russia (except, ahem, Chernobyl) was "red mercury" or the related pure fusion type miniature bomb (no fission trigger) - this story sounds like it too is trying to capitalize on that scare. The ballotechnic or ultra-high explosive technology that was supposedly developed by the Russians was thoroughly denied here and then even lampooned by the top brass (yes, the same ones who say there is nothing over at Groom lake). > "Nevertheless, only Russia has the secret of creating the > small energy charges necessary to launch the facility," he > said, describing these as "miniature nuclear bombs." Since the West developed "back-pack" sized nukes some time ago, isn't it just like those former commies to go out and do us one better with the "codpiece" bomb. > The explosive ignition facility is based on the fusion of > deuterium, ignited by a small energy charge, What no tritium? The story is now beginning to unravel as not just a poor spoof but one created by morons. BTW what does Lumpov mean in Russian? I guess Dumkov would have been too obvious. > "Calculations have shown that in the next few years we can > build industrial power stations on the basis of the explosive > ignition facility and sell energy at 1 cent per kilowatt-hour, > which is very cheap," he said. It appears that Russians in the middle of Siberia are now using our currency, and in a denomination fitting to their industrial expertise ... > The facility is absolutely safe. The basis of its construction > is a shock-absorbing pad and the walls are resilient. "The > facility cannot be broken or strongly shaken by internal > explosions, or earthquakes measuring 8-9 on the Richter > scale," the expert said. The same expert who designed Chernobyl no doubt - only this time Fred McMurray gave him the formula for flubber. > The project could enable Russia to provide energy for two > thirds of the world's population at $1 trillion - $3 trillion > per annum by the middle of the twenty-first century. Just the power lines out of Siberia would cost about a hundred times more, but never mind, they are probably going to beam it out. Can't wait till the real April fools stories start. Jones From vortex-l-request eskimo.com Thu Feb 15 12:55:42 2001 Received: (from smartlst localhost) by mx1.eskimo.com (8.9.1a/8.8.8) id MAA29816; Thu, 15 Feb 2001 12:46:05 -0800 Resent-Date: Thu, 15 Feb 2001 12:46:05 -0800 From: "xplorer" To: Subject: RE: Report: HotWater, Run 3 =1.20 txt Date: Fri, 16 Feb 2001 03:45:41 +0700 Message-ID: MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-Priority: 3 (Normal) X-MSMail-Priority: Normal X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook IMO, Build 9.0.2416 (9.0.2910.0) In-Reply-To: Importance: Normal X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V4.72.3110.3 Resent-Message-ID: <"WXRtn3.0.jH7.D04Zw" mx1> Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/40792 X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com Status: O X-Status: > From: Mitchell Jones [mailto:mjones jump.net] > Sent: 2001 February 15, Thursday 22:26 > Subject: RE: Report: HotWater, Run 3 =1.20 txt >x< > >I used a full-wave bridge, yes, and no - I didn't use anything > > to smooth the waveform - so this could be a distortion. > >However: the capacitive action of the unit is considerable, > > and measurements of the voltage drop across the unit > > as well as the current flow are all very stable. > > ***{Capacitance will smooth out fluctuations in voltage, but you need > inductors to smooth out the current. I suggest that you kludge together an > inductor and place it in the circuit, and see if your OU numbers go down. > If they do, it is likely that your meter expects flat DC and cannot handle > the bumpy variety that you are giving it. --MJ}*** Could be - I did a run just like this, with an inductor in series. I got a higher amp reading - 3.2 amps - but I neglected to check the voltage drop across the unit so I don't know what kind of power was involved. I'll do it again and check more thoroughly. > > Fluctuations are generally on the order of 5 mA. > > ***{The kind of fluctuations you can see on the readout aren't the kind I > am worried about here. All readouts are dampened, of necessity, to enable > the human eye to make use of them. (For example, if the DC readout jumped > from zero to 8 amps 50 times per second, all you would see would be a > blur.) My concern is that your meter may not be giving you a true average > of the amplitudes of those 50 cycle current fluctuations. --MJ}*** Fair enough - as I said, I'll run it again and see. Nyquist for the display is about 2 Hertz, so I'll see if I can ensure I've got filtering down to 1.3 Hertz > >I haven't gotten a data-logging system up just yet, > > but when I do it should settle the story of fluctuation > > when I track voltage/current/temperature simultaneously. > >Mostly it's been a matter of me looking at this > > from a viewpoint of "there's something obviously wrong here - > > I shouldn't need lab facilities to sort out where the numbers > > have gone wrong". Perhaps I am just too lazy. > > > >> (4) What did you use for your anode and cathode? > > > >The anode is steel pipe, the cathode is a steel bolt. > >The bolt is embedded in a concrete insulation plug. > >If you're interested, I have a .jpg of the beast > > ***{If your OU numbers persist after you have eliminated the > apparent flaws > in your design, I will be *very* interested. Based on lengthy experience > discussing these sorts of things, however, I would say that the chances of > that happening are virtually zero. (If anything has become clear about CF, > it is that it is not easy to achieve. Thus a fellow in Jakarta > who sticks a > pipe and a bolt in a bucket *ain't hardly* gonna do it! :-) --MJ}*** It sounds pretty awful, doesn't it ? I wouldn't bother with this if I had proper water. (necessity and economy are the parents of invention) And I wouldn't even consider looking at it in the light of CF if I hadn't measured the properties, as well as the point that I haven't read any accounts of anyone else trying this sort of setup. More than likely it is only 1.0, but sometimes someone has to report something like this so no one else gets bogged down in needlessly repeating what is probably uneventful. One of those 'negative results' type reports, I guess... > >> (5) You said you used tap water. From what source? A well? A > >> cistern? A city water supply? > > > >It's the city water, which is allegedly treated but > > we all believe that the treatment is only notional. > >I have seen swarms of worms, microscopic mite-like creatures, > > and various shades of algae associated with this water > > ***{What in the name of Zeus do you drink? More importantly, what are you > doing in a pest-hole like that? I would pack my bags and be on the next > flight (or boat, or donkey cart, or whatever) out of there. --MJ}*** We buy purified drinking water, and here is quite a bit closer to where I sometimes work, where the living conditions get *far* worse. I've been over here for a decade, so I've gotten used to it, but there are moments when the pay just doesn't seem enough. cheers From vortex-l-request eskimo.com Thu Feb 15 13:22:21 2001 Received: (from smartlst localhost) by mx1.eskimo.com (8.9.1a/8.8.8) id NAA13007; Thu, 15 Feb 2001 13:14:12 -0800 Resent-Date: Thu, 15 Feb 2001 13:14:12 -0800 From: Robin van Spaandonk To: vortex-l eskimo.com Subject: Re: Neutrons from D2-Ar-N2-Hot W? Date: Fri, 16 Feb 2001 08:13:56 +1100 Organization: Improving Message-ID: References: In-Reply-To: X-Mailer: Forte Agent 1.8/32.548 MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit X-MIME-Autoconverted: from quoted-printable to 8bit by mx1.eskimo.com id NAA12958 Resent-Message-ID: <"FDz-X3.0.9B3.ZQ4Zw" mx1> Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/40793 X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com Status: O X-Status: In reply to Horace Heffner's message of Thu, 15 Feb 2001 10:47:54 -0900: [snip] >Say, it just occurred to me, how can this be done? If 35,000 volts were >applied to a gas across a short enough gap to have any effect, then an >avalanche would occur, a plasma would be formed, and the resistance across >the gap would drop to near zero. The 35,000 volt supply would have to be >current limited, like neon sign transformers are, so the voltage applied to >the gap would thus quickly drop to near zero. > >This kind of device could only operate in a pulsed mode where the delay >between pulses is long enough for an arc to quench. To be efficient, the >pulse would have to be very short. [snip] Congratulations, I think you may have just shown that it wasn't a voltage or high energy particle based effect. (It would be necessary to correlate neutron production with pulse timing to tell). OTOH, the D atoms that reformed from a plasma could undergo Mills shrinkage, and could then easily take part in exchange reactions resulting in free neutrons (these do exist). Regards, Robin van Spaandonk A Future For Humanity see: http://users.bigpond.net.au/rvanspaa/ From vortex-l-request eskimo.com Thu Feb 15 13:47:23 2001 Received: (from smartlst localhost) by mx1.eskimo.com (8.9.1a/8.8.8) id NAA26738; Thu, 15 Feb 2001 13:43:29 -0800 Resent-Date: Thu, 15 Feb 2001 13:43:29 -0800 Message-ID: <004101c09799$01ad50e0$c3c01d18 pestilence.ce.mediaone.net> From: "Scott Stephens" To: Subject: Re: ZPE harnessed Date: Thu, 15 Feb 2001 15:48:17 -0600 MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-Priority: 3 X-MSMail-Priority: Normal X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook Express 4.72.3155.0 X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V4.72.3155.0 Resent-Message-ID: <"LlBUe2.0.XX6.0s4Zw" mx1> Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/40794 X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com Status: O X-Status: Sorry if this has been discussed (I'm sure it has, I can't read all my mail!), but isn't trying to extract Casimir energy no different than trying to extract thermal energy? I mean everything above 0 K has thermal energy. But we can't extract it without a heat engine, or we would have wonderfull batteries and refrigerators. But I can see how some molecule or crystal might be designed to collapse and release energy. But that would be a fuel, being left at a lower potential after it released its potential. Scott From vortex-l-request eskimo.com Thu Feb 15 15:31:02 2001 Received: (from smartlst localhost) by mx1.eskimo.com (8.9.1a/8.8.8) id PAA18691; Thu, 15 Feb 2001 15:21:30 -0800 Resent-Date: Thu, 15 Feb 2001 15:21:30 -0800 Date: Thu, 15 Feb 2001 15:21:12 -0800 (PST) From: hank scudder To: vortex-l eskimo.com Subject: RE: Report: HotWater, Run 3 =1.20 txt In-Reply-To: Message-Id: Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: TEXT/PLAIN; charset=US-ASCII Resent-Message-ID: <"mGAFp1.0.oZ4.vH6Zw" mx1> Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/40795 X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com Status: O X-Status: Mitchell If you use a RMS meter to measure both voltage and current, or better yet a wattmeter, you will get a more accurate idea of the energies involved. Hank On Fri, 16 Feb 2001, xplorer wrote: > > > From: Mitchell Jones [mailto:mjones jump.net] > > Sent: 2001 February 15, Thursday 22:26 > > Subject: RE: Report: HotWater, Run 3 =1.20 txt > > >x< > > > >I used a full-wave bridge, yes, and no - I didn't use anything > > > to smooth the waveform - so this could be a distortion. > > >However: the capacitive action of the unit is considerable, > > > and measurements of the voltage drop across the unit > > > as well as the current flow are all very stable. > > > > ***{Capacitance will smooth out fluctuations in voltage, but you need > > inductors to smooth out the current. I suggest that you kludge together an > > inductor and place it in the circuit, and see if your OU numbers go down. > > If they do, it is likely that your meter expects flat DC and cannot handle > > the bumpy variety that you are giving it. --MJ}*** > > Could be - I did a run just like this, with an inductor in series. > I got a higher amp reading - 3.2 amps - but I neglected > to check the voltage drop across the unit so I don't know > what kind of power was involved. > I'll do it again and check more thoroughly. > > > > Fluctuations are generally on the order of 5 mA. > > > > ***{The kind of fluctuations you can see on the readout aren't the kind I > > am worried about here. All readouts are dampened, of necessity, to enable > > the human eye to make use of them. (For example, if the DC readout jumped > > from zero to 8 amps 50 times per second, all you would see would be a > > blur.) My concern is that your meter may not be giving you a true average > > of the amplitudes of those 50 cycle current fluctuations. --MJ}*** > > Fair enough - as I said, I'll run it again and see. > Nyquist for the display is about 2 Hertz, so I'll see > if I can ensure I've got filtering down to 1.3 Hertz > > > >I haven't gotten a data-logging system up just yet, > > > but when I do it should settle the story of fluctuation > > > when I track voltage/current/temperature simultaneously. > > >Mostly it's been a matter of me looking at this > > > from a viewpoint of "there's something obviously wrong here - > > > I shouldn't need lab facilities to sort out where the numbers > > > have gone wrong". Perhaps I am just too lazy. > > > > > >> (4) What did you use for your anode and cathode? > > > > > >The anode is steel pipe, the cathode is a steel bolt. > > >The bolt is embedded in a concrete insulation plug. > > >If you're interested, I have a .jpg of the beast > > > > ***{If your OU numbers persist after you have eliminated the > > apparent flaws > > in your design, I will be *very* interested. Based on lengthy experience > > discussing these sorts of things, however, I would say that the chances of > > that happening are virtually zero. (If anything has become clear about CF, > > it is that it is not easy to achieve. Thus a fellow in Jakarta > > who sticks a > > pipe and a bolt in a bucket *ain't hardly* gonna do it! :-) --MJ}*** > > It sounds pretty awful, doesn't it ? > I wouldn't bother with this if I had proper water. > (necessity and economy are the parents of invention) > And I wouldn't even consider looking at it in the light > of CF if I hadn't measured the properties, > as well as the point that I haven't read any accounts > of anyone else trying this sort of setup. > More than likely it is only 1.0, but sometimes someone > has to report something like this so no one else gets > bogged down in needlessly repeating what is probably uneventful. > One of those 'negative results' type reports, I guess... > > > >> (5) You said you used tap water. From what source? A well? A > > >> cistern? A city water supply? > > > > > >It's the city water, which is allegedly treated but > > > we all believe that the treatment is only notional. > > >I have seen swarms of worms, microscopic mite-like creatures, > > > and various shades of algae associated with this water > > > > ***{What in the name of Zeus do you drink? More importantly, what are you > > doing in a pest-hole like that? I would pack my bags and be on the next > > flight (or boat, or donkey cart, or whatever) out of there. --MJ}*** > > We buy purified drinking water, and here is quite a bit closer > to where I sometimes work, where the living conditions > get *far* worse. > I've been over here for a decade, so I've gotten used to it, > but there are moments when the pay just doesn't seem enough. > > cheers > > > From vortex-l-request eskimo.com Thu Feb 15 18:12:10 2001 Received: (from smartlst localhost) by mx1.eskimo.com (8.9.1a/8.8.8) id SAA03884; Thu, 15 Feb 2001 18:08:18 -0800 Resent-Date: Thu, 15 Feb 2001 18:08:18 -0800 Message-ID: <011201c097c5$5e329a60$138f85ce fjsparber> Reply-To: "Frederick Sparber" From: "Frederick Sparber" To: Cc: Subject: Fundamental Physical Constants - Physics and Science Reference by PhysLINK.com Date: Thu, 15 Feb 2001 19:05:06 -0800 MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: multipart/mixed; boundary="----=_NextPart_000_0005_01C09782.36542240" X-Priority: 3 X-MSMail-Priority: Normal X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook Express 5.00.2615.200 X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V5.00.2615.200 Resent-Message-ID: <"RLrzC.0.cy.Ik8Zw" mx1> Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/40796 X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com Status: O X-Status: This is a multi-part message in MIME format. ------=_NextPart_000_0005_01C09782.36542240 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit You're right Robin. I misread the CRC table. :-) http://www.physlink.com/reference_constants.cfm Fred ------=_NextPart_000_0005_01C09782.36542240 Content-Type: application/octet-stream; name="Fundamental Physical Constants - Physics and Science Reference by PhysLINK.com.url" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Content-Disposition: attachment; filename="Fundamental Physical Constants - Physics and Science Reference by PhysLINK.com.url" [DEFAULT] BASEURL=http://www.physlink.com/reference_constants.cfm [InternetShortcut] URL=http://www.physlink.com/reference_constants.cfm Modified=80BD06EDC497C0014C ------=_NextPart_000_0005_01C09782.36542240-- From vortex-l-request eskimo.com Thu Feb 15 19:00:21 2001 Received: (from smartlst localhost) by mx1.eskimo.com (8.9.1a/8.8.8) id SAA28094; Thu, 15 Feb 2001 18:57:26 -0800 Resent-Date: Thu, 15 Feb 2001 18:57:26 -0800 Message-Id: <200102160257.f1G2vH401077 smtp-2u-1.atlantic.net> Date: Thu, 15 Feb 2001 22:6:43 -0500 From: "Michael T. Huffman" Reply-To: knuke LCIA.COM To: "vortex-l eskimo.com" Subject: Ionic Fuel Company X-mailer: FoxMail 2.1 [en] Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Resent-Message-ID: <"XCXik3.0.us6.MS9Zw" mx1> Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/40797 X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com Status: O X-Status: Ahoy There! I just ran across this company's website, and was wondering if there were any expert opinions on their technology. http://www.ionicfuel.co.uk/ It seems to me that this principle could be applied to just about any existing "burner" application, like cars, trucks, boats and home gas heaters, and that it would be an extremely easy and cheap thing for a do-it-yourselfer to do to get more bang for the buck, reduce pollution, maintenance expense, etc.. What do you think? Knuke If, for some strange reason, you don't receive this message, please let me know. From vortex-l-request eskimo.com Thu Feb 15 19:44:30 2001 Received: (from smartlst localhost) by mx1.eskimo.com (8.9.1a/8.8.8) id TAA23987; Thu, 15 Feb 2001 19:41:10 -0800 Resent-Date: Thu, 15 Feb 2001 19:41:10 -0800 Message-Id: <5.0.2.1.0.20010215212952.024a80f8 earthtech.org> X-Sender: little earthtech.org X-Mailer: QUALCOMM Windows Eudora Version 5.0.2 Date: Thu, 15 Feb 2001 21:42:35 -0600 To: vortex-l eskimo.com From: Scott Little Subject: Re: ZPE harnessed In-Reply-To: <3a8bfe7e.2c6d.0 enter.net> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"; format=flowed Resent-Message-ID: <"LoPf4.0.Zs5.L5AZw" mx1> Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/40798 X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com Status: O X-Status: At 11:06 AM 2/15/2001 -0500, David Rosignoli wrote: >So, it is possible to prove analytically that the Casimir effect, and all >variations on this effect must be energy conservative in nature? The mechanism by which the force arises is well understood and this has led to exact analytical expressions for the force vs distance for various geometries (flat-flat, flat-sphere, etc.). All of these expressions are relatively simple monotonic functions of distance, which results in energy conservation when one integrates around any closed path. As usual, there are people throwing extra degrees of complexity into the mix so it's no longer obvious that it must be energy conserving...but I think it's very likely that these, too, will be perfectly conservative. For example, there's a proposal to use liquid crystal surfaces which can be electrically switched between reflective and non-reflective, thus turning on/off the Casimir attraction to some degree. I expect it will turn out that energy is required to make the switch, etc. >Isn't there a NASA BPP physics sponsored project to see if it is possible >to do just that, by providing a Casimir force on one end of a trampoline >looking device, and the spring force of the trampoline on the other end? >So, if these forces are conservative, it should be theoretically >impossible to extract any net energy out of it. What happened to this >research, then? Dunno...but it is not surprising that such a project got a little funding. Unfortunately, there are no real warp drive projects going on in the NASA BPP. Nobody knows how to even get started! So folks are poking around the edges of it...looking for a tiny glimmer of hope. Even I, in my jaded old age, remain interested in well-executed experiments that look for anomalies in what theoretically appears to be barren territory. Scott Little EarthTech International, Inc. 4030 Braker Lane West, Suite 300 Austin TX 78759 512-342-2185 512-346-3017 (FAX) http://www.earthtech.org From vortex-l-request eskimo.com Thu Feb 15 20:38:05 2001 Received: (from smartlst localhost) by mx1.eskimo.com (8.9.1a/8.8.8) id UAA13093; Thu, 15 Feb 2001 20:29:18 -0800 Resent-Date: Thu, 15 Feb 2001 20:29:18 -0800 Date: Thu, 15 Feb 2001 23:34:48 -0500 (EST) From: John Schnurer To: Horace Heffner cc: vortex-l eskimo.com Subject: arc In-Reply-To: Message-ID: MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: TEXT/PLAIN; charset=US-ASCII Resent-Message-ID: <"zM0MF3.0.VC3.UoAZw" mx1> Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/40799 X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com Status: RO X-Status: The idea that arcs can have a very very low resistance when the arc is fully ionizing the air is reasonably well accepted. BUT: This does not HAVE to be pulsed, provided your power supply is heavy enough. Vortec arc lamps put out so much optical radiation that carbon evaporates... BIG wires ... bigger transformers. HOG ... Huge Of Good device. The arc is surrounded by rapidly flowing water... on the inside of the tube. On Thu, 15 Feb 2001, Horace Heffner wrote: > At 12:11 PM 2/13/1, Mitchell Jones wrote: > [snip] > >***{Ernest Sternglass did an experiment back in the '50's in which he > >passed 35000 volts between two tungsten electrodes inside a hydrogen-filled > >tube, and generated lots of neutrons. > [snip] > > Say, it just occurred to me, how can this be done? If 35,000 volts were > applied to a gas across a short enough gap to have any effect, then an > avalanche would occur, a plasma would be formed, and the resistance across > the gap would drop to near zero. The 35,000 volt supply would have to be > current limited, like neon sign transformers are, so the voltage applied to > the gap would thus quickly drop to near zero. > > This kind of device could only operate in a pulsed mode where the delay > between pulses is long enough for an arc to quench. To be efficient, the > pulse would have to be very short. > > Regards, > > Horace Heffner > > From vortex-l-request eskimo.com Thu Feb 15 23:40:23 2001 Received: (from smartlst localhost) by mx1.eskimo.com (8.9.1a/8.8.8) id XAA06824; Thu, 15 Feb 2001 23:38:24 -0800 Resent-Date: Thu, 15 Feb 2001 23:38:24 -0800 Message-Id: Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Date: Thu, 15 Feb 2001 22:48:22 -0900 To: vortex-l eskimo.com From: hheffner mtaonline.net (Horace Heffner) Subject: Re: arc Resent-Message-ID: <"BuBHY.0.Yg1.mZDZw" mx1> Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/40800 X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com Status: RO X-Status: At 11:34 PM 2/15/1, John Schnurer wrote: > The idea that arcs can have a very very low resistance when the >arc is fully ionizing the air is reasonably well accepted. > BUT: This does not HAVE to be pulsed, provided your power supply >is heavy enough. Vortec arc lamps put out so much optical radiation >that carbon evaporates... BIG wires ... bigger transformers. HOG ... Huge >Of Good device. > The arc is surrounded by rapidly flowing water... on the inside of >the tube. Well, let's see. A good hot plasma fed lots of electrons from hot tungsten electrodes should have a conductivity less than copper, probably less than an ohm. To maintain a 35,000 volt potential drop across the tube would require over 35,000 amps to be pushed through the tube. That's 1.2 gigawatts. It would take a lot of water to cool that hummer. Regards, Horace Heffner From vortex-l-request eskimo.com Fri Feb 16 00:16:13 2001 Received: (from smartlst localhost) by mx1.eskimo.com (8.9.1a/8.8.8) id AAA16900; Fri, 16 Feb 2001 00:14:32 -0800 Resent-Date: Fri, 16 Feb 2001 00:14:32 -0800 Message-Id: Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Date: Thu, 15 Feb 2001 23:24:31 -0900 To: From: hheffner mtaonline.net (Horace Heffner) Subject: Re: Fundamental Physical Constants - Physics and Science Reference by PhysLINK.com Resent-Message-ID: <"XvKEo.0.z74.e5EZw" mx1> Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/40801 X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com Status: O X-Status: At 7:05 PM 2/15/1, Frederick Sparber wrote: >You're right Robin. I misread the CRC table. :-) > > http://www.physlink.com/reference_constants.cfm Right about waht? Regards, Horace Heffner From vortex-l-request eskimo.com Fri Feb 16 00:23:52 2001 Received: (from smartlst localhost) by mx1.eskimo.com (8.9.1a/8.8.8) id AAA18242; Fri, 16 Feb 2001 00:22:08 -0800 Resent-Date: Fri, 16 Feb 2001 00:22:08 -0800 Message-ID: <014601c097f9$fe0ba200$138f85ce fjsparber> Reply-To: "Frederick Sparber" From: "Frederick Sparber" To: References: Subject: Re: Fundamental Physical Constants - Physics and Science Reference by PhysLINK.com Date: Fri, 16 Feb 2001 01:22:20 -0800 MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-Priority: 3 X-MSMail-Priority: Normal X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook Express 5.00.2615.200 X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V5.00.2615.200 Resent-Message-ID: <"10Jox3.0.tS4.lCEZw" mx1> Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/40802 X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com Status: O X-Status: ----- Original Message ----- From: Horace Heffner To: Sent: Friday, February 16, 2001 12:24 AM Subject: Re: Fundamental Physical Constants - Physics and Science Reference by PhysLINK.com I had the mass of the proton down as 1.007825. Regards, Frederick > At 7:05 PM 2/15/1, Frederick Sparber wrote: > >You're right Robin. I misread the CRC table. :-) > > > > http://www.physlink.com/reference_constants.cfm > > Right about waht? > > Regards, > > Horace Heffner > > > From vortex-l-request eskimo.com Fri Feb 16 06:54:53 2001 Received: (from smartlst localhost) by mx1.eskimo.com (8.9.1a/8.8.8) id GAA06732; Fri, 16 Feb 2001 06:51:13 -0800 Resent-Date: Fri, 16 Feb 2001 06:51:13 -0800 X-Apparently-From: Message-Id: <4.2.0.58.20010216083952.009633f0 postoffice.swbell.net> X-Sender: cjford1 pop.mail.yahoo.com X-Mailer: QUALCOMM Windows Eudora Pro Version 4.2.0.58 Date: Fri, 16 Feb 2001 08:51:24 -0600 To: vortex-l eskimo.com From: Charles Ford Subject: Re: arc In-Reply-To: Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"; format=flowed Resent-Message-ID: <"w7nbT3.0.6f1.XvJZw" mx1> Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/40803 X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com Status: O X-Status: FYI on the arc Not all gasses avail at very low resistance. A NE2 (common neon bulb used for pilot lights) Begins to conduct at about 100V and drops to about 90V during normal quiescent operation. This bulb will draw a continuous smooth DC current of about 350uA. So the ionized neon gas has a resistance here of about 260K ohm. Also a HeNe Laser tube (the 5mW one that I have) is quiescent at 1450V and 4.5mA about 322K ohm. At 10:48 PM 2/15/01 -0900, you wrote: >At 11:34 PM 2/15/1, John Schnurer wrote: > > The idea that arcs can have a very very low resistance when the > >arc is fully ionizing the air is reasonably well accepted. > > BUT: This does not HAVE to be pulsed, provided your power supply > >is heavy enough. Vortec arc lamps put out so much optical radiation > >that carbon evaporates... BIG wires ... bigger transformers. HOG ... Huge > >Of Good device. > > The arc is surrounded by rapidly flowing water... on the inside of > >the tube. > > >Well, let's see. A good hot plasma fed lots of electrons from hot tungsten >electrodes should have a conductivity less than copper, probably less than >an ohm. To maintain a 35,000 volt potential drop across the tube would >require over 35,000 amps to be pushed through the tube. That's 1.2 >gigawatts. It would take a lot of water to cool that hummer. > >Regards, > >Horace Heffner Charlie Ford KC5-OWZ cjford1 yahoo.com cjford1 swbell.net _________________________________________________________ Do You Yahoo!? Get your free yahoo.com address at http://mail.yahoo.com From vortex-l-request eskimo.com Fri Feb 16 08:16:08 2001 Received: (from smartlst localhost) by mx1.eskimo.com (8.9.1a/8.8.8) id IAA05009; Fri, 16 Feb 2001 08:12:37 -0800 Resent-Date: Fri, 16 Feb 2001 08:12:37 -0800 Reply-To: From: "Keith Nagel" To: Subject: RE: arc Date: Fri, 16 Feb 2001 11:16:18 -0500 Message-ID: MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-Priority: 3 (Normal) X-MSMail-Priority: Normal X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook IMO, Build 9.0.2416 (9.0.2910.0) X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V5.00.2314.1300 In-Reply-To: <4.2.0.58.20010216083952.009633f0 postoffice.swbell.net> Importance: Normal Resent-Message-ID: <"pH9Gu.0.4E1.q5LZw" mx1> Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/40804 X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com Status: O X-Status: Hi All. No mention was made about geometry of electrodes, gas fill pressure, etc. The experimental description by Mitchell was quite vague, and I will repost it here >>***{Ernest Sternglass did an experiment back in the '50's in which he >>passed 35000 volts between two tungsten electrodes inside a hydrogen-filled >>tube, and generated lots of neutrons. This result had physicists scratching >>their heads at the time because, according to theory, an electron needs to >>be accelerated through a potential of roughly 780000 volts in order to slam >>into a proton with enough energy to produce a neutron. Nobody ever came up >>with an explanation for the result that accorded well with prevailing >>theory, and so they simply stopped talking about it. I presume from this description that a glow discharge was established at 35KV and the effect was noted. It is a known experimental fact that stripping can occur as low as 20KV, as other list members can confirm. Mitchell's source claimed this was tested for, as follows "The possibility that a small normal admixture of deuterium, a form of heavy hydrogen, was the source of neutrons was eliminated both theoretically and subsequently by deliberately adding known amounts of this gas and measuring the neutron production rate. To everyone's consternation, no one in the physics department was able to suggest a known nuclear reaction that might explain the observed activity." Perhaps Mitchell can write in the relevant passages from the book describing the experiment, if there is any more than what was presented. I don't agree with Horace that you'd automatically have an arc discharge, but I understand his concern. A rather large tube would be required to sustain the 35KV, but it certainly seems feasable. I do question whether their tests for stripping were adequate. K. -----Original Message----- From: Charles Ford [mailto:cjford1 yahoo.com] Sent: Friday, February 16, 2001 9:51 AM To: vortex-l eskimo.com Subject: Re: arc FYI on the arc Not all gasses avail at very low resistance. A NE2 (common neon bulb used for pilot lights) Begins to conduct at about 100V and drops to about 90V during normal quiescent operation. This bulb will draw a continuous smooth DC current of about 350uA. So the ionized neon gas has a resistance here of about 260K ohm. Also a HeNe Laser tube (the 5mW one that I have) is quiescent at 1450V and 4.5mA about 322K ohm. At 10:48 PM 2/15/01 -0900, you wrote: >At 11:34 PM 2/15/1, John Schnurer wrote: > > The idea that arcs can have a very very low resistance when the > >arc is fully ionizing the air is reasonably well accepted. > > BUT: This does not HAVE to be pulsed, provided your power supply > >is heavy enough. Vortec arc lamps put out so much optical radiation > >that carbon evaporates... BIG wires ... bigger transformers. HOG ... Huge > >Of Good device. > > The arc is surrounded by rapidly flowing water... on the inside of > >the tube. > > >Well, let's see. A good hot plasma fed lots of electrons from hot tungsten >electrodes should have a conductivity less than copper, probably less than >an ohm. To maintain a 35,000 volt potential drop across the tube would >require over 35,000 amps to be pushed through the tube. That's 1.2 >gigawatts. It would take a lot of water to cool that hummer. > >Regards, > >Horace Heffner Charlie Ford KC5-OWZ cjford1 yahoo.com cjford1 swbell.net _________________________________________________________ Do You Yahoo!? Get your free yahoo.com address at http://mail.yahoo.com From vortex-l-request eskimo.com Fri Feb 16 10:38:54 2001 Received: (from smartlst localhost) by mx1.eskimo.com (8.9.1a/8.8.8) id KAA30176; Fri, 16 Feb 2001 10:27:58 -0800 Resent-Date: Fri, 16 Feb 2001 10:27:58 -0800 Message-Id: Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Date: Fri, 16 Feb 2001 09:36:35 -0900 To: vortex-l eskimo.com From: hheffner mtaonline.net (Horace Heffner) Subject: Re: arc Resent-Message-ID: <"Jp8Ij2.0.QN7.k4NZw" mx1> Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/40805 X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com Status: O X-Status: At 8:51 AM 2/16/1, Charles Ford wrote: >A NE2 (common neon bulb used for pilot lights) Begins to conduct at about >100V and drops to about 90V during normal quiescent operation. The critical value is not the breakdown voltage, but rather the saturation voltage, and the conductivity once saturation voltage is achieved. The saturation voltage is a function of the pressure of the gas, the characteristics of the gas, and the distance between electrodes. In order for electrons flowing in the gas to create the saturation avalanche, electrons have to have a sufficient mean free path to achieve ionization potential. However, we know that if the subject hydrogen device is going to achieve high deuteron energies that the mean free path of the deuterons must also be large, thus the mean free path of the electrons is also large, plus the deuterons themselves will cause avalanche, and saturation is assured. When saturation occurs resistance drops to a very low value and if the 35,000 volts is sustained you can be certain the tungsten electrodes will heat up (if not already heated) thus there is a very efficient low resistance electron source present. I should note that it is possible to make a long H2 filled tube that acts like a neon tube, that would run a limited current using a neon transformer. However, I would point out that neon transformers are designed to be self balasting. Further, the longer the tube the less relevant the 35,000 volts, because the field gradient has dropped. >This bulb >will draw a continuous smooth DC current of about 350uA. So the ionized >neon gas has a resistance here of about 260K ohm. The NE2 is a cold cathode device, and also a device which requires a balast resistor. Are you sure there is no balast resistor involved to achieve the above numbers? You should measure the voltage across a conducting bulb, not across the balast resistor and bulb, and not the breakdown voltage, and not an rms voltage, but the actual voltage across the bulb (only) when conducting. > >Also a HeNe Laser tube (the 5mW one that I have) is quiescent at 1450V and >4.5mA about 322K ohm. Again, the objective of this tube is not to accelerate the ions in it to high energies, and in fact the more gas pressure the higher the light emission at a given operating temperature. The higher the gas pressure the shorter the mean free path and the less the ratio of mean energy to driving voltage. This tube will not tend to create 1450 eV collisions. Regards, Horace Heffner From vortex-l-request eskimo.com Fri Feb 16 11:42:53 2001 Received: (from smartlst localhost) by mx1.eskimo.com (8.9.1a/8.8.8) id LAA16992; Fri, 16 Feb 2001 11:18:25 -0800 Resent-Date: Fri, 16 Feb 2001 11:18:25 -0800 Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" X-Sender: mjones pop.jump.net Message-Id: In-Reply-To: References: Date: Fri, 16 Feb 2001 12:41:45 -0600 To: vortex-l eskimo.com From: Mitchell Jones Subject: RE: Report: HotWater, Run 3 =1.20 txt Resent-Message-ID: <"Ys3OA3.0.G94.0qNZw" mx1> Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/40806 X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com Status: O X-Status: >>Paul Anderson wrote: >> > >> >I used a full-wave bridge, yes, and no - I didn't use anything >> > to smooth the waveform - so this could be a distortion. >> >However: the capacitive action of the unit is considerable, >> > and measurements of the voltage drop across the unit >> > as well as the current flow are all very stable. >> >> ***{Capacitance will smooth out fluctuations in voltage, but you need >> inductors to smooth out the current. I suggest that you kludge together an >> inductor and place it in the circuit, and see if your OU numbers go down. >> If they do, it is likely that your meter expects flat DC and cannot handle >> the bumpy variety that you are giving it. --MJ}*** > >Could be - I did a run just like this, with an inductor in series. > I got a higher amp reading - 3.2 amps - but I neglected > to check the voltage drop across the unit so I don't know > what kind of power was involved. >I'll do it again and check more thoroughly. ***{I doubt that the mere presence of an inductor in the circuit would affect the average voltage. If not, then based on your earlier numbers your input power after 1800 sec would be: (3.2)(187)(1800) = 107712 joules. And your output power would be: (12.1)(20000) = 242000 calories, or 1012770 joules. Which would give you a COP of: 1012770/107712 = .94, or 94%. That sounds about right to me, considering the various unacounted heat losses. Bottom line: unless your inductor is having odd effects that would merit investigation in their own right, your gadget is not OU. In spite of that, doing this sort of stuff is educational and great fun, and ought to be encouraged. If enough of us play with this stuff and post our results, we will eventually get to the bottom of the CF conundrum. If it proves to be real we will transform the world, and our lives, for the better. (And some of us may make a few bucks in the bargain! :-) --Mitchell Jones}*** > >> > Fluctuations are generally on the order of 5 mA. >> >> ***{The kind of fluctuations you can see on the readout aren't the kind I >> am worried about here. All readouts are dampened, of necessity, to enable >> the human eye to make use of them. (For example, if the DC readout jumped >> from zero to 8 amps 50 times per second, all you would see would be a >> blur.) My concern is that your meter may not be giving you a true average >> of the amplitudes of those 50 cycle current fluctuations. --MJ}*** > >Fair enough - as I said, I'll run it again and see. >Nyquist for the display is about 2 Hertz, so I'll see > if I can ensure I've got filtering down to 1.3 Hertz > >> >I haven't gotten a data-logging system up just yet, >> > but when I do it should settle the story of fluctuation >> > when I track voltage/current/temperature simultaneously. >> >Mostly it's been a matter of me looking at this >> > from a viewpoint of "there's something obviously wrong here - >> > I shouldn't need lab facilities to sort out where the numbers >> > have gone wrong". Perhaps I am just too lazy. >> > >> >> (4) What did you use for your anode and cathode? >> > >> >The anode is steel pipe, the cathode is a steel bolt. >> >The bolt is embedded in a concrete insulation plug. >> >If you're interested, I have a .jpg of the beast >> >> ***{If your OU numbers persist after you have eliminated the >> apparent flaws >> in your design, I will be *very* interested. Based on lengthy experience >> discussing these sorts of things, however, I would say that the chances of >> that happening are virtually zero. (If anything has become clear about CF, >> it is that it is not easy to achieve. Thus a fellow in Jakarta >> who sticks a >> pipe and a bolt in a bucket *ain't hardly* gonna do it! :-) --MJ}*** > >It sounds pretty awful, doesn't it ? >I wouldn't bother with this if I had proper water. > (necessity and economy are the parents of invention) >And I wouldn't even consider looking at it in the light > of CF if I hadn't measured the properties, > as well as the point that I haven't read any accounts > of anyone else trying this sort of setup. >More than likely it is only 1.0, but sometimes someone > has to report something like this so no one else gets > bogged down in needlessly repeating what is probably uneventful. >One of those 'negative results' type reports, I guess... ***{Probably, but it's great fun! :-) --MJ}*** [snip] ________________ Quote of the month: "Law is what the authorities use to ride the country." --Anatoly Schransky From vortex-l-request eskimo.com Fri Feb 16 12:02:48 2001 Received: (from smartlst localhost) by mx1.eskimo.com (8.9.1a/8.8.8) id LAA30162; Fri, 16 Feb 2001 11:46:05 -0800 Resent-Date: Fri, 16 Feb 2001 11:46:05 -0800 X-Authentication-Warning: eskimo.com: billb owned process doing -bs Date: Fri, 16 Feb 2001 11:46:01 -0800 (PST) From: William Beaty To: vortex-l eskimo.com Subject: off topic: lobster Message-ID: MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: TEXT/PLAIN; charset=US-ASCII Resent-Message-ID: <"i9RiQ3.0.BN7.yDOZw" mx1> Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/40807 X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com Status: O X-Status: Here's a 'tutorial' on bioelectromagnetism! Heh. http://www.512productions.com/lobstermagnet/lobsmag.swf (flash plugin required, fairly long download time) ((((((((((((((((((((( ( ( ( ( (O) ) ) ) ) ))))))))))))))))))))) William J. Beaty SCIENCE HOBBYIST website billb eskimo.com http://www.amasci.com EE/programmer/sci-exhibits science projects, tesla, weird science Seattle, WA 206-789-0775 freenrg-L taoshum-L vortex-L webhead-L From vortex-l-request eskimo.com Fri Feb 16 12:31:35 2001 Received: (from smartlst localhost) by mx1.eskimo.com (8.9.1a/8.8.8) id MAA11614; Fri, 16 Feb 2001 12:14:50 -0800 Resent-Date: Fri, 16 Feb 2001 12:14:50 -0800 X-Authentication-Warning: eskimo.com: billb owned process doing -bs Date: Fri, 16 Feb 2001 12:14:47 -0800 (PST) From: William Beaty To: vortex-l eskimo.com Subject: Re: [astro-forum] Re: [whirlpower] Re: David Dennard is gone. Message-ID: MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: MULTIPART/ALTERNATIVE; BOUNDARY="----=_NextPart_000_047E_01C09703.E9E88640" Content-ID: Resent-Message-ID: <"6MY_j2.0.Mr2.veOZw" mx1> Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/40808 X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com Status: O X-Status: This message is in MIME format. The first part should be readable text, while the remaining parts are likely unreadable without MIME-aware tools. Send mail to mime docserver.cac.washington.edu for more info. ------=_NextPart_000_047E_01C09703.E9E88640 Content-Type: TEXT/PLAIN; CHARSET=iso-8859-1 Content-ID: David Dennard ("whirlpower") passed away. See below. ((((((((((((((((((((( ( ( ( ( (O) ) ) ) ) ))))))))))))))))))))) William J. Beaty SCIENCE HOBBYIST website billb eskimo.com http://www.amasci.com EE/programmer/sci-exhibits science projects, tesla, weird science Seattle, WA 206-789-0775 freenrg-L taoshum-L vortex-L webhead-L ---------- Forwarded message ---------- Date: Thu, 15 Feb 2001 04:01:03 -0700 From: Anna M* Reply-To: freenrg-l eskimo.com To: astro-forum yahoogroups.com, freenrg-l@eskimo.com, svpvril yahoogroups.com Subject: [FG]: Re: [astro-forum] Fw: [whirlpower] Re: David Dennard is gone. Hello Regina, I live in AZ. near Tucson. It is a little paradise here still untouched by the mainstream civilization. I feel very sad about David. Yes, you are right -he was onto something, only perhaps his interpretation of his own vision was not quiet right. But he was too stubborn to admit any faults in his thinking. This might had been the reason why people after awhile tended to discard him and his ideas altogether. Till later, Anna Have you tried Melatonin for your sleeping problems? It does wonders sometimes. I am a night person too. ----- Original Message ----- From: Regina To: astro-forum yahoogroups.com ; freenrg-l@eskimo.com ; svpvril@yahoogroups.com Sent: Thursday, February 15, 2001 3:46 AM Subject: Re: [astro-forum] Fw: [whirlpower] Re: David Dennard is gone. Anna: DD wasn't homeless. He lived with Ms Clark, as Niz was so fond of reminding us. I am still thinking about this and still hoping he was on to something. I've been burned out and had may be 5 all nighters in the last 2 weeks. And now the man with the real sleep problems is dead. I'll wb later. I feel bad for his son. DD was only in his 40's , you know. Where are you located, Anna? I am in NYC. DD was in California. I think he was originally from the Carolinas. And good point. This seems like a virtual world, but the people we meet die. DD is the first person I have met on line who died. It feels very surreal and existential. I'll wb later. ----- Original Message ----- From: Anna M* To: ; ; Sent: Thursday, February 15, 2001 2:50 AM Subject: [astro-forum] Fw: [whirlpower] Re: David Dennard is gone. > Hello everyone! > It looks that David Dennard our whirlpool guy is dead. That is all the information which was forwarded to me I could get right now. > As we know, David was homeless and very poor. But he had this one crazy idea about the whirlpower running the universe that he tried to promote sometimes enraging us all with his stubborn persistence. He also made Vera Rubin the very popular name on the net. > Let's remember David for his vision and passion. > I do realize that Internet is dealing with virtual people having virtual lives. Yet we live, die and suffer and we all are very real people, what sometimes needs to be reminded. > Anna > > From: jack telaservices.co.uk > To: whirlpower yahoogroups.com > Date: Wednesday, February 14, 2001 10:44 AM > Subject: [whirlpower] Re: David > > >Dear Joel > >Just a note to extend my deepest sympathy at your sad loss > >Yours > >Jack > > --- In whirlpower y..., trblmakr@b... wrote: Hello everyone. I'm not sure exactly how to say this, but my father died today. I dont keep up with this listing, but he spoke about it alot, so i decided that i should let all of you know. I rather shaken up about all of it at the moment, i apologise for any briefness of this message. I believe however that you should all try to keep this list up as best you can. This will be my only message, and if you would like to know any more informaon, please email me at tack2sr y... and ill try to keep you informed as to what is going on. Joel ------=_NextPart_000_047E_01C09703.E9E88640-- From vortex-l-request eskimo.com Fri Feb 16 13:11:58 2001 Received: (from smartlst localhost) by mx1.eskimo.com (8.9.1a/8.8.8) id NAA32729; Fri, 16 Feb 2001 13:05:09 -0800 Resent-Date: Fri, 16 Feb 2001 13:05:09 -0800 X-Apparently-From: Message-Id: <4.2.0.58.20010216141546.0096e2f0 postoffice.swbell.net> X-Sender: cjford1 pop.mail.yahoo.com X-Mailer: QUALCOMM Windows Eudora Pro Version 4.2.0.58 Date: Fri, 16 Feb 2001 15:05:16 -0600 To: vortex-l eskimo.com From: Charles Ford Subject: Re: arc In-Reply-To: Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"; format=flowed Resent-Message-ID: <"ebcG-.0.E_7.3OPZw" mx1> Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/40809 X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com Status: O X-Status: At 09:36 AM 2/16/01 -0900, you wrote: >The NE2 is a cold cathode device, and also a device which requires a balast >resistor. Are you sure there is no balast resistor involved to achieve the >above numbers? You should measure the voltage across a conducting bulb, >not across the balast resistor and bulb, and not the breakdown voltage, and >not an rms voltage, but the actual voltage across the bulb (only) when >conducting. Horace: Yes. The 90V is the quiescent voltage of the bulb. In this case the supply voltage is 125VDC with a 100Kohm resister in series. The 100K resister drops the remaining 35V. In the case of the LASER there is also a ballast of 75Kohm so the required supply is about 1790VDC As I said this is a quiescent (stable) condition. No oscillation. Just smooth DC. Not pulsed. As a mater of fact I have never seen a condition where an arc of any type was able to consume all of the available charge. Once there is not enough voltage to maintain the condition the condition will collapse. Furthermore I have long since forgotten how this discussion got started. :-) Charlie Ford KC5-OWZ cjford1 yahoo.com cjford1 swbell.net _________________________________________________________ Do You Yahoo!? Get your free yahoo.com address at http://mail.yahoo.com From vortex-l-request eskimo.com Fri Feb 16 14:21:16 2001 Received: (from smartlst localhost) by mx1.eskimo.com (8.9.1a/8.8.8) id OAA27608; Fri, 16 Feb 2001 14:08:09 -0800 Resent-Date: Fri, 16 Feb 2001 14:08:09 -0800 Message-ID: <3A8DA4CB.A6C7E961 ix.netcom.com> Date: Fri, 16 Feb 2001 14:08:11 -0800 From: Akira Kawasaki X-Mailer: Mozilla 4.72 [en]C-CCK-MCD NSCPCD472 (Win95; U) X-Accept-Language: en MIME-Version: 1.0 To: Vortex Subject: [Fwd: What's New for Feb 16, 2001] Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Resent-Message-ID: <"SC_Ho3.0.Hl6.9JQZw" mx1> Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/40810 X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com Status: O X-Status: -------- Original Message -------- Subject: What's New for Feb 16, 2001 Date: Fri, 16 Feb 2001 15:46:32 -0500 (EST) From: "What's New" To: aki ix.netcom.com WHAT'S NEW Robert L. Park Friday, 16 Feb 01 Washington, DC FLASH! BUSH BUDGET SLASHES SCIENCE. Today's Wall Street Journal announced that the Bush Administration plans to chop the science investment in order to make room for the $1.6 trillion tax cut. 1. EVOLUTION: CHARLES DARWIN IS ALIVE, AND LIVING IN KANSAS! In August 1999, the Kansas State Board of Education eliminated not only evolution, but the Big Bang and plate tectonics as well, from the science standards (WN 13 Aug 99). As in other states where religious conservatives have gained control, the action of the school board embarrassed the majority of voters of Kansas, who got rid of the fossilized members of the board at the first opportunity (WN 4 Aug 00). This seemed to assure that evolution would be restored, and yesterday the new board did just that, approving the new standards by a 7 to 3 majority. 2. NMD: REPUBLICAN CRITICISMS. On Wednesday, Richard Perle, Assistant Secretary of Defense in the Reagan Administration and a prominent missile defense advocate, slammed the ground-based NMD system. "The program that the outgoing administration had been looking at is worse than inadequate. It would have been foolish to build it. So, we have to start over again..." The same day, Craig Thomas (R-WY) voiced concern on the Senate floor. In addition to the technical problems, Thomas noted, the darn thing costs a lot. No kidding. The price tag for boost-phase NMD could run as high as $100 billion (WN 26 Jan 01). If the proposed $1.6 trillion tax cut passes, pentagon officials will be looking under seat cushions to find enough cash to fund NMD. 3. DOCTORAL DEGREE DECLINE. For the first time in 14 years the total number of Ph.D.s awarded in the United States has gone down, dropping 3.6% between 1998 and 1999. Physical Sciences, Engineering and Mathematics led the slide, together down 8.5%, including a 12% reduction in degrees to non-U.S. citizens. The U.S. Commission on National Security for the 21st Century recently identified science and technology education as a national security imperative, stating "the word 'crisis' is much overused, but it is entirely appropriate here." 4. POLYGRAPH: RICHARDSON SOFTENED RULES--SO WHO CARES? In one of his final acts, Bill Richardson suspended implementation of the very lab security measures he had himself imposed in response to heat over the Wen Ho Lee affair, and called for a review of the policies. His successor, Spencer Abraham, must of course make up his own mind about security policies at the labs. So far, there is little hint of where he stands. However, he may be preoccupied with the heavy budget cuts imposed by Bush on the whole stockpile stewardship program. Meanwhile, former CIA Director John Deutch was pardoned for his lapses in security. THE AMERICAN PHYSICAL SOCIETY (Note: Opinions are the author's and are not necessarily shared by the APS, but they should be.) From vortex-l-request eskimo.com Fri Feb 16 14:32:54 2001 Received: (from smartlst localhost) by mx1.eskimo.com (8.9.1a/8.8.8) id OAA02373; Fri, 16 Feb 2001 14:26:31 -0800 Resent-Date: Fri, 16 Feb 2001 14:26:31 -0800 Message-ID: <001901c0986f$fd0aa920$efb4bfa8 fjsparber> Reply-To: "Frederick Sparber" From: "Frederick Sparber" To: Cc: "jlsparber" Subject: Re: Protons, Deuterons,and Neutrons in the Sternglasss Experiment Date: Fri, 16 Feb 2001 15:25:35 -0800 MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-Priority: 3 X-MSMail-Priority: Normal X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook Express 5.00.2615.200 X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V5.00.2615.200 Resent-Message-ID: <"y4v8r3.0.xa.MaQZw" mx1> Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/40811 X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com Status: O X-Status: Go Figure, Robin. :-) D = 2.01355 AMU n = 1.008665 AMU P = 1.0072764 AMU e = 0.00054858 AMU High energy (> 1.02 Mev Collision) P-P reaction(requires Electron-Positron and Neutrino-Antineutrino Pair Production) : 1, P + P ---> D + e+ + neutrino + 0.930 Mev Lower energy P-e-P reaction (requires Neutrino-Antineutrino Pair Production): 2, P + e + P ---> D + neutrino + 1.441 Mev Free Neutron Decay: 3, n ---> P + e + Antineutrino + 0.782 Mev Neutron capture by a Proton: 4, n + P ---> D + 2.223 Mev Then, 2.223 Mev - 1.441 Mev = 0.782 Mev same as 3. Now then, if the 35 Kev Sternglass Hydrogen Experiment was creating Mills' Hydrino Hydride (A Pseudo Deuteron) could it form a Deuteron and/or a free neutron in a "three-body" collision? Regards, Frederick From vortex-l-request eskimo.com Fri Feb 16 15:49:33 2001 Received: (from smartlst localhost) by mx1.eskimo.com (8.9.1a/8.8.8) id PAA06028; Fri, 16 Feb 2001 15:44:33 -0800 Resent-Date: Fri, 16 Feb 2001 15:44:33 -0800 From: Robin van Spaandonk To: vortex-l eskimo.com Subject: Stimulated alpha decay? Date: Sat, 17 Feb 2001 10:43:54 +1100 Organization: Improving Message-ID: <2tcr8to5smohqkosckoa966ul3eok9k8lk 4ax.com> References: In-Reply-To: X-Mailer: Forte Agent 1.8/32.548 MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit X-MIME-Autoconverted: from quoted-printable to 8bit by mx1.eskimo.com id PAA05977 Resent-Message-ID: <"rkPtt.0.0U1.XjRZw" mx1> Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/40812 X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com Status: O X-Status: In reply to William Beaty's message of Mon, 12 Feb 2001 17:16:14 -0800 (PST): [snip] >You are invited to visit www.rexresearch.com, a new website dedicated to >representing unconventional technologies! Hi, >From the above site I went to http://www.rexresearch.com/aa5pbhg.htm . I would like to put forward the following possible explanation for you to pick apart :). Pb207 -> He4 + Hg203 + 0.391 MeV Hg203 -> Tl203 + 0.492 MeV (beta decay; hl=46.6 days) Both reactions are therefore exothermic, and should run unaided, however Pb207 is a stable isotope. Perhaps however it takes only a very little push to make it decay. Adding "extra" electrons to the local environment of the Pb atom, would increase the negative potential of the environment relative to the nucleus, and might "encourage" the alpha particle to leave. (Which is why a heavy electron current promotes the process). Regards, Robin van Spaandonk A Future For Humanity see: http://users.bigpond.net.au/rvanspaa/ From vortex-l-request eskimo.com Fri Feb 16 17:40:55 2001 Received: (from smartlst localhost) by mx1.eskimo.com (8.9.1a/8.8.8) id RAA12587; Fri, 16 Feb 2001 17:29:44 -0800 Resent-Date: Fri, 16 Feb 2001 17:29:44 -0800 Date: Fri, 16 Feb 2001 17:29:36 -0800 (PST) From: hank scudder To: vortex-l eskimo.com Subject: Re: arc In-Reply-To: <4.2.0.58.20010216141546.0096e2f0 postoffice.swbell.net> Message-Id: Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: TEXT/PLAIN; charset=US-ASCII Resent-Message-ID: <"qGjFK.0.b43.7GTZw" mx1> Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/40813 X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com Status: O X-Status: Arcs in air are often used as a high voltage, very low resistance switch. The ones I have seen consist of an annular ring surrounding a center cylinder, both of heavy Copper. The gap is large enough that no conduction occurs at the operating voltage-about 100KV on the system I saw. A thin wire stuck into the gap was pulsed with an intermediate voltage, large enough to start an arc. In microseconds, the arc filled the whole ring, and the voltage across it was on the order of 0 volts. About a million amperes flowed from the capacitors bank into the H-fusion device under test. This was at GER&D Center in the 60's, when they were hoping to get fusion power in the next few years. They gave it up about 1968 or so. Hank On Fri, 16 Feb 2001, Charles Ford wrote: > At 09:36 AM 2/16/01 -0900, you wrote: > >The NE2 is a cold cathode device, and also a device which requires a balast > >resistor. Are you sure there is no balast resistor involved to achieve the > >above numbers? You should measure the voltage across a conducting bulb, > >not across the balast resistor and bulb, and not the breakdown voltage, and > >not an rms voltage, but the actual voltage across the bulb (only) when > >conducting. > > Horace: > > Yes. The 90V is the quiescent voltage of the bulb. In this case the > supply voltage is 125VDC with a 100Kohm resister in series. The 100K > resister drops the remaining 35V. > In the case of the LASER there is also a ballast of 75Kohm so the required > supply is about 1790VDC > > As I said this is a quiescent (stable) condition. No oscillation. Just > smooth DC. Not pulsed. > > As a mater of fact I have never seen a condition where an arc of any type > was able to consume all of the available charge. Once there is not enough > voltage to maintain the condition the condition will collapse. > > Furthermore I have long since forgotten how this discussion got started. :-) > > > > > > > > > > Charlie Ford > > KC5-OWZ > cjford1 yahoo.com > cjford1 swbell.net > > _________________________________________________________ > Do You Yahoo!? > Get your free yahoo.com address at http://mail.yahoo.com > > From vortex-l-request eskimo.com Fri Feb 16 17:47:23 2001 Received: (from smartlst localhost) by mx1.eskimo.com (8.9.1a/8.8.8) id RAA18826; Fri, 16 Feb 2001 17:42:39 -0800 Resent-Date: Fri, 16 Feb 2001 17:42:39 -0800 From: Robin van Spaandonk To: Subject: Re: Protons, Deuterons,and Neutrons in the Sternglasss Experiment Date: Sat, 17 Feb 2001 12:42:03 +1100 Organization: Improving Message-ID: References: <001901c0986f$fd0aa920$efb4bfa8 fjsparber> In-Reply-To: <001901c0986f$fd0aa920$efb4bfa8 fjsparber> X-Mailer: Forte Agent 1.8/32.548 MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit X-MIME-Autoconverted: from quoted-printable to 8bit by mx1.eskimo.com id RAA18792 Resent-Message-ID: <"0DEbW1.0._b4.ESTZw" mx1> Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/40814 X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com Status: O X-Status: In reply to Frederick Sparber's message of Fri, 16 Feb 2001 15:25:35 -0800: [snip] Hi Fred, >Now then, if the 35 Kev Sternglass Hydrogen Experiment was creating >Mills' Hydrino Hydride (A Pseudo Deuteron) could it form a Deuteron and/or Hydrino Hydride, is not a pseudo deuteron (though the name makes it sound as though it were). It is the name Mills has chosen to give to a proton with two shrunken electrons (and is consequently negatively charged), i.e. a hydride ion based upon a hydrino rather than on a normal ground state hydrogen atom. >a free neutron in a "three-body" collision? Quote from Mills' book (Chapter 13, page 266-267): "The rates of electronic transitions of molecules is a function of the change in internuclear distance during the transition. Transitions between electronic states that have equivalent internuclear distances at some point during their vibrational cycles have much greater rates than transitions that require the energy level of the electrons to change as well as the internuclear distance to change simultaneously. As shown in Figure 13.1, the transition from the n = 1 state to the n = 1/ 2 state of molecular hydrogen is not favored for this reason. A more likely transition pathway is a vibrational excitation of molecular hydrogen ( n = 1) that breaks the bond, followed by a transition reaction of each of the hydrogen atoms via a 27.2 eV energy hole catalyst as given in the Atomic Coulomb Field Collapse-Hydrino Theory-BlackLight Process Section, followed by reaction of the two hydrino atoms (n = 1/ 2) to form dihydrino molecule (n = 1/ 2)." I take this to mean that your three-body collision has a snowflake's hope in hell ;). [snip] Regards, Robin van Spaandonk A Future For Humanity see: http://users.bigpond.net.au/rvanspaa/ From vortex-l-request eskimo.com Fri Feb 16 17:58:16 2001 Received: (from smartlst localhost) by mx1.eskimo.com (8.9.1a/8.8.8) id RAA22831; Fri, 16 Feb 2001 17:52:37 -0800 Resent-Date: Fri, 16 Feb 2001 17:52:37 -0800 Message-Id: Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Date: Fri, 16 Feb 2001 17:02:37 -0900 To: vortex-l eskimo.com From: hheffner mtaonline.net (Horace Heffner) Subject: Re: arc Resent-Message-ID: <"KmDum2.0.ea5.bbTZw" mx1> Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/40815 X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com Status: O X-Status: At 3:05 PM 2/16/1, Charles Ford wrote: >As a mater of fact I have never seen a condition where an arc of any type >was able to consume all of the available charge. If you would like to see this then remove the balast resistor from the NE2 bulb. 8^) Protect your eyes etc. The balast resistor prevents enough current from going through the bulb to cause it to go to saturation. Also, note again that the pressure in the NE2 is not set low enough to obtain a long mean free path, so as to produce a significant number of ions in the 1-2 MeV range, which is required of a neutron stripper. Regards, Horace Heffner From vortex-l-request eskimo.com Fri Feb 16 18:02:09 2001 Received: (from smartlst localhost) by mx1.eskimo.com (8.9.1a/8.8.8) id RAA24073; Fri, 16 Feb 2001 17:57:06 -0800 Resent-Date: Fri, 16 Feb 2001 17:57:06 -0800 Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1" X-Sender: mjones pop.jump.net Message-Id: In-Reply-To: Date: Fri, 16 Feb 2001 19:54:32 -0600 To: vortex-l eskimo.com From: Mitchell Jones Subject: Re: Neutrons from Electron Impact? Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit X-MIME-Autoconverted: from quoted-printable to 8bit by mx1.eskimo.com id RAA24048 Resent-Message-ID: <"SlyaN2.0.1u5.mfTZw" mx1> Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/40816 X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com Status: O X-Status: ***{Hi Horace. I decided to go through your mathematical reasoning with a fine-toothed comb. Sorry for the delay. --MJ}*** Horace Heffner wrote: >My speculations are based roughly on the idea that the high energy 35 keV >electrons would have, in proximity to the nucleus, a kinetic energy of >about 511 keV + 35 kev = 546 keV ***{At "infinity," by definition, the potential energy of the electron with respect to a 1 esu charge--e.g., a proton--is negligible. Given--also at "infinity"--a kinetic energy of 35 keV pointing straight toward that proton, the total kinetic energy of the electron upon impact will be the sum of the 35 keV with which it started, and the change in its potential energy when it reaches the surface of the nucleus--typically at a radius of about .5x10^-12 cm. The potential energy at radius r is defined as the work required to lower the electron from infinity to its position at distance r from the proton, and is computed by determining the average value of F over the interval from r to infinity, and then multiplying that value by the distance from infinity to r. The average value of F over that interval would be [1/(ƒ - r) Int(r,ƒ)F(ƒ - r)dr = Int(r,ƒ)(-e^2/r^2)dr = -e^2 Int(r,ƒ)(1/r^2)dr = -e^2 (r,ƒ)[-1/r] = -e^2[0 - (-1/r)] = -e^2/r. In the present case, -e^2/r = -(4.8x10^-10)^2/(.5x10^-12) = 4.61x10^-7 ergs, and, at 6.25x10^11 ev/erg, that becomes 288125 ev, or 288 keV. Hence 288 keV, not 511 keV, has been transformed from potential to kinetic energy when the electron strikes the nucleus. Thus the total kinetic energy at that point would be 288 + 35 = 323 keV. Therefore, by what reasoning did you obtain 511 keV rather than 288 keV? --Mitchell Jones}*** , and, including rest mass of 511 keV, a >total energy of 1057 keV for use in the relativistic momentum calculation: ***{As per the above, that should be 834 keV. --MJ}*** > > E^2 = E0^2 + (pc)^2 ***{The following is for those who have never seen a detailed derivation of the above. It seems that, back in the early 1900's, various experimental results had begun hinting that at extreme velocities (a) mass increased, (b) bodies were foreshortened in the direction of motion, and (c) causal process ("clocks") ran more slowly. The problem was to come up with a mathematical transformation that would make the ordinary equations of motion fit the data obtained both at ordinary velocities and at extreme velocities. To that end Einstein conjectured that a transformation based on [1-(v^2/c^2)]^.5 could be used to accomplish that purpose. The resulting derivation for relativistic momentum and energy is described below. The classical expression for momentum was simply p = mv, where m is the mass and v is the velocity, but, to make mass increase as velocity increased, Einstein distinguished between m, the "rest mass," and m', the increased mass that occurs with velocity, as follows: m' = m/[1 - (V^2/c^2)]^.5 The expression for momentum thus became: p = m'v = mv/[1 - (V^2/c^2)]^.5 (1 If K is the kinetic energy of a particle, then: dK = Fdx By Newton's 2nd law: F = dp/dt Thus: dK = (dp/dt)dx = dp(dx/dt) = Vdp Hence: Int dK = Int Vdp (2 Solving (1 for V, we obtain: V = p/(m^2 + p^2/c^2)^.5 (3 Substituting (3 into (2, we get: Int dK = Int pdp/(m^2 + p^2/c^2)^.5 (4 If we let Z = m^2 + p^2/c^2, then dZ = (2/C^2)pdp To permit a substitution of Z and dZ, modify (4 as follows: Int dK = (c^2/2) Int (2/c^2)pdp/(m^2 + p^2/c^2)^.5 (5 Substituting Z and dZ into (5, we obtain: Int dK = (c^2/2) Int dZ/(Z)^.5 Which becomes: K = (c^2/2) Int (Z^-.5)dZ = (c^2/2) (Z^.5)/.5 + C = (c^2/2) (m^2 + p^2/c^2)^.5)/.5 + C = (c^2/2) (m^2c^2 + p^2)^.5)/.5c + C = (c/2) (m^2c^2 + p^2)^.5)/.5 + C = (c)(m^2c^2 + p^2)^.5 + C = (m^2c^4 + p^2c^2)^.5 + C = [(mc^2)^2 + (pc)^2]^.5 + C (6 The question is, what is the value of C? In other words, do we know of a situation that will permit us to plug in a value for K and solve for C? Well, when V = 0, K = 0 and p = 0. Thus we obtain: 0 = [(mc^2)^2 + 0]^.5 + C Result: C = -[(mc^2)^2]^.5 = -mc^2 Thus, substituting for C in (6, we obtain: K = [(mc^2)^2 + (pc)^2]^.5 -mc^2 Rewriting: mc^2 + K = [(mc^2)^2 + (pc)^2]^.5 Based on examination of the above, it is apparent that mc^2 is the energy of a body at rest, and that [(mc^2)^2 + (pc)^2]^.5 is the total energy of a body, whether in motion or at rest. Thus we obtain E0 = mc^2, and E = [(mc^2)^2 + (pc)^2]^.5 Substituting the former in the latter, we get: E = [E0^2 + (pc)^2]^.5 Which gives: E^2 = E0^2 + (pc)^2 (7 Q.E.D. Fascinating stuff, in my opinion. --Mitchell Jones}*** > >or > p = ([E^2 - E0^2]^0.5)/c > > p = ([(1.057x10^6 ev)^2 - (5.11x10^5 eV)^2]^0.5)/c ***{You do not show a conversion factor to mks energy units in the above. If that is included, p = ([(.834x10^6*1.6x10^-19)^2 - (5.11x10^5*1.6x10^-19)^2]^0.5)/c. --MJ}*** > > p = 6.274x10^-22 kg-m/s ***{I got p = 3.52x10^-22 kg-m/s. --MJ}*** > >giving a deBroglie wavelength of: > > lambda = h/p = h/(6.274 kg-m/s) = 1.056x10^-12 m ***{Planck's constant, h, in the cgs system is 6.63x10^-27 erg-sec, which becomes 6.63x10^-34 joule-sec, so I got lambda = h/p = 6.63x10^-34/3.52x10^-22 = 1.89x10^-12 m. --MJ}*** > >and thus, given a nuclear radius of about 10^-4 m ***{That looks like a typo. A typical nuclear radius would be about .5x10^-14 m, so I assume that 10^-14 was the number you intended. --MJ}*** , about a 1/10,000 chance >of being "found in the nucleus" at any moment during the interaction ***{If you assume that the electron will be somewhere within a "matter wave" of radius lambda/2 then, using your lambda, that gives a cross-sectional area of ¼[(.528x10^-12)^2] = 8.76x10^-25 m^2, whereas the cross-sectional area of a typical nucleus, again using your number, would be ¼[(1x10^-14)^2] = 3.14x10^-28 m^2. Thus the probability that the electron would pass into the nucleus would be 3.14x10^-28/8.76x10^-25 = 3.59x10^-4, which, as you say, is roughly 1 chance in 10,000. Using my numbers, on the other hand, the same probability would be: ¼[(.5x10^-14)^2]/¼[(1.89x10^-12)^2] = (.5x10^-14)^2/(1.89x10^-12)^2 = 7x10^-6. The problem with such reasoning, however, is that it ignores the fact that the electron will not be approaching just one tungsten atom, but a surface consisting of millions of them, with lots of space in between. Result: you can't assume that *any* W nucleus will fall within the cross-sectional area of an incoming "matter wave". Since the W-W bond length at 25 deg. C is 2.7409x10^-10 meters, with each sheet laid out in a square array, there will be [1/(2.7409x10^-10)]^2 = 1.33x10^19 nuclei/m^2. Thus in the wave packet cross sectional area of ¼(1.89x10^-12)^2 = 1/12x10^-23 m, there will be (1.33x10^19)(1/12x10^-23) = 1.49x10^-4 nuclei, on average, rather than 1 nucleus, as you assumed. Thus the actual probability would be (1.49x10^-4)(7x10^-6) = 1.04x10^-9, or about 1 chance in a billion. Of course, it is a bit more complicated than that, since beneath layer number one of W atoms, there will be layer number two. However, an electron that makes it through the first layer is likely to be deflected and of much lower energy, due to its passage through the thick electron shell structure of a W atom in the first layer. Hence it is only if it happens to go through the hole between shells, at the center of a square, that the second layer becomes relevant to the calculation, and if you factor that in, I doubt it will improve the odds very much. --Mitchell Jones}*** >thus a similar probability of stripping a neutron electromagnetically by >cancelling the magnetic moment of the neutron or protron. In addition, >that small an electron can catalyse a fusion reaction in a D2 pair, via >screening mechanisms I have posted in the past. Obtaining a high fusion or >neutron production rate is then a matter of obtaining a high electron flux >into the nucleus. ***{Unless I misunderstood your reasoning or miscalculated at some point, the chance of this scenario eventuating is vanishingly small. There is simply *no way* you can explain significant neutron production in the Sternglass experiment by electron impacts on W nuclei, even with the kind of extremely creative thinking that you engaged in here. In spite of that, it was a pleasure to read. :-) --Mitchell Jones}*** > >Regards, > >Horace Heffner ________________ Quote of the month: "Law is what the authorities use to ride the country." --Anatoly Schransky From vortex-l-request eskimo.com Fri Feb 16 19:04:11 2001 Received: (from smartlst localhost) by mx1.eskimo.com (8.9.1a/8.8.8) id TAA15534; Fri, 16 Feb 2001 19:00:10 -0800 Resent-Date: Fri, 16 Feb 2001 19:00:10 -0800 X-Apparently-From: Message-Id: <4.2.0.58.20010216210944.0096b100 postoffice.swbell.net> X-Sender: cjford1 pop.mail.yahoo.com X-Mailer: QUALCOMM Windows Eudora Pro Version 4.2.0.58 Date: Fri, 16 Feb 2001 21:10:42 -0600 To: vortex-l eskimo.com From: Charles Ford Subject: Re: off topic: lobster In-Reply-To: Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"; format=flowed Resent-Message-ID: <"5wURN1.0.eo3.waUZw" mx1> Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/40817 X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com Status: RO X-Status: Um... did anybody get the sound? I am sure it is missing somthing........ everything.... without the sound At 11:46 AM 2/16/01 -0800, you wrote: >Here's a 'tutorial' on bioelectromagnetism! Heh. > > http://www.512productions.com/lobstermagnet/lobsmag.swf > >(flash plugin required, fairly long download time) > > >((((((((((((((((((((( ( ( ( ( (O) ) ) ) ) ))))))))))))))))))))) >William J. Beaty SCIENCE HOBBYIST website >billb eskimo.com http://www.amasci.com >EE/programmer/sci-exhibits science projects, tesla, weird science >Seattle, WA 206-789-0775 freenrg-L taoshum-L vortex-L webhead-L _________________________________________________________ Do You Yahoo!? Get your free yahoo.com address at http://mail.yahoo.com From vortex-l-request eskimo.com Fri Feb 16 19:27:07 2001 Received: (from smartlst localhost) by mx1.eskimo.com (8.9.1a/8.8.8) id TAA24835; Fri, 16 Feb 2001 19:25:40 -0800 Resent-Date: Fri, 16 Feb 2001 19:25:40 -0800 X-Apparently-From: Message-Id: <4.2.0.58.20010216211411.00bc4350 postoffice.swbell.net> X-Sender: cjford1 pop.mail.yahoo.com X-Mailer: QUALCOMM Windows Eudora Pro Version 4.2.0.58 Date: Fri, 16 Feb 2001 21:36:22 -0600 To: vortex-l eskimo.com From: Charles Ford Subject: Re: arc In-Reply-To: Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"; format=flowed Resent-Message-ID: <"yheAo1.0.u36.qyUZw" mx1> Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/40818 X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com Status: O X-Status: Horace: Hank: It must be the pressure. In the case of a NE2 it is designed to do this, I have many times operated an NE2 as a relaxation oscillator using a resister in series and a cap in parallel with the bulb. There is still only partial discharge. In a xenon flash circuit there is a much more complete loss of charge. A xenon tube has a higher full pressure but is still only a fraction of a bar. In this case there is also no ballast, but still There is incomplete discharge leaving as much as 15% of the ready voltage. In the case of ambient air. I have seen (in lower energy experiments) near complete discharge 25KV to about 30V this is relatively un reliable still there is a residual. For the most part I am agreeing with you at this point. There may have intermittently been full discharge and I simply did not trust it. I will still caution anybody to insure full discharge before working with the electrodes. Concerning the discussion. We seem to be agreeing but still carry an argumentative tone. That is just a human thing I am sure we can all work around. Reguards At 05:02 PM 2/16/01 -0900, you wrote: >At 3:05 PM 2/16/1, Charles Ford wrote: > > >As a mater of fact I have never seen a condition where an arc of any type > >was able to consume all of the available charge. > >If you would like to see this then remove the balast resistor from the NE2 >bulb. 8^) Protect your eyes etc. The balast resistor prevents enough >current from going through the bulb to cause it to go to saturation. > >Also, note again that the pressure in the NE2 is not set low enough to >obtain a long mean free path, so as to produce a significant number of ions >in the 1-2 MeV range, which is required of a neutron stripper. > >Regards, > >Horace Heffner _________________________________________________________ Do You Yahoo!? Get your free yahoo.com address at http://mail.yahoo.com From vortex-l-request eskimo.com Fri Feb 16 20:08:52 2001 Received: (from smartlst localhost) by mx1.eskimo.com (8.9.1a/8.8.8) id UAA04598; Fri, 16 Feb 2001 20:04:12 -0800 Resent-Date: Fri, 16 Feb 2001 20:04:12 -0800 From: Robin van Spaandonk To: vortex-l eskimo.com Subject: Re: Photon in a cavity? Date: Sat, 17 Feb 2001 15:03:45 +1100 Organization: Improving Message-ID: <5ltr8t4nb00bqv8ck9fcmqq0peoqmj266b 4ax.com> References: <3A85F654.BADA2E94@ix.netcom.com> <3A86A219.9A713786@ix.netcom.com> In-Reply-To: <3A86A219.9A713786 ix.netcom.com> X-Mailer: Forte Agent 1.8/32.548 MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit X-MIME-Autoconverted: from quoted-printable to 8bit by mx1.eskimo.com id UAA04570 Resent-Message-ID: <"nO9Q03.0.k71.xWVZw" mx1> Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/40819 X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com Status: O X-Status: In reply to Edmund Storms's message of Sun, 11 Feb 2001 08:30:52 -0600: >Mirrors work because an uniform discontinuity exists between two vastly >different environments. As the photon wave penetrates the new environment, >its wave front experiences cancellation in one direction and reinforcement >in the other. No such discontinuity exists within a solid substance. What then distinguishes a cavity from the rest of the metal? >The >condition having the most discontinuity within a solid is a grain boundary. And what do you call the space between grains? >However, your model does not address this structure. The helium catalyzed part would fit in here quite nicely. >In any case, an atom >at a grain boundary experiences an inhomogeneous environment, not a uniform >discontinuity. I think a "uniform discontinuity" is a contradiction in terms. >A uniform structure does not exists, a condition for a >photon to be influenced. This is not a sentence. [snip] Regards, Robin van Spaandonk A Future For Humanity see: http://users.bigpond.net.au/rvanspaa/ From vortex-l-request eskimo.com Fri Feb 16 20:18:58 2001 Received: (from smartlst localhost) by mx1.eskimo.com (8.9.1a/8.8.8) id UAA07121; Fri, 16 Feb 2001 20:13:39 -0800 Resent-Date: Fri, 16 Feb 2001 20:13:39 -0800 From: Robin van Spaandonk To: vortex-l eskimo.com Subject: Re: Photon in a cavity? Date: Sat, 17 Feb 2001 15:13:00 +1100 Organization: Improving Message-ID: References: <3A86CC0B.9080202@pacbell.net> In-Reply-To: <3A86CC0B.9080202 pacbell.net> X-Mailer: Forte Agent 1.8/32.548 MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit X-MIME-Autoconverted: from quoted-printable to 8bit by mx1.eskimo.com id UAA07096 Resent-Message-ID: <"hMlP23.0.Bl1.ofVZw" mx1> Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/40820 X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com Status: O X-Status: In reply to Jones Beene's message of Sun, 11 Feb 2001 09:29:47 -0800: >Robin van Spaandonk wrote: > > >> Suppose that an atom in a cavity in metal tries to emit a photon of a >> wavelength that is larger than the cavity. >> What happens? > >Robin, > >A cavity of restricted size is not at all unusual. Also, I think >the "exit path" or waveguide out of the cavity is as important >as the cavity itself, I should have mentioned that the cavity is completely closed. >but in either case a "harmonic ratio" can >be more important than a constricted size, per se. Ok, but suppose the photon wavelength were 1000 times the cavity size. I suspect that this means that near field effects dominate, and it may not even be valid to speak of photons. "Transformers" may be more appropriate, where one atom forms the "primary", and another the "secondary", and it's an "air" core transformer (actually vacuum). > >I have been recently modifying a microwave cavity, for instance, >and it is interesting that although the chamber was designed to >produce 2450 Mhz radiation - about 12 cm, the manufacturer used >a quarter wave length diameter chamber of only ~ 3 cm. I had >assumed that quarter wavelength was an optimal waveguide >dimension or antenna length, but had assumed that the chamber >itself would be a full wavelength. Also, the waveguide for this >magnetron is curious, a ~1 cm dia circular tube - more often >they are rectangular. Since the unit is rated at about 60% >efficiency it doesn't seem to suffer much from the size >constraints (which were undoubtedly manufacturing considerations). [snip] I have frequently seen 1/4 wavelength mentioned with regard to antennae, but never anything less. Has anyone else seen something less than 1/4 used? Regards, Robin van Spaandonk A Future For Humanity see: http://users.bigpond.net.au/rvanspaa/ From vortex-l-request eskimo.com Fri Feb 16 20:22:46 2001 Received: (from smartlst localhost) by mx1.eskimo.com (8.9.1a/8.8.8) id UAA08045; Fri, 16 Feb 2001 20:15:52 -0800 Resent-Date: Fri, 16 Feb 2001 20:15:52 -0800 From: Robin van Spaandonk To: vortex-l eskimo.com Subject: Re: Photon in a cavity? Date: Sat, 17 Feb 2001 15:15:16 +1100 Organization: Improving Message-ID: <0kur8too9d7jktub2sh36puau5a1jr107c 4ax.com> References: In-Reply-To: X-Mailer: Forte Agent 1.8/32.548 MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit X-MIME-Autoconverted: from quoted-printable to 8bit by mx1.eskimo.com id UAA08011 Resent-Message-ID: <"-awUU1.0.cz1.thVZw" mx1> Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/40821 X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com Status: O X-Status: In reply to Horace Heffner's message of Sun, 11 Feb 2001 03:09:05 -0900: [snip] >This is not something I know much about. However, I think a set of QM >related scattering probabilities (amplitudes) is invoked depending on the >probabilites of electrons being located in various places and probabilities >of the photon being scattered from those places. The probabilites >determine the degree to which the lattice is transparent and other optical >properties associated with the wavelength involved. However, in a metal >lattice, a low energy photon is almost always fully absorbed. [snip] I believe that the fact that most metals reflect light shows that in fact most metals reflect rather than absorbing low energy photons. Regards, Robin van Spaandonk A Future For Humanity see: http://users.bigpond.net.au/rvanspaa/ From vortex-l-request eskimo.com Fri Feb 16 23:16:13 2001 Received: (from smartlst localhost) by mx1.eskimo.com (8.9.1a/8.8.8) id XAA23551; Fri, 16 Feb 2001 23:12:27 -0800 Resent-Date: Fri, 16 Feb 2001 23:12:27 -0800 X-Authentication-Warning: smtp2.ihug.co.nz: Host 203-173-205-227.akl.ihugultra.co.nz [203.173.205.227] claimed to be ihug.co.nz Message-ID: <3A8E2441.542A3FF8 ihug.co.nz> Date: Sat, 17 Feb 2001 20:12:02 +1300 From: John Berry X-Mailer: Mozilla 4.75 [en] (Win98; U) X-Accept-Language: en MIME-Version: 1.0 To: vortex-l eskimo.com, pantheon@ix.netcom.com, xibalba@ix.netcom.com Subject: Re: [astro-forum] Re: [whirlpower] Re: David Dennard is gone. References: Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Resent-Message-ID: <"UVwLT2.0.ll5.QHYZw" mx1> Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/40822 X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com Status: RO X-Status: My own sleeping problems disappeared when I started taking these multi-vitamins. http://www.usana.com Nothing else seemed to work. William Beaty wrote: > David Dennard ("whirlpower") passed away. See below. > > ((((((((((((((((((((( ( ( ( ( (O) ) ) ) ) ))))))))))))))))))))) > William J. Beaty SCIENCE HOBBYIST website > billb eskimo.com http://www.amasci.com > EE/programmer/sci-exhibits science projects, tesla, weird science > Seattle, WA 206-789-0775 freenrg-L taoshum-L vortex-L webhead-L > > ---------- Forwarded message ---------- > Date: Thu, 15 Feb 2001 04:01:03 -0700 > From: Anna M* > Reply-To: freenrg-l eskimo.com > To: astro-forum yahoogroups.com, freenrg-l@eskimo.com, > svpvril yahoogroups.com > Subject: [FG]: Re: [astro-forum] Fw: [whirlpower] Re: David Dennard is gone. > > Hello Regina, I live in AZ. near Tucson. It is a little paradise here > still untouched by the mainstream civilization. I feel very sad about > David. Yes, you are right -he was onto something, only perhaps his > interpretation of his own vision was not quiet right. But he was too > stubborn to admit any faults in his thinking. This might had been the > reason why people after awhile tended to discard him and his ideas > altogether. Till later, > Anna > Have you tried Melatonin for your sleeping problems? > It does wonders sometimes. I am a night person too. > > ----- Original Message ----- > From: Regina > To: astro-forum yahoogroups.com ; freenrg-l@eskimo.com ; svpvril@yahoogroups.com > Sent: Thursday, February 15, 2001 3:46 AM > Subject: Re: [astro-forum] Fw: [whirlpower] Re: David Dennard is gone. > > Anna: > DD wasn't homeless. He lived with Ms Clark, as Niz was so fond of reminding > us. I am still thinking about this and still hoping he was on to something. > I've been burned out and had may be 5 all nighters in the last 2 weeks. And > now the man with the real sleep problems is dead. I'll wb later. I feel > bad for his son. DD was only in his 40's , you know. Where are you > located, Anna? I am in NYC. DD was in California. I think he was > originally from the Carolinas. And good point. This seems like a virtual > world, but the people we meet die. DD is the first person I have met on > line who died. It feels very surreal and existential. I'll wb later. > > ----- Original Message ----- > From: Anna M* > To: ; ; > > Sent: Thursday, February 15, 2001 2:50 AM > Subject: [astro-forum] Fw: [whirlpower] Re: David Dennard is gone. > > Hello everyone! > > It looks that David Dennard our whirlpool guy is dead. That is all the > information which was forwarded to me I could get right now. > > As we know, David was homeless and very poor. But he had this one crazy > idea about the whirlpower running the universe that he tried to promote > sometimes enraging us all with his stubborn persistence. He also made Vera > Rubin the very popular name on the net. > > Let's remember David for his vision and passion. > > I do realize that Internet is dealing with virtual people having virtual > lives. Yet we live, die and suffer and we all are very real people, what > sometimes needs to be reminded. > > Anna > > > > From: jack telaservices.co.uk > > To: whirlpower yahoogroups.com > > Date: Wednesday, February 14, 2001 10:44 AM > > Subject: [whirlpower] Re: David > > > > >Dear Joel > > >Just a note to extend my deepest sympathy at your sad loss > > >Yours > > >Jack > > > > > --- In whirlpower y..., trblmakr@b... wrote: > Hello everyone. > > I'm not sure exactly how to say this, but my father died today. I dont > keep up with this listing, but he spoke about it alot, so i decided that i > should let all of you know. I rather shaken up about all of it at the > moment, i apologise for any briefness of this message. I believe however > that you should all try to keep this list up as best you can. This will > be my only message, and if you would like to know any more informaon, > please email me at tack2sr y... and ill try to keep you informed as to > what is going on. > > Joel From vortex-l-request eskimo.com Sat Feb 17 01:46:45 2001 Received: (from smartlst localhost) by mx1.eskimo.com (8.9.1a/8.8.8) id BAA18081; Sat, 17 Feb 2001 01:45:58 -0800 Resent-Date: Sat, 17 Feb 2001 01:45:58 -0800 Message-Id: Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1" Date: Sat, 17 Feb 2001 00:55:51 -0900 To: vortex-l eskimo.com From: hheffner mtaonline.net (Horace Heffner) Subject: Re: Neutrons from Electron Impact? Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit X-MIME-Autoconverted: from quoted-printable to 8bit by mx1.eskimo.com id BAA18063 Resent-Message-ID: <"FwyRE1.0.RQ4.MXaZw" mx1> Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/40823 X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com Status: O X-Status: At 7:54 PM 2/16/1, Mitchell Jones wrote: >***{Hi Horace. I decided to go through your mathematical reasoning with a >fine-toothed comb. Sorry for the delay. --MJ}*** > >Horace Heffner wrote: > >>My speculations are based roughly on the idea that the high energy 35 keV >>electrons would have, in proximity to the nucleus, a kinetic energy of >>about 511 keV + 35 kev = 546 keV > >***{At "infinity," by definition, the potential energy of the electron with >respect to a 1 esu charge--e.g., a proton--is negligible. Given--also at >"infinity"--a kinetic energy of 35 keV pointing straight toward that >proton, the total kinetic energy of the electron upon impact will be the >sum of the 35 keV with which it started, and the change in its potential >energy when it reaches the surface of the nucleus--typically at a radius of >about .5x10^-12 cm. This is an interesting question, the size of the nucleus. The diameter of the nucleus as given in Halliday and Resnick, third printing, 1963, ranges as follows: H 1x10^-15 m to heavies (like U) 7x10^-15 m. However, what about the size of the deBroglie wavelength? A slow interaction should involve a nucleus with a larger cross section (wavelength) than a fast one? Unfortuantely I don't know of any tables available for electron-deuteron cross sections. If they exist then they are probably highly distorted due to the need for a weak interaction to obtain electron capture, which would produce the very short half-life nn particle. It seems to me, from one perspective that the electron and nucleus should be visualized as balls of charge having radii determined each in the other's frame of reference, with the charge distributed throughout the balls. The interesting part occurs when the balls begin to overlap. The attraction doesn't drop to zero but gradually wanes until the centers of charge overlap, when the force drops to zero. However, I have read various things (sorry no refs handy) that indicate this is not a good mental model except maybe in calxulating the force of piezoelectric effects, where the nucleus gets displaced from the center of charge of the electron cloud. I think this model might be reasonably be extended to our case of the electron "falling into the Coulomb well," at least to obtain a rule fo thmb estimate. However, other visualization of the electron quantum waveform have it being a point jumping all over the place. This visulaization is apparently more appropriate for approximating the likelyhood of a weak interaction based on the range of the weak force and probability of the point-like electron being in the nucleus. In the case of the point-like charge model, another significant force takes root as the electron approaches the nucleus the 1/r^3 dipole magnetic force. The incoming electron rotates to align its magnetic field in the direction opposite the magnetic field of the nucleus. If the neutron and protron in the D nucleus retain their identities, i.e. their quarj triads remain intact and retain their magnetic moments, then the D nucleus consists of two opposed magnets, one will be attracted and one repulsed by the electron's magnetic field, and one or the other or both will be torqued in opposing directions by the electron's magnetic field, and this torque will result in a tendency to recess in mutually opposed directions. > >The potential energy at radius r is defined as the work required to lower >the electron from infinity to its position at distance r from the proton, >and is computed by determining the average value of F over the interval >from r to infinity, and then multiplying that value by the distance from >infinity to r. The average value of F over that interval would be [1/(ƒ - >r) Int(r,ƒ)F(ƒ - r)dr = Int(r,ƒ)(-e^2/r^2)dr = -e^2 Int(r,ƒ)(1/r^2)dr = >-e^2 (r,ƒ)[-1/r] = -e^2[0 - (-1/r)] = -e^2/r. > >In the present case, -e^2/r = -(4.8x10^-10)^2/(.5x10^-12) = 4.61x10^-7 >ergs, and, at 6.25x10^11 ev/erg, that becomes 288125 ev, or 288 keV. Hence >288 keV, not 511 keV, has been transformed from potential to kinetic energy >when the electron strikes the nucleus. Thus the total kinetic energy at >that point would be 288 + 35 = 323 keV. > >Therefore, by what reasoning did you obtain 511 keV rather than 288 keV? >Perhaps I was using a smaller radius of approach. Well you got me there! 8^) I picked it out of memory from some other calc where the kinetic energy gained by the incoming electron equalled (doubled) its own mass. When I started writing the post I didn't expect it to get as detailed as it did, which even so was not nearly enough. To do a good job I suppose both the Coulomb force and the magnetic forces would have to be computed on a relativistic basis, with compensation for waveform overlap. However, if I recall correctly Robert Eachus's posts of the past on this subject, the magnetic bond of the protron and neutron in the D nucleus is about half the binding energy, or about 0.5 MeV. If the electron could enter the nucleus (if it really is merely a point) it could completely nullify this portion of the nuclear bond - a very unique quality to the D nucleus. In addition, it would supply an another .5 MeV energy to the electron. Further, if the electron is merely a point then it can accelerate all the way down to a radius of about 2x10^15 m (I don't think this is correct though.) In light of the above unceratinties, an arbitrary slecetrion of .511 MeV was just that, arbitrary. I liked tit becaus it seemd to fit the common sense feeling of the probability of the electron acting as a catalyst. > >--Mitchell Jones}*** > >, and, including rest mass of 511 keV, a >>total energy of 1057 keV for use in the relativistic momentum calculation: > >***{As per the above, that should be 834 keV. --MJ}*** Or maybe 2 MeV? > >> >> E^2 = E0^2 + (pc)^2 > >***{The following is for those who have never seen a detailed derivation of >the above. [snip] >Einstein distinguished between m, the "rest mass," and m', the >increased mass that occurs with velocity, as follows: > >m' = m/[1 - (V^2/c^2)]^.5 > [snip explanation] note: I think there was independent experimental evidence that supported the above equation before Einstein derived it. At any rate it is a good place to start. >E^2 = E0^2 + (pc)^2 (7 > >Q.E.D. Here is a brief derivation of the above from your starting point, but with E = mc^2 conveniently assumed: m = m0/[1 - (V^2/c^2)]^.5 now square and multiply both sides by c^4(1-(v^2/c^2)) to get: m^2c^4 - m^2v^2c^2 = m0^2c^4 (mc^2)^2 = (m0c^2)^2 + (mvc)^2 (mc^2)^2 = (m0c^2)^2 + (pc)^2 It is at this point you need to know E=mc^2. > >Fascinating stuff, in my opinion. Yep. > >--Mitchell Jones}*** > >> >>or >> p = ([E^2 - E0^2]^0.5)/c >> >> p = ([(1.057x10^6 ev)^2 - (5.11x10^5 eV)^2]^0.5)/c > >***{You do not show a conversion factor to mks energy units in the above. No need to. My TI-89 calculator takes eV as a unit of energy. >If that is included, p = ([(.834x10^6*1.6x10^-19)^2 - >(5.11x10^5*1.6x10^-19)^2]^0.5)/c. --MJ}*** > >> >> p = 6.274x10^-22 kg-m/s > >***{I got p = 3.52x10^-22 kg-m/s. --MJ}*** I double checked the above, and got the same answer. It was still in my calculator, so I assume you obtained the above using your energy - which I now see you show above. > >> >>giving a deBroglie wavelength of: >> >> lambda = h/p = h/(6.274 kg-m/s) = 1.056x10^-12 m > >***{Planck's constant, h, in the cgs system is 6.63x10^-27 erg-sec, which >becomes 6.63x10^-34 joule-sec, Yes, I get h = 6.6260755x10^-34 joule-sec from my calculator. >so I got lambda = h/p = >6.63x10^-34/3.52x10^-22 = 1.89x10^-12 m. --MJ}*** > >> >>and thus, given a nuclear radius of about 10^-4 m > >***{That looks like a typo. A typical nuclear radius would be about >.5x10^-14 m, so I assume that 10^-14 was the number you intended. --MJ}*** Yes, a typo. > >, about a 1/10,000 chance >>of being "found in the nucleus" at any moment during the interaction > >***{If you assume that the electron will be somewhere within a "matter >wave" of radius lambda/2 then, using your lambda, that gives a >cross-sectional area of ¼[(.528x10^-12)^2] = 8.76x10^-25 m^2, whereas the >cross-sectional area of a typical nucleus, again using your number, would >be ¼[(1x10^-14)^2] = 3.14x10^-28 m^2. Thus the probability that the >electron would pass into the nucleus would be 3.14x10^-28/8.76x10^-25 = >3.59x10^-4, which, as you say, is roughly 1 chance in 10,000. Yes, but unfortunately a fairly arbitrary number on my part. I simply wanted to show the idea might be in some kind of ballpark of reality. > >Using my numbers, on the other hand, the same probability would be: > >¼[(.5x10^-14)^2]/¼[(1.89x10^-12)^2] = (.5x10^-14)^2/(1.89x10^-12)^2 = 7x10^-6. > >The problem with such reasoning, however, is that it ignores the fact that >the electron will not be approaching just one tungsten atom, but a surface >consisting of millions of them, The definition of stripping that I used doesn't require that the electrons enter the tungsten. I think the tungsten's role is primarily to be able to be hot enough to be a good low resistance electron source. The electron, once it interacts with a D nucleus will scatter and find other nucleii. Being light, if it doesn't come out of the nucleus with a hadron, then it should carry away most of its momentum. The momentum stealer for the electron is the brehmstrahlung and interaction with other electrons. Since the deutron has only one or maybe no electrons, the electron has a prospect of interacting with lots of nucleii, and thus the probability of a hit is greatly increased through repetition. Note that, if the electron could lose more than 35 keV to brehmsstrahlung, due to its large energy in close proximity to the nucleus, then the electron is energetically trapped and a source of free energy exists right there via the electron extraction of ZPE to climb back up out of the well. The electron current density is nearly as critical a value as is the initial energy of the electron before it heads into the coulomb well, because a large flux causes many repeated fallings into the well for each electron. Another factor is that the electron is a guided missile, a magic bullet. Unlike the case in fusion, the electrostatic force is not a barrier that repels the electron, but rather a well into which it falls. Since its initial kinetic energy of 35,000 volts is small compared to the energy it acquires from the nucleus, it should tend to hit the mark fairly closely. Since, except in the rare case where a weak interaction occurs, the electron is freed no matter whether the D nucleus is fissioned or not, its role is purely catalytic. >with lots of space in between. Result: you >can't assume that *any* W nucleus will fall within the cross-sectional area >of an incoming "matter wave". Since the W-W bond length at 25 deg. C is >2.7409x10^-10 meters, with each sheet laid out in a square array, there >will be [1/(2.7409x10^-10)]^2 = 1.33x10^19 nuclei/m^2. Thus in the wave >packet cross sectional area of ¼(1.89x10^-12)^2 = 1/12x10^-23 m, there will >be (1.33x10^19)(1/12x10^-23) = 1.49x10^-4 nuclei, on average, rather than 1 >nucleus, as you assumed. Thus the actual probability would be >(1.49x10^-4)(7x10^-6) = 1.04x10^-9, or about 1 chance in a billion. The more nucleii in the vicinity the more chance the electron has to repeatedly fall into wells. The main problem is keeping the electron energy up, and making the current density and D density as large as possible consistent with sustaining a high relative velocity. Note that a plasma pinch meets these criteria extremely well. It all the electorns tend to be going one direction while all the nucleii tend to be going the other, then the electrons will tend to lose less kinetic energy to each other. > >Of course, it is a bit more complicated than that, since beneath layer >number one of W atoms, there will be layer number two. However, an electron >that makes it through the first layer is likely to be deflected and of much >lower energy, due to its passage through the thick electron shell structure >of a W atom in the first layer. Hence it is only if it happens to go >through the hole between shells, at the center of a square, that the second >layer becomes relevant to the calculation, and if you factor that in, I >doubt it will improve the odds very much. Yes, all true, but the suggested catalytic action of the electron is not upon the tungsten, but upon the D nucleus in plasma form. Regards, Horace Heffner From vortex-l-request eskimo.com Sat Feb 17 01:59:16 2001 Received: (from smartlst localhost) by mx1.eskimo.com (8.9.1a/8.8.8) id BAA20513; Sat, 17 Feb 2001 01:58:23 -0800 Resent-Date: Sat, 17 Feb 2001 01:58:23 -0800 Message-Id: Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Date: Sat, 17 Feb 2001 01:08:25 -0900 To: vortex-l eskimo.com From: hheffner mtaonline.net (Horace Heffner) Subject: Re: Photon in a cavity? Resent-Message-ID: <"Z35cN2.0.M05._iaZw" mx1> Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/40824 X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com Status: O X-Status: At 3:15 PM 2/17/1, Robin van Spaandonk wrote: >In reply to Horace Heffner's message of Sun, 11 Feb 2001 03:09:05 -0900: >[snip] >>This is not something I know much about. However, I think a set of QM >>related scattering probabilities (amplitudes) is invoked depending on the >>probabilites of electrons being located in various places and probabilities >>of the photon being scattered from those places. The probabilites >>determine the degree to which the lattice is transparent and other optical >>properties associated with the wavelength involved. However, in a metal >>lattice, a low energy photon is almost always fully absorbed. >[snip] >I believe that the fact that most metals reflect light shows that in fact >most metals reflect rather than absorbing low energy photons. You sepcified that the photon was to be inside a cavity. It can not bounce around in the cavity indefinitely because the probability of exciting a phonon in the surrounding lattice at any point is non-zero. Regards, Horace Heffner From vortex-l-request eskimo.com Sat Feb 17 07:00:23 2001 Received: (from smartlst localhost) by mx1.eskimo.com (8.9.1a/8.8.8) id GAA08545; Sat, 17 Feb 2001 06:58:11 -0800 Resent-Date: Sat, 17 Feb 2001 06:58:11 -0800 Message-ID: <3A8E83E2.BF8FD42C ix.netcom.com> Date: Sat, 17 Feb 2001 08:00:06 -0600 From: Edmund Storms X-Mailer: Mozilla 4.5 (Macintosh; U; PPC) X-Accept-Language: en,pdf MIME-Version: 1.0 To: vortex-l eskimo.com Subject: Re: Photon in a cavity? References: <3A85F654.BADA2E94@ix.netcom.com> <3A86A219.9A713786@ix.netcom.com> <5ltr8t4nb00bqv8ck9fcmqq0peoqmj266b@4ax.com> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii; x-mac-type="54455854"; x-mac-creator="4D4F5353" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Resent-Message-ID: <"j90yY.0.R52.36fZw" mx1> Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/40825 X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com Status: O X-Status: Robin van Spaandonk wrote: > In reply to Edmund Storms's message of Sun, 11 Feb 2001 08:30:52 -0600: > > >Mirrors work because an uniform discontinuity exists between two vastly > >different environments. As the photon wave penetrates the new environment, > >its wave front experiences cancellation in one direction and reinforcement > >in the other. No such discontinuity exists within a solid substance. > > What then distinguishes a cavity from the rest of the metal? The basis of the discussion is the scale of the cavity. If a cavity is defined only by a few atoms (such as a dislocation), the situation is much different compared to a big cavity defined by many atoms. In the first case, the cavity is filled by the electron cloud that is associated with the surrounding atoms. Consequently, no sharp boundary exists. A photon would not see a sufficient change in properties to cause it to change direction. On the other hand, if the cavity were large, the surface could act like the "outside" surface and a photon could bounce around until it was absorbed. Such a cavity would contain many D2 molecules whose properties would not differ from those applied to the "outside" surface. This is not the situation you are describing in your model. > > > >The > >condition having the most discontinuity within a solid is a grain boundary. > > And what do you call the space between grains? > > >However, your model does not address this structure. > > The helium catalyzed part would fit in here quite nicely. > > >In any case, an atom > >at a grain boundary experiences an inhomogeneous environment, not a uniform > >discontinuity. > > I think a "uniform discontinuity" is a contradiction in terms. A uniform discontinuity is one that has a sharp change in properties in the z direction but uniform properties in the x-y direction. A flat mirror would be an example. On the other hand, a sandblasted surface would not be an example. > > > >A uniform structure does not exists, a condition for a > >photon to be influenced. A uniform structure does not exists, which is a condition for a photon to be influenced (reflected). > > > This is not a sentence. Now it is. Regards, Ed From vortex-l-request eskimo.com Sat Feb 17 07:12:26 2001 Received: (from smartlst localhost) by mx1.eskimo.com (8.9.1a/8.8.8) id HAA11876; Sat, 17 Feb 2001 07:10:20 -0800 Resent-Date: Sat, 17 Feb 2001 07:10:20 -0800 Message-ID: <3A8E86D5.DA770FD8 ix.netcom.com> Date: Sat, 17 Feb 2001 08:12:41 -0600 From: Edmund Storms X-Mailer: Mozilla 4.5 (Macintosh; U; PPC) X-Accept-Language: en,pdf MIME-Version: 1.0 To: vortex-l eskimo.com Subject: Re: Photon in a cavity? References: <0kur8too9d7jktub2sh36puau5a1jr107c@4ax.com> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii; x-mac-type="54455854"; x-mac-creator="4D4F5353" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Resent-Message-ID: <"S9ot11.0.Uv2.SHfZw" mx1> Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/40826 X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com Status: O X-Status: Robin van Spaandonk wrote: > In reply to Horace Heffner's message of Sun, 11 Feb 2001 03:09:05 -0900: > [snip] > >This is not something I know much about. However, I think a set of QM > >related scattering probabilities (amplitudes) is invoked depending on the > >probabilites of electrons being located in various places and probabilities > >of the photon being scattered from those places. The probabilites > >determine the degree to which the lattice is transparent and other optical > >properties associated with the wavelength involved. However, in a metal > >lattice, a low energy photon is almost always fully absorbed. > [snip] > I believe that the fact that most metals reflect light shows that in fact > most metals reflect rather than absorbing low energy photons. Reflection by metals, or anything else, has to do with the property of the surface, in that the surface has a regular array of atoms. A metal that is finely divided, i.e. whose surface is not regular, is black. Even thin films of metals are good absorbers to transmitted light. Glass, on the other hand, both reflects and transmits light. This is the reason why metals are considered to be good absorbers of photons, in contrast to other materials - independent of their ability to reflect under certain conditions. These conditions, I suggest, are not present under the conditions required by your model. Regards, Ed Storms > > > Regards, > > Robin van Spaandonk > > A Future For Humanity see: http://users.bigpond.net.au/rvanspaa/ From vortex-l-request eskimo.com Sat Feb 17 09:10:54 2001 Received: (from smartlst localhost) by mx1.eskimo.com (8.9.1a/8.8.8) id JAA12848; Sat, 17 Feb 2001 09:08:16 -0800 Resent-Date: Sat, 17 Feb 2001 09:08:16 -0800 Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" X-Sender: mjones pop.jump.net Message-Id: In-Reply-To: <3A8E83E2.BF8FD42C ix.netcom.com> References: <3A85F654.BADA2E94 ix.netcom.com> <3A86A219.9A713786 ix.netcom.com> <5ltr8t4nb00bqv8ck9fcmqq0peoqmj266b 4ax.com> Date: Sat, 17 Feb 2001 11:07:17 -0600 To: vortex-l eskimo.com From: Mitchell Jones Subject: Re: Photon in a cavity? Resent-Message-ID: <"vNSc41.0.g83.__gZw" mx1> Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/40827 X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com Status: O X-Status: Ed Storms wrote: >> >> >A uniform structure does not exists, a condition for a >> >photon to be influenced. > >A uniform structure does not exists, which is a condition for a >photon to be influenced (reflected). > >> >> >> This is not a sentence. > >Now it is. ***{Nope. A structure either exists or it does not exist. Note that in the first half of the sentence, where "does" is absent, the proper verb is "exists," while in the second half, where "does" is present, the proper verb is "exist." Thus to use "exists" in both the affirmative and the negative construct, you would say: "A structure does exist or it does not exist." Similarly, to use "exists" in both the affirmative and the negative, you would say: "A structure either exists or it exists not." The latter form, however, is archaic. --MJ}*** > >Regards, >Ed ________________ Quote of the month: "Law is what the authorities use to ride the country." --Anatoly Schransky From vortex-l-request eskimo.com Sat Feb 17 10:28:52 2001 Received: (from smartlst localhost) by mx1.eskimo.com (8.9.1a/8.8.8) id KAA06862; Sat, 17 Feb 2001 10:24:54 -0800 Resent-Date: Sat, 17 Feb 2001 10:24:54 -0800 Message-Id: Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Date: Sat, 17 Feb 2001 09:34:54 -0900 To: vortex-l eskimo.com From: hheffner mtaonline.net (Horace Heffner) Subject: Re: Neutrons from Electron Impact? Resent-Message-ID: <"2fUKV3.0.4h1.r7iZw" mx1> Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/40828 X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com Status: O X-Status: I overlooked describing the possible effect of a D2+ ion, that is two deutrons plus an electron, striking a dense target. The dense target, e.g. tungsten, provides an electron cloud for the incoming pair. There is an large flux of electrons falling into the two deuteron's Coulomb wells. The electron cloud in the vicinity of the incoming deutron pair is a highly disrupted electron gas, with some very energetic electrons in the tail of the distribution. Regardless, there is a large flux of electrons about and between the two nucleii. If a pair enter the target aligned in tandem, longitudinally, then the electron flux about the first nucleus should have sufficient density to periodically permit sheilding of the first deuteron from the second, thus permitting their close approach and possible fusion. In addition, the leading deuteron would be running interference for the second deuteron, and abosrbng kinteic energy from the cloud, thus rapidly decellerating, and thus tending to more closely approach the second deuteron. In its wake, the electrons, being close to the nucleus, could be expected to have a high kinetic energy, so, as the two deuterons approach, the second deuteron may be sporadically immersed in a dense wake of high energy electrons, which then catalyses the stripping of the neutron from the trailing deuteron in the same fashion as in a plasma containing a large flux of high energy electrons. Too many "miracles?" Regards, Horace Heffner From vortex-l-request eskimo.com Sat Feb 17 13:05:03 2001 Received: (from smartlst localhost) by mx1.eskimo.com (8.9.1a/8.8.8) id NAA27964; Sat, 17 Feb 2001 13:03:45 -0800 Resent-Date: Sat, 17 Feb 2001 13:03:45 -0800 Message-ID: <3A8ED985.10A15AAA ix.netcom.com> Date: Sat, 17 Feb 2001 14:05:27 -0600 From: Edmund Storms X-Mailer: Mozilla 4.5 (Macintosh; U; PPC) X-Accept-Language: en,pdf MIME-Version: 1.0 To: vortex-l eskimo.com Subject: Re: Photon in a cavity? References: <3A85F654.BADA2E94 ix.netcom.com> <3A86A219.9A713786 ix.netcom.com> <5ltr8t4nb00bqv8ck9fcmqq0peoqmj266b 4ax.com> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii; x-mac-type="54455854"; x-mac-creator="4D4F5353" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Resent-Message-ID: <"1Av3-.0.pq6.mSkZw" mx1> Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/40829 X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com Status: O X-Status: Mitchell Jones wrote: > Ed Storms wrote: > > >> > >> >A uniform structure does not exists, a condition for a > >> >photon to be influenced. > > > >A uniform structure does not exists, which is a condition for a > >photon to be influenced (reflected). > > > >> > >> > >> This is not a sentence. > > > >Now it is. > > ***{Nope. A structure either exists or it does not exist. Note that in the > first half of the sentence, where "does" is absent, the proper verb is > "exists," while in the second half, where "does" is present, the proper > verb is "exist." Thus to use "exists" in both the affirmative and the > negative construct, you would say: "A structure does exist or it does not > exist." Similarly, to use "exists" in both the affirmative and the > negative, you would say: "A structure either exists or it exists not." The > latter form, however, is archaic. --MJ}*** Let me try again. For a photon to be reflected from a surface, a uniform array of atoms must be present. If the array is not uniform, the photon will be scattered rather than reflected. In addition, the size of the array must be greater than the wavelength of the photon. An atom defect within an atomic structure does not meet these conditions. Hence, a photon originating within such a defect will not be contained within the defect but will move immediately out into the surrounding structure where it will be absorbed. I hope this is more clear. Ed From vortex-l-request eskimo.com Sat Feb 17 14:44:35 2001 Received: (from smartlst localhost) by mx1.eskimo.com (8.9.1a/8.8.8) id OAA21642; Sat, 17 Feb 2001 14:39:49 -0800 Resent-Date: Sat, 17 Feb 2001 14:39:49 -0800 Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" X-Sender: mjones pop.jump.net Message-Id: In-Reply-To: <3A8ED985.10A15AAA ix.netcom.com> References: <3A85F654.BADA2E94 ix.netcom.com> <3A86A219.9A713786 ix.netcom.com> <5ltr8t4nb00bqv8ck9fcmqq0peoqmj266b 4ax.com> Date: Sat, 17 Feb 2001 16:38:47 -0600 To: vortex-l eskimo.com From: Mitchell Jones Subject: Re: Photon in a cavity? Resent-Message-ID: <"zjwuz1.0.4I5.rslZw" mx1> Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/40830 X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com Status: O X-Status: >Mitchell Jones wrote: > >> Ed Storms wrote: >> >> >> >> >> >A uniform structure does not exists, a condition for a >> >> >photon to be influenced. >> > >> >A uniform structure does not exists, which is a condition for a >> >photon to be influenced (reflected). >> > >> >> >> >> >> >> This is not a sentence. >> > >> >Now it is. >> >> ***{Nope. A structure either exists or it does not exist. Note that in the >> first half of the sentence, where "does" is absent, the proper verb is >> "exists," while in the second half, where "does" is present, the proper >> verb is "exist." Thus to use "exists" in both the affirmative and the >> negative construct, you would say: "A structure does exist or it does not >> exist." Similarly, to use "exists" in both the affirmative and the >> negative, you would say: "A structure either exists or it exists not." The >> latter form, however, is archaic. --MJ}*** > >Let me try again. > >For a photon to be reflected from a surface, a uniform array of atoms must be >present. If the array is not uniform, the photon will be scattered rather >than reflected. In addition, the size of the array must be greater than the >wavelength of the photon. An atom defect within an atomic structure does not >meet these conditions. Hence, a photon originating within such a defect will >not be contained within the defect but will move immediately out into the >surrounding structure where it will be absorbed. > >I hope this is more clear. > >Ed ***{It was clear from the beginning, Ed. Robin and I were criticizing your grammar, not your physics. :-) --MJ}*** ________________ Quote of the month: "Law is what the authorities use to ride the country." --Anatoly Schransky From vortex-l-request eskimo.com Sat Feb 17 15:38:09 2001 Received: (from smartlst localhost) by mx1.eskimo.com (8.9.1a/8.8.8) id PAA04287; Sat, 17 Feb 2001 15:32:27 -0800 Resent-Date: Sat, 17 Feb 2001 15:32:27 -0800 From: Robin van Spaandonk To: vortex-l eskimo.com Subject: Re: Photon in a cavity? Date: Sun, 18 Feb 2001 10:31:49 +1100 Organization: Improving Message-ID: References: In-Reply-To: X-Mailer: Forte Agent 1.8/32.548 MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit X-MIME-Autoconverted: from quoted-printable to 8bit by mx1.eskimo.com id PAA04263 Resent-Message-ID: <"yObpy.0.v21.AemZw" mx1> Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/40831 X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com Status: O X-Status: In reply to Horace Heffner's message of Sat, 17 Feb 2001 01:08:25 -0900: [snip] Hi Horace, >You sepcified that the photon was to be inside a cavity. It can not bounce >around in the cavity indefinitely because the probability of exciting a >phonon in the surrounding lattice at any point is non-zero. You are of course correct. I suppose my original reason for putting the question was to determine whether or not the chance, of a photon being emitted at all, would be effected by the fact that it was in a small cavity. Though this may be the same thing as a reflected photon being reabsorbed by the same (or a similar) atom that emitted it. I suspect that being in a cavity with dimensions much smaller than the photon wavelength would lead to much more efficient coupling of energy between atoms in the cavity, but I'm not at all sure that this is so. [snip] Regards, Robin van Spaandonk A Future For Humanity see: http://users.bigpond.net.au/rvanspaa/ From vortex-l-request eskimo.com Sat Feb 17 15:49:32 2001 Received: (from smartlst localhost) by mx1.eskimo.com (8.9.1a/8.8.8) id PAA07161; Sat, 17 Feb 2001 15:43:23 -0800 Resent-Date: Sat, 17 Feb 2001 15:43:23 -0800 Message-ID: <3A8EFF0D.42BDBCF6 ix.netcom.com> Date: Sat, 17 Feb 2001 16:45:34 -0600 From: Edmund Storms X-Mailer: Mozilla 4.5 (Macintosh; U; PPC) X-Accept-Language: en,pdf MIME-Version: 1.0 To: vortex-l eskimo.com Subject: Re: Photon in a cavity? References: <3A85F654.BADA2E94 ix.netcom.com> <3A86A219.9A713786 ix.netcom.com> <5ltr8t4nb00bqv8ck9fcmqq0peoqmj266b 4ax.com> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii; x-mac-type="54455854"; x-mac-creator="4D4F5353" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Resent-Message-ID: <"x467G.0.jl1.RomZw" mx1> Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/40832 X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com Status: O X-Status: Mitchell Jones wrote: > >Mitchell Jones wrote: > > > >> Ed Storms wrote: > >> > >> >> > >> >> >A uniform structure does not exists, a condition for a > >> >> >photon to be influenced. > >> > > >> >A uniform structure does not exists, which is a condition for a > >> >photon to be influenced (reflected). > >> > > >> >> > >> >> > >> >> This is not a sentence. > >> > > >> >Now it is. > >> > >> ***{Nope. A structure either exists or it does not exist. Note that in the > >> first half of the sentence, where "does" is absent, the proper verb is > >> "exists," while in the second half, where "does" is present, the proper > >> verb is "exist." Thus to use "exists" in both the affirmative and the > >> negative construct, you would say: "A structure does exist or it does not > >> exist." Similarly, to use "exists" in both the affirmative and the > >> negative, you would say: "A structure either exists or it exists not." The > >> latter form, however, is archaic. --MJ}*** > > > >Let me try again. > > > >For a photon to be reflected from a surface, a uniform array of atoms must be > >present. If the array is not uniform, the photon will be scattered rather > >than reflected. In addition, the size of the array must be greater than the > >wavelength of the photon. An atom defect within an atomic structure does not > >meet these conditions. Hence, a photon originating within such a defect will > >not be contained within the defect but will move immediately out into the > >surrounding structure where it will be absorbed. > > > >I hope this is more clear. > > > >Ed > > ***{It was clear from the beginning, Ed. Robin and I were criticizing your > grammar, not your physics. :-) --MJ}*** Ah so! The "s" at the end of exist was a typo, a problem my typing is often prone. If the spelling checker can't find the problem, neither can I. Ed > > > ________________ > Quote of the month: > > "Law is what the authorities use to ride the country." --Anatoly Schransky From vortex-l-request eskimo.com Sat Feb 17 16:46:21 2001 Received: (from smartlst localhost) by mx1.eskimo.com (8.9.1a/8.8.8) id QAA24194; Sat, 17 Feb 2001 16:41:08 -0800 Resent-Date: Sat, 17 Feb 2001 16:41:08 -0800 X-Sender: josephnewman mail.earthlink.net Message-Id: Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Date: Sat, 17 Feb 2001 19:46:40 -0600 To: vortex-L eskimo.com From: josephnewman earthlink.net (JNPCo.) Subject: HONDA MOTOR COMPANY: INSIGHT Resent-Message-ID: <"DXTK43.0.yv5.ZenZw" mx1> Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/40833 X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com Status: RO X-Status: THE ENERGY MACHINE OF JOSEPH NEWMAN 11445 East Via Linda, No. 416 Scottsdale, Arizona 85259 (480) 657-3722 josephnewman earthlink.net www.josephnewman.com February 15, 2001 - Press Release: THE PLUNDER CONTINUES: HONDA MOTOR CORPORATION IS NOW UTILIZING JOSEPH NEWMAN'S TECHNOLOGY It is obvious to me that the power brokers (and their "old boy networks") seek to plunder my technology by dribbling it out to you, the people, in small increments while they MAINTAIN CONTROL OVER ITS USAGE AND APPLICATION. To provide such technology as a fully-developed system that provides economic and energy independence to the people of this planet would not enable the power brokers to maintain control over it. Yet, I am ready to immediately go forward with such a fully-developed, energy-generating system once capitalization for commercial production is achieved. As further proof of the scientific validity of my technology, Honda Motor Corporation is now utilizing my technology in a piecemeal, incremental approach. Please notice that rather than produce a full-blown commercial application of my technology, they hybridize it by combining it with a conventional, gasoline-powered (and inferior) system. The TNN (cable) nationally-televised network recently broadcast a "Car & Driver" segment that further verified the continuing theft of my technology as well as the successful operability of the technology that I teach relative to my Energy Machine. The TNN broadcast showed the Honda Motor Corporation using my Pioneering technology. They combined a conventional gasoline engine with an electric motor (based upon the principles of the Newman Motor/Generator). The electric motor operated on 120 "D-sized" batteries that were connected in SERIES and PRODUCED OVER 13 HORSEPOWER that augmented the horsepower produced by the gasoline engine. It is important to note that the electric motor's batteries were connected in SERIES - not in PARALLEL! The following are the statistics provided by Honda Corporation at: www.honda2001.com/models/insight/features.html and www.honda2001.com/models/insight/specs/specs9.html - Gasoline engine: Insight Electric Motor/Gen.: Insight Aluminum-Alloy/3 cyl Motor Type: Permanent Magnet Displacement (cc): 995 Power Output: 10 kw 3000 rpm Horsepower rpm: 67 @ 5700/73 @ 5700 Battery Type: Nickel Metal Hydride (SAE net/with IMA) Battery Output: 144v (120 cells 1.2v) Compression ratio: 10.8:1 Rated Capacity: 6.5 amp. hours IMPORTANT NOTE: BATTERIES ARE CONNECTED IN SERIES. Batteries Output Power = 6.5 amp. hours x 144 volts = 936 watts of input power 1 HP = 746 watts (current x voltage = wattage) Elec. Motor's Output Power = 10,000 watts/746 watts = 13.40 HP or 10,000 watts of output power Note: The HP rating is at constant 3,000 rpms or steady car speed at the least current draw It is a fact that the current draw is highest at start-up. It should be obvious that the Honda Insight automobile is NOT using a conventional electric motor! In fact, my technology has demonstrated such results (and greater) for OVER 20 YEARS! FACT: The above described Honda Electric Motor/Generator (based upon my technology) produces: 10,000 watts of output power using 936 watts of input power (from batteries) That represents a production efficiency of more than: 10 to 1! CONCLUSION: Honda Motor Corporation is utilizing Joseph Newman's Pioneering Energy Machine technology which "generates greater external energy output than external energy input". Honda Motor Corporation has copied what I accomplished with my automobile in 1986 when I operated an 1,800 lb car on the current equivalent of that from a 1.5 transistor battery! That was documented by CBS News as well as recorded by Japanese TV reporters who were present at the demonstration of my automobile's historic performance and later broadcast that performance in Japan. Fact: Batteries in series produce a current that is equivalent to one (1) battery. Fact: For the Honda Insight Electric Motor (actually a Newman Motor/Generator) to produce 13.4 HP (according to CONVENTIONAL TEACHINGS) would require a bank of batteries that are capable of producing 70 amps. But the batteries described above cannot produce even 10 amps! Fact: The Honda Motor Corporation - by utilizing a Motor/Generator based upon Joseph Newman's technology - has once again proven that Joseph Newman's technology is correct. All honest and brave attorneys as well as sincere and concerned people should join me in seeking justice for themselves and their posterity. Together, we and humanity will win. [Signed] Joseph Westley Newman From vortex-l-request eskimo.com Sun Feb 18 05:12:09 2001 Received: (from smartlst localhost) by mx1.eskimo.com (8.9.1a/8.8.8) id FAA18882; Sun, 18 Feb 2001 05:08:37 -0800 Resent-Date: Sun, 18 Feb 2001 05:08:37 -0800 Message-ID: <003c01c099b4$60f36220$978f85ce fjsparber> Reply-To: "Frederick Sparber" From: "Frederick Sparber" To: Subject: Physical Constants and Conversion Factors Date: Sun, 18 Feb 2001 06:08:56 -0800 MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: multipart/related; boundary="----=_NextPart_000_0001_01C09971.46C45500"; type="multipart/alternative" X-Priority: 3 X-MSMail-Priority: Normal X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook Express 5.00.2615.200 X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V5.00.2615.200 Resent-Message-ID: <"th4RA3.0.tc4.LbyZw" mx1> Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/40834 X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com Status: O X-Status: This is a multi-part message in MIME format. ------=_NextPart_000_0001_01C09971.46C45500 Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary="----=_NextPart_001_0002_01C09971.46CBF620" ------=_NextPart_001_0002_01C09971.46CBF620 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="utf-8" Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable Physical Constants and Conversion Factors Recommended Values of Physical Constants and Conversion Factors Please read the notes following the table. -------------------------------------------------------------------------= ------- Quantity Value=20 speed of light in a vacuum (c) 2.99792458E+08 m/s (exact)=20 permeability of a vacuum (=C2=B50) 4=CF=80=C3=971.0E-07 H/m=20 permittivity of a vacuum (=CE=B50) 8.854187817...E-12 F/m=20 elementary charge (of proton) 1.60217733(49)E-19 C=20 gravitational constant 6.67259(85)E-11 Nm2kg-2=20 unified atomic mass constant (mu =3D mass 12C / 12) = 1.6605402(10)E-27 kg=20 rest mass of electron (me) 9.1093897(54)E-31 kg=20 5.48579903(13)E-04 amu=20 rest mass of proton (mp) 1.6726231(10)E-27 kg=20 1.007276470(12) amu=20 1836.152701(37) me=20 rest mass of neutron (mn) 1.6749286(10)E-27 kg=20 1.008664904(14) amu=20 energy equivalence of rest mass of electron 0.5109906(15) MeV=20 energy equivalence of rest mass of proton 938.27231(28) MeV=20 energy equivalence of rest mass of neutron 939.56563(28) MeV=20 =20 electron specific charge (-e/me) -1.75881962(53)E11 C/kg=20 Planck constant 6.6260755(40)E-34 Js=20 h/2=CF=80 1.05457266(63)E-34 Js=20 Rydberg constant 1.0973731534E+07 1/m=20 fine structure constant 7.29735308(33)=20 reciprocal fine structure constant 137.0359895(61)=20 Hartree energy 4.3597482(26)E-18 J=20 2.6255000E+06 J/mol=20 27.211652 eV=20 627.51E+03 Calories/mol (US Calorie)=20 Bohr radius 5.29177249(24)E-11 m=20 electron radius 2.81794092(38)E-15 m=20 Compton wavelength of electron 2.42631058(22)E-12 m=20 Compton wavelength of proton 1.32141002(12)E-15 m=20 Compton wavelength of neutron 1.31959110(12)E-12 m=20 =20 Avogadro constant (NA, L) 6.0221367(36)E+23 1/mol=20 Faraday constant 9.6485309(29)E+04 C/mol=20 molar gas constant 8.314510(70) J/K/mol=20 Boltzman constant 1.380658(12)E-23 J/K=20 Stefan-Boltzman constant 5.67051(19)E-08 W/m2K-4=20 first radiation constant 3.7417749(22)E-16 Jm2s-1=20 second radiation constant 1.438769(12)E-02 mK=20 Bohr magneton 9.2740154(31)E-24 J/T=20 nuclear magneton 5.0507866(17)E-27 J/T=20 magnetic flux quantum 2.06783461(61)E-15 Vs=20 =20 gyromagnetic ratio of proton 2.67522128(81)E+08 1/s/T=20 *1/2=CF=80 4.2577469(13)E+07 Hz/T=20 in pure water 2.67515255(81)E+08 1/s/T=20 *1/2=CF=80 4.2756375(13)E+07 Hz/T=20 =20 magnetic moment of electron 9.2847701(31)E-24 J/T=20 in terms of Bohr magneton 1.001159652(10)=20 =20 magnetic moment of proton 1.41060761(47)E-26 J/T=20 in terms of Bohr magneton 1.521032202(15)E+03=20 in pure water 1.520993129(17)E+03=20 in terms of nuclear magneton 2.792847386(63)=20 =20 Electronvolts per mol 96.485333E+03 J/mol=20 23.060548E+03 Calories/mol=20 1/cm (harmonic oscillator) 9.93223731E-24 J=20 5.98132908 J/mol=20 8.06554093 E-3 eV=20 Calorie (USA - definition) 4.18400 J=20 Mean Calorie 4.19002 J=20 15 deg C Calorie 4.1890 J=20 220 lattice parameter of silicon (d220 =3D a/80.5) = 1.92015540(40)E-13=20 -------------------------------------------------------------------------= ------- Notes The above values are taken from Refs. [1-3]: these are good enough for = most purposes. Recently new values have been published which are = considerably more accurate, except for the gravitational constant, G. = For details of these please see Ref. [4] and the NIST website. References 1.. E. R. Cohen and B. N. Taylor, "The 1986 CODATA recommended values = of the fundamental physical constants.", J. Res. National Bureau of = Standards, 92(2), 85-95 (1987).=20 2.. E. R. Cohen and B. N. Taylor, "The 1986 adjustment of the = fundamental physical constants", CODATA Bulletin Number 63, (1986); and = Rev. Mod. Phys., 59(4), 1121-1148 (1987).=20 3.. CRC Handbook of Chemistry and Physics, 58th edition (1977-78).=20 4.. P. J. Mohr and B. N. Taylor, "CODATA recommended values of the = fundamental physical constants: 1998", J. Phys. Chem. Ref. Data, 28(6) = (1999); and Rev. Mod. Phys., 72(2), 1713-1852, (2000). The number in parenthesis after each value is the estimated standard = deviation uncertainty of the last digit quoted. Other Sources of Information: a.. Atomic Units conversion factors=20 b.. CODATA Recommended Values=20 c.. Dictionary of Units=20 d.. Basic units conversion Any constants missing that you think should be here? Please let us know = - thanks! -------------------------------------------------------------------------= ------- Useful Links Symmetry Conversion Theoretical Physics Last modified: Wed Jun 28 16:06:31 BST 2000 Chris Latham, Chris Ewels. HTML 4.0: [W3C][WDG] ------=_NextPart_001_0002_01C09971.46CBF620 Content-Type: text/html; charset="utf-8" Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable Physical Constants and Conversion Factors
 

Recommended Values of Physical = Constants=20 and Conversion Factors

Please read the notes following the = table.

Quantity Value
speed of light in a vacuum (c) 2.99792458E+08 m/s (exact)
permeability of a vacuum (=C2=B50) 4=CF=80=C3=971.0E-07 H/m
permittivity of a vacuum (=CE=B50) 8.854187817...E-12 F/m
elementary charge (of proton) 1.60217733(49)E-19 C
gravitational constant 6.67259(85)E-11 Nm2kg-2
unified atomic mass constant (mu =3D mass=20 12C / 12) 1.6605402(10)E-27 kg
rest mass of electron (me) 9.1093897(54)E-31 kg
5.48579903(13)E-04 amu
rest mass of proton (mp) 1.6726231(10)E-27 kg
1.007276470(12) amu
1836.152701(37) me
rest mass of neutron (mn) 1.6749286(10)E-27 kg
1.008664904(14) amu
energy equivalence of rest mass of electron 0.5109906(15) MeV
energy equivalence of rest mass of proton 938.27231(28) MeV
energy equivalence of rest mass of neutron 939.56563(28) MeV
electron specific charge (-e/me) -1.75881962(53)E11 C/kg
Planck constant 6.6260755(40)E-34 Js
h/2=CF=80 1.05457266(63)E-34 Js
Rydberg constant 1.0973731534E+07 1/m
fine structure constant 7.29735308(33)
reciprocal fine structure constant 137.0359895(61)
Hartree energy 4.3597482(26)E-18 J
2.6255000E+06 J/mol
27.211652 eV
627.51E+03 Calories/mol (US Calorie)
Bohr radius 5.29177249(24)E-11 m
electron radius 2.81794092(38)E-15 m
Compton wavelength of electron 2.42631058(22)E-12 m
Compton wavelength of proton 1.32141002(12)E-15 m
Compton wavelength of neutron 1.31959110(12)E-12 m
Avogadro constant (NA, L) 6.0221367(36)E+23 1/mol
Faraday constant 9.6485309(29)E+04 C/mol
molar gas constant 8.314510(70) J/K/mol
Boltzman constant 1.380658(12)E-23 J/K
Stefan-Boltzman constant 5.67051(19)E-08 W/m2K-4
first radiation constant 3.7417749(22)E-16 Jm2s-1
second radiation constant 1.438769(12)E-02 mK
Bohr magneton 9.2740154(31)E-24 J/T
nuclear magneton 5.0507866(17)E-27 J/T
magnetic flux quantum 2.06783461(61)E-15 Vs
gyromagnetic ratio of proton 2.67522128(81)E+08 1/s/T
*1/2=CF=80 4.2577469(13)E+07 Hz/T
in pure water 2.67515255(81)E+08 1/s/T
*1/2=CF=80 4.2756375(13)E+07 Hz/T
magnetic moment of electron 9.2847701(31)E-24 J/T
in terms of Bohr magneton 1.001159652(10)
magnetic moment of proton 1.41060761(47)E-26 J/T
in terms of Bohr magneton 1.521032202(15)E+03
in pure water 1.520993129(17)E+03
in terms of nuclear magneton 2.792847386(63)
Electronvolts per mol 96.485333E+03 J/mol
23.060548E+03 Calories/mol
1/cm (harmonic oscillator) 9.93223731E-24 J
5.98132908 J/mol
8.06554093 E-3 eV
Calorie (USA - definition) 4.18400 J
Mean Calorie 4.19002 J
15 deg C Calorie 4.1890 J
220 lattice parameter of silicon (d220 =3D=20 a/80.5) 1.92015540(40)E-13

Notes

The above values are taken from Refs. [1-3]: these are good = enough for=20 most purposes.  Recently new values have been published which are=20 considerably more accurate, except for the gravitational constant, = G.  For=20 details of these please see Ref. [4] and the NIST website.

References

  1. E. R. Cohen and B. N. Taylor, "The 1986 CODATA recommended values = of the=20 fundamental physical constants.", J. Res. National Bureau of = Standards,=20 92(2), 85-95 (1987).=20
  2. E. R. Cohen and B. N. Taylor, "The 1986 adjustment of the = fundamental=20 physical constants", CODATA Bulletin Number 63, (1986); and Rev. Mod. = Phys.,=20 59(4), 1121-1148 (1987).=20
  3. CRC Handbook of Chemistry and Physics, 58th edition (1977-78).=20
  4. P. J. Mohr and B. N. Taylor, "CODATA recommended values of the = fundamental=20 physical constants: 1998", J. Phys. Chem. Ref. Data, 28(6) = (1999);=20 and Rev. Mod. Phys., 72(2), 1713-1852, (2000).

The number in parenthesis after each value is the estimated standard=20 deviation uncertainty of the last digit quoted.

Other Sources of Information:

Any constants missing that you think should be here? Please let us know - thanks!

3D"(link=20 Useful Links 3D"(link Symmetry = Conversion 3D"(link Theoretical=20 Physics

Last modified: Wed Jun 28 16:06:31 = BST 2000 Chris=20 Latham, Chris=20 Ewels.

HTML 4.0: [W3C][WDG]=

------=_NextPart_001_0002_01C09971.46CBF620-- ------=_NextPart_000_0001_01C09971.46C45500 Content-Type: image/gif; name="=?utf-8?Q?arrow.gif?=" Content-Transfer-Encoding: base64 Content-Location: http://newton.ex.ac.uk/people/ewels/arrow.gif R0lGODlhJAAbAIAAAP///wAA/yH5BAEAAAAALAAAAAAkABsAAAJPhI+pyxAPo2zUyBsrxVw97XCX 91XimGTbqSJTw74HusQ2xNx6rd9kb/sBWalhcGY8WpKnIhPDe7aET5MUFDJiXb3tVubVTMPWAPlr PqsZBQA7 ------=_NextPart_000_0001_01C09971.46C45500 Content-Type: image/gif; name="=?utf-8?Q?arrow.gif?=" Content-Transfer-Encoding: base64 Content-Location: http://newton.ex.ac.uk/arrow.gif R0lGODlhJAAgAIAAAP///wAA/yH5BAEAAAAALAAAAAAkACAAAAJYhI+pyxAPo2zUyBtVqAd7vXEe BobUeJUmg06Jy7YZksbyvdI4vuy76msBg6MX8aY7ypLKD7MJe0JzUmVlSrUROUMh92uZgb/iMRdi Hj/Sarb7DY/L53RuAQA7 ------=_NextPart_000_0001_01C09971.46C45500 Content-Type: image/gif; name="=?utf-8?Q?arrow2.gif?=" Content-Transfer-Encoding: base64 Content-Location: http://newton.ex.ac.uk/people/ewels/arrow2.gif R0lGODlhJAAdAIAAAP///wB+ACH5BAEAAAAALAAAAAAkAB0AAAJIhI+py93hogShzpuqxlh7Lnki +IgjmZkmeqgu68ZkTHP0fd36pONgD2FResLhTghEJnPAFbP5eUKDUqhtarlaf1vuckZUykgFADs= ------=_NextPart_000_0001_01C09971.46C45500-- From vortex-l-request eskimo.com Sun Feb 18 09:09:51 2001 Received: (from smartlst localhost) by mx1.eskimo.com (8.9.1a/8.8.8) id JAA02519; Sun, 18 Feb 2001 09:07:42 -0800 Resent-Date: Sun, 18 Feb 2001 09:07:42 -0800 Date: Sun, 18 Feb 2001 09:05:20 -0800 From: Jones Beene Subject: More on DU toxicity To: vortex-l Message-id: <3A9000D0.1020009 pacbell.net> MIME-version: 1.0 Content-type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii; format=flowed Content-transfer-encoding: 7bit User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (Windows; U; Win98; en-US; m18) Gecko/20001108 Netscape6/6.0 X-Accept-Language: en Resent-Message-ID: <"WeC1B3.0.Hd.T50aw" mx1> Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/40835 X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com Status: O X-Status: For the doubters: Two more surprising stories on DU toxicity appeared today on the BBC and the message is becoming loud and clear: The Japanese atomic bomb survivors are simply not typical of what we should expect from the many types of radiation exposure. In one story, small amounts of Pu, which is deadly in milligram doses or less, has been found in the rounds. If the so-called "depleted" material in these rounds has actually been through a reactor, instead of just the normal non-activating enrichment process, then it opens up a whole new Pandoras box of previously unknown possibilities which perhaps wouldn't have shown up on a typical radiation monitor). Among the more speculative possibilities of what can happen to material which has been irradiated in a reactor for years and then "cleaned" i.e. putatively deactivated are: - subquark enrichment? orbital rearrangement of nuclei? shrunken nuclei? a new kind of radioactivity? Don't laugh yet, wait till you see hundreds of preteenage Bosnians with thyroid cancer. In the case of orbital rearrangement of nuclei, there is some widely scoffed-at research that suggests that high Z materials behave far differently when subdivided to micro-aggregations of a few atoms, which (yes, you guessed it) is not an unexpected result of impact of a DU round with armor. Perhaps this DU ammunition should be called AU, as in activated. Here is another story from the Beeb. One suspects that this is only the tip of a huge iceberg that the US government is saying doesn't exist, mainly because we refused to believe our own troops leaving Iraq, some of whom were very sick. From the BBC Sci/Tech page... by environment correspondent Alex Kirby Many of those who argue that depleted uranium (DU) cannot be a serious health risk say radiation takes a long time to produce cancers. They say the reports from veterans of the wars in Bosnia and Kosovo, complaining of leukemia and other cancers, are inconsistent with what we know of the time it takes for radiation to cause damage. And they believe that even the reports from Gulf veterans and Iraqi civilians of cancers which have developed since the 1991 war suggest an improbably rapid development of the disease. But two senior scientists have told BBC News Online they believe it may be a serious mistake to rule DU out of the equation. Both remain open-minded on whether DU actually does damage health, but both believe its effects are poorly understood. Neither was prepared to be named. Chernobyl's surprise One, a professor in a university physics department, said: "We're in uncharted territory, because we have no experience of human exposure to DU. Baghdad burns as the Allies attack "What we do know, though, is that thyroid cancer appeared far sooner than expected after the Chernobyl accident in 1986. That was a real surprise. "It's true that DU is not very radioactive. But when you inhale it, it does go to the lymph nodes surrounding the lungs, and that means it could irradiate all the blood cells which pass through the nodes. "Many experts say DU is more of a chemical threat than a radioactive one, and I think the chemical toxicity is an issue. The uranium atoms are chemically toxic, and they will visit every cell in the body where they may have an effect. "And it would not be hard to absorb a serious dose of DU quite quickly. When it vaporises, it forms a very fine powder which can blow a long way. Limit reached quickly "The permitted body burden of uranium is 80 milligrams. We have calculated that if you had 10,000 particles of DU per cubic centimetre, each up to 200 nanometres in size, then it would take about a month and a half to reach that limit. "It's not overly likely. But it's not too unlikely, either." Monitoring DU in Kosovo The other scientist is a leading expert on the effects of ionising radiation. He told BBC News Online: "What Nato and the UK Ministry of Defence are missing is the fact that a single alpha emitter can be carcinogenic. "We don't know how low the risk of DU is. But the uranium has the potential to cause DNA damage because of its chemical properties, and that can trigger cancer. "That would be an unconvincing argument about Kosovo, though a possibility for the Gulf. A two-year development period for cancers caused this way is a valid hypothesis. "The warning from Chernobyl is to remind us that the Japanese atomic bomb survivors are not typical of all types of radiation. "We shouldn't say too lightly that two years is not long enough for radiation to cause cancer." Scary prognostication, Jones From vortex-l-request eskimo.com Sun Feb 18 10:18:55 2001 Received: (from smartlst localhost) by mx1.eskimo.com (8.9.1a/8.8.8) id KAA21908; Sun, 18 Feb 2001 10:14:14 -0800 Resent-Date: Sun, 18 Feb 2001 10:14:14 -0800 Message-ID: <005601c099df$12d6d600$978f85ce fjsparber> Reply-To: "Frederick Sparber" From: "Frederick Sparber" To: Cc: "jlsparber" References: <3A9000D0.1020009 pacbell.net> Subject: Re: More on DU toxicity Date: Sun, 18 Feb 2001 11:14:36 -0800 MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-Priority: 3 X-MSMail-Priority: Normal X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook Express 5.00.2615.200 X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V5.00.2615.200 Resent-Message-ID: <"-EDra3.0.EM5.s31aw" mx1> Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/40836 X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com Status: O X-Status: ----- Original Message ----- From: Jones Beene To: vortex-l Sent: Sunday, February 18, 2001 9:05 AM Subject: More on DU toxicity I thought that there is enough "Spontaneous Fission" (from residual U235?)in Depleted Uranium 238 to breed Plutonium 239. Then enough neutrons from the S.F. to fission the Pu239 and so on. Slow but Sure. Regards, Frederick > For the doubters: > > Two more surprising stories on DU toxicity appeared today on the > BBC and the message is becoming loud and clear: The Japanese > atomic bomb survivors are simply not typical of what we should > expect from the many types of radiation exposure. > > In one story, small amounts of Pu, which is deadly in milligram > doses or less, has been found in the rounds. If the so-called > "depleted" material in these rounds has actually been through a > reactor, instead of just the normal non-activating enrichment > process, then it opens up a whole new Pandoras box of previously > unknown possibilities which perhaps wouldn't have shown up on a > typical radiation monitor). > > Among the more speculative possibilities of what can happen to > material which has been irradiated in a reactor for years and > then "cleaned" i.e. putatively deactivated are: - subquark > enrichment? orbital rearrangement of nuclei? shrunken nuclei? a > new kind of radioactivity? Don't laugh yet, wait till you see > hundreds of preteenage Bosnians with thyroid cancer. > > In the case of orbital rearrangement of nuclei, there is some > widely scoffed-at research that suggests that high Z materials > behave far differently when subdivided to micro-aggregations of > a few atoms, which (yes, you guessed it) is not an unexpected > result of impact of a DU round with armor. > > Perhaps this DU ammunition should be called AU, as in activated. > > Here is another story from the Beeb. One suspects that this is > only the tip of a huge iceberg that the US government is saying > doesn't exist, mainly because we refused to believe our own > troops leaving Iraq, some of whom were very sick. > > > > From the BBC Sci/Tech page... by environment correspondent Alex > Kirby > > Many of those who argue that depleted uranium (DU) cannot be a > serious health risk say radiation takes a long time to produce > cancers. > > They say the reports from veterans of the wars in Bosnia and > Kosovo, complaining of leukemia and other cancers, are > inconsistent with what we know of the time it takes for > radiation to cause damage. > > And they believe that even the reports from Gulf veterans and > Iraqi civilians of cancers which have developed since the 1991 > war suggest an improbably rapid development of the disease. > > But two senior scientists have told BBC News Online they believe > it may be a serious mistake to rule DU out of the equation. > > Both remain open-minded on whether DU actually does damage > health, but both believe its effects are poorly understood. > Neither was prepared to be named. > > Chernobyl's surprise > > One, a professor in a university physics department, said: > "We're in uncharted territory, because we have no experience of > human exposure to DU. > > Baghdad burns as the Allies attack > "What we do know, though, is that thyroid cancer appeared far > sooner than expected after the Chernobyl accident in 1986. That > was a real surprise. > > "It's true that DU is not very radioactive. But when you inhale > it, it does go to the lymph nodes surrounding the lungs, and > that means it could irradiate all the blood cells which pass > through the nodes. > > "Many experts say DU is more of a chemical threat than a > radioactive one, and I think the chemical toxicity is an issue. > The uranium atoms are chemically toxic, and they will visit > every cell in the body where they may have an effect. > > "And it would not be hard to absorb a serious dose of DU quite > quickly. When it vaporises, it forms a very fine powder which > can blow a long way. > > Limit reached quickly > > "The permitted body burden of uranium is 80 milligrams. We have > calculated that if you had 10,000 particles of DU per cubic > centimetre, each up to 200 nanometres in size, then it would > take about a month and a half to reach that limit. > > "It's not overly likely. But it's not too unlikely, either." > > Monitoring DU in Kosovo > The other scientist is a leading expert on the effects of > ionising radiation. > > He told BBC News Online: "What Nato and the UK Ministry of > Defence are missing is the fact that a single alpha emitter can > be carcinogenic. > > "We don't know how low the risk of DU is. But the uranium has > the potential to cause DNA damage because of its chemical > properties, and that can trigger cancer. > > "That would be an unconvincing argument about Kosovo, though a > possibility for the Gulf. A two-year development period for > cancers caused this way is a valid hypothesis. > > "The warning from Chernobyl is to remind us that the Japanese > atomic bomb survivors are not typical of all types of radiation. > > "We shouldn't say too lightly that two years is not long enough > for radiation to cause cancer." > > Scary prognostication, > > Jones > > From vortex-l-request eskimo.com Sun Feb 18 10:19:59 2001 Received: (from smartlst localhost) by mx1.eskimo.com (8.9.1a/8.8.8) id KAA22588; Sun, 18 Feb 2001 10:16:13 -0800 Resent-Date: Sun, 18 Feb 2001 10:16:13 -0800 From: FZNIDARSIC aol.com Message-ID: Date: Sun, 18 Feb 2001 13:15:30 EST Subject: Re: HONDA MOTOR COMPANY: INSIGHT To: vortex-l eskimo.com MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="US-ASCII" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-Mailer: AOL 5.0 for Windows sub 128 Resent-Message-ID: <"m26Nc2.0.sW5.j51aw" mx1> Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/40837 X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com Status: RO X-Status: In a message dated 2/17/01 7:46:09 PM Eastern Standard Time, josephnewman earthlink.net writes: << It is obvious to me that the power brokers (and their "old boy networks") seek to plunder my technology by dribbling it out to you, the people, in small increments while they MAINTAIN CONTROL OVER ITS USAGE AND >> Wrong! Honda is claiming no overunity operation. This technology was largely developed in the mining industry in the 1970. Gasoline engines cannot be used underground. The first mining controllers were resistive in operation. This wasted precious battery power. The next generation of 'buggy' controls used SCR's. The problem was comutating (turning off) the SCR's off when supplied by continuos DC power. This problem was solved in the early 1970 with a reverse voltage spike. In the late 1970's regenerative braking was introduced. This captured kinetic energy from the motion of the underground buggy during braking. At this time brushless AC and DC operation was also introduced. This involved converting the DC voltage from the batteries to AC 3 phase variable frequency and voltage. This system used low maintenance induction motors. Regenerative braking was also attained from the induction motors by shorting the motor and open circuiting it back into the batteries. This limitation with the AC drive was low starting torque. Since that time permanent magnet developments have once again made the DC motor the favorite candidate for propulsion. Brushless operation is obtained with electronic switching. Some of the comapanies that worked on the were National Scmiconductor, Femco, Westinghouse, Samaco, Pemco and the like. I was there in the mines fixing this stuff. What exactly did Newman do? Frank Zndarsic From vortex-l-request eskimo.com Sun Feb 18 12:01:35 2001 Received: (from smartlst localhost) by mx1.eskimo.com (8.9.1a/8.8.8) id LAA21949; Sun, 18 Feb 2001 11:57:06 -0800 Resent-Date: Sun, 18 Feb 2001 11:57:06 -0800 Message-ID: <3A901B71.7C068145 ix.netcom.com> Date: Sun, 18 Feb 2001 12:59:20 -0600 From: Edmund Storms X-Mailer: Mozilla 4.5 (Macintosh; U; PPC) X-Accept-Language: en,pdf MIME-Version: 1.0 To: vortex-l eskimo.com Subject: Re: More on DU toxicity References: <3A9000D0.1020009 pacbell.net> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii; x-mac-type="54455854"; x-mac-creator="4D4F5353" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Resent-Message-ID: <"gw1tH1.0.mM5.Ha2aw" mx1> Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/40838 X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com Status: O X-Status: Jones Beene wrote: > For the doubters: > > Two more surprising stories on DU toxicity appeared today on the > BBC and the message is becoming loud and clear: The Japanese > atomic bomb survivors are simply not typical of what we should > expect from the many types of radiation exposure. > > In one story, small amounts of Pu, which is deadly in milligram > doses or less, has been found in the rounds. If the so-called > "depleted" material in these rounds has actually been through a > reactor, instead of just the normal non-activating enrichment > process, then it opens up a whole new Pandoras box of previously > unknown possibilities which perhaps wouldn't have shown up on a > typical radiation monitor). This speculation is not valid. U238 is not used in a normal reactor. It is only used in a breeder reactor and would be too radioactive even after separation of the Pu to be useful for any other purpose. We have more than enough depleted U238 without using breeder fuel, which at this time is not even being produced. The presence of minute amounts Pu from natural processes is not surprising. Until the amount of claimed Pu is known, such speculation is pointless and potentially harmful to the truth. > > > Among the more speculative possibilities of what can happen to > material which has been irradiated in a reactor for years and > then "cleaned" i.e. putatively deactivated are: - subquark > enrichment? orbital rearrangement of nuclei? shrunken nuclei? a > new kind of radioactivity? Don't laugh yet, wait till you see > hundreds of preteenage Bosnians with thyroid cancer. > > In the case of orbital rearrangement of nuclei, there is some > widely scoffed-at research that suggests that high Z materials > behave far differently when subdivided to micro-aggregations of > a few atoms, which (yes, you guessed it) is not an unexpected > result of impact of a DU round with armor. True, very finely divided material of any kind has different chemical properties compared to bulk material. For you to suggest that the nuclear properties might be changed is pure speculation. Nevertheless, once the UO2 enters the body and is dissolved, the ions would have the same chemical and nuclear properties regardless of the source. > > > Perhaps this DU ammunition should be called AU, as in activated. > > Here is another story from the Beeb. One suspects that this is > only the tip of a huge iceberg that the US government is saying > doesn't exist, mainly because we refused to believe our own > troops leaving Iraq, some of whom were very sick. This sickness has been suggested to have a very different source, nerve gas and warm Aspartame (Diet Coke) being the most likely. Remember, everyone involved in this mess has a self-interest to ignore the facts. The Serb government wants us to look bad and give them more money, the US government wants to look good and not pay any of the potential costs. the soft drink companies want to avoid liability. It would be extremely easy to test people who have developed cancer for uranium. Why is this not done and the results made known? Also, a person who has gotten a lung full of UO2 dust will surely have serious health problems. Someone near an exploding normal bomb would be in the same boat, but for a different reason. Such people need help. However, it is hard to imagine that very many people were so unfortunate. Placing emphasis on uranium smacks too much of political scare tactics to be taken seriously as a general health problem. Ed Storms snip From vortex-l-request eskimo.com Sun Feb 18 13:06:59 2001 Received: (from smartlst localhost) by mx1.eskimo.com (8.9.1a/8.8.8) id NAA06167; Sun, 18 Feb 2001 13:01:47 -0800 Resent-Date: Sun, 18 Feb 2001 13:01:47 -0800 From: Robin van Spaandonk To: Subject: Re: Physical Constants and Conversion Factors Date: Mon, 19 Feb 2001 08:01:12 +1100 Organization: Improving Message-ID: References: <003c01c099b4$60f36220$978f85ce fjsparber> In-Reply-To: <003c01c099b4$60f36220$978f85ce fjsparber> X-Mailer: Forte Agent 1.8/32.548 MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit X-MIME-Autoconverted: from quoted-printable to 8bit by mx1.eskimo.com id NAA06142 Resent-Message-ID: <"n6PBF3.0.HW1.xW3aw" mx1> Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/40839 X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com Status: O X-Status: In reply to Frederick Sparber's message of Sun, 18 Feb 2001 06:08:56 -0800: [snip] > Compton wavelength of electron 2.42631058(22)E-12 m > Compton wavelength of proton 1.32141002(12)E-15 m > Compton wavelength of neutron 1.31959110(12)E-12 m ^ Typo on this one. > [snip] > Bohr magneton 9.2740154(31)E-24 J/T > nuclear magneton 5.0507866(17)E-27 J/T > magnetic flux quantum 2.06783461(61)E-15 Vs > > gyromagnetic ratio of proton 2.67522128(81)E+08 1/s/T > *1/2? 4.2577469(13)E+07 Hz/T > in pure water 2.67515255(81)E+08 1/s/T > *1/2? 4.2756375(13)E+07 Hz/T > > magnetic moment of electron 9.2847701(31)E-24 J/T > in terms of Bohr magneton 1.001159652(10) > > magnetic moment of proton 1.41060761(47)E-26 J/T > in terms of Bohr magneton 1.521032202(15)E+03 ^ Should be "-". > in pure water 1.520993129(17)E+03 ^ ditto. > in terms of nuclear magneton 2.792847386(63) > > Electronvolts per mol 96.485333E+03 J/mol ???????? (If the above were true, then 1 eV would be 96485.333 J). Obviously the intent is that 1 mol of eV = 96485.333 J, however this is not what is written. ("of" is "x", not "per"; "per" means "divided by"). They should have written: Joules per mol of electronvolts 96.485333E+03. > 23.060548E+03 Calories/mol ????????? > 1/cm (harmonic oscillator) 9.93223731E-24 J > 5.98132908 J/mol > 8.06554093 E-3 eV > Calorie (USA - definition) 4.18400 J > Mean Calorie 4.19002 J Actually this one looks more generous to me ;) [snip] PS - Fred, you still have your "reply to" set to your own edress iso blank. Regards, Robin van Spaandonk A Future For Humanity see: http://users.bigpond.net.au/rvanspaa/ From vortex-l-request eskimo.com Sun Feb 18 13:18:35 2001 Received: (from smartlst localhost) by mx1.eskimo.com (8.9.1a/8.8.8) id NAA11534; Sun, 18 Feb 2001 13:12:54 -0800 Resent-Date: Sun, 18 Feb 2001 13:12:54 -0800 From: Robin van Spaandonk To: vortex-l eskimo.com Subject: Re: More on DU toxicity Date: Mon, 19 Feb 2001 08:12:48 +1100 Organization: Improving Message-ID: References: <3A9000D0.1020009 pacbell.net> <3A901B71.7C068145@ix.netcom.com> In-Reply-To: <3A901B71.7C068145 ix.netcom.com> X-Mailer: Forte Agent 1.8/32.548 MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit X-MIME-Autoconverted: from quoted-printable to 8bit by mx1.eskimo.com id NAA11462 Resent-Message-ID: <"lNm3m.0.7q2.Lh3aw" mx1> Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/40840 X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com Status: O X-Status: In reply to Edmund Storms's message of Sun, 18 Feb 2001 12:59:20 -0600: > > >Jones Beene wrote: [snip] >> In one story, small amounts of Pu, which is deadly in milligram >> doses or less, has been found in the rounds. If the so-called >> "depleted" material in these rounds has actually been through a >> reactor, instead of just the normal non-activating enrichment >> process, then it opens up a whole new Pandoras box of previously >> unknown possibilities which perhaps wouldn't have shown up on a >> typical radiation monitor). > >This speculation is not valid. U238 is not used in a normal >reactor. U238 is used in every reactor. It simply isn't worth the effort to extract pure U235 for use in reactors. In fact most reactors use uranium that is only slightly enriched, and given that natural uranium is only .7 % U235, slight enrichment implies that most of the uranium in any reactor is U238. >It is only used in a breeder reactor and would be too >radioactive even after separation of the Pu to be useful for any >other purpose. [snip] Regards, Robin van Spaandonk A Future For Humanity see: http://users.bigpond.net.au/rvanspaa/ From vortex-l-request eskimo.com Sun Feb 18 14:00:40 2001 Received: (from smartlst localhost) by mx1.eskimo.com (8.9.1a/8.8.8) id OAA27029; Sun, 18 Feb 2001 14:00:15 -0800 Resent-Date: Sun, 18 Feb 2001 14:00:15 -0800 Message-ID: <3A90386A.680C86CD ix.netcom.com> Date: Sun, 18 Feb 2001 15:03:06 -0600 From: Edmund Storms X-Mailer: Mozilla 4.5 (Macintosh; U; PPC) X-Accept-Language: en,pdf MIME-Version: 1.0 To: vortex-l eskimo.com Subject: Re: More on DU toxicity References: <3A9000D0.1020009 pacbell.net> <3A901B71.7C068145@ix.netcom.com> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii; x-mac-type="54455854"; x-mac-creator="4D4F5353" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Resent-Message-ID: <"b7PsR3.0.Fc6.lN4aw" mx1> Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/40841 X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com Status: O X-Status: Robin van Spaandonk wrote: > In reply to Edmund Storms's message of Sun, 18 Feb 2001 12:59:20 -0600: > > > > > > >Jones Beene wrote: > [snip] > >> In one story, small amounts of Pu, which is deadly in milligram > >> doses or less, has been found in the rounds. If the so-called > >> "depleted" material in these rounds has actually been through a > >> reactor, instead of just the normal non-activating enrichment > >> process, then it opens up a whole new Pandoras box of previously > >> unknown possibilities which perhaps wouldn't have shown up on a > >> typical radiation monitor). > > > >This speculation is not valid. U238 is not used in a normal > >reactor. > > U238 is used in every reactor. It simply isn't worth the effort to extract > pure U235 for use in reactors. In fact most reactors use uranium that is > only slightly enriched, and given that natural uranium is only .7 % U235, > slight enrichment implies that most of the uranium in any reactor is U238. While this is true, it misses the point. Enriched U is too expensive to use as a tank round. After spent fuel is taken out of a reactor, it is stored on site within the fuel rods. This is because the US has no way to reprocess fuel or any place to put the radioactivity even if it did extract the U238. This is even a worse potential disaster than the use of U238 in war. Therefore, uranium that has been in a reactor would never be used for any purpose whatsoever. Regards, Ed Storms From vortex-l-request eskimo.com Sun Feb 18 14:39:37 2001 Received: (from smartlst localhost) by mx1.eskimo.com (8.9.1a/8.8.8) id OAA06386; Sun, 18 Feb 2001 14:35:06 -0800 Resent-Date: Sun, 18 Feb 2001 14:35:06 -0800 Date: Sun, 18 Feb 2001 14:29:11 -0800 From: Jones Beene Subject: Re: More on DU toxicity To: vortex-l eskimo.com Message-id: <3A904CB7.5030607 pacbell.net> MIME-version: 1.0 Content-type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii; format=flowed Content-transfer-encoding: 7bit User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (Windows; U; Win98; en-US; m18) Gecko/20001108 Netscape6/6.0 X-Accept-Language: en References: <3A9000D0.1020009 pacbell.net> <3A901B71.7C068145@ix.netcom.com> Resent-Message-ID: <"CW1D71.0.eZ1.Pu4aw" mx1> Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/40842 X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com Status: O X-Status: Edmund Storms wrote: > This speculation is not valid. U238 is not used in a normal > reactor. Think this must be a typo, Ed. U238 is used in every working reactor in the world today. In the past there were only two kinds of research reactors that I know about that did not contain some 238, one is the long forgotten "rocket reactor" program in the 50s-60s that used 100% fissile fuel, which I think was called Nerva; and the other was a version of the MSBR, non-homogenous breeder and it used only U235 plus bred 233 as the fissile and thorium 232 as fertile. BTW, that one was probably the most promising of all reactor schemes yet devised - but because it needed no refueling in the sense of purchased fuel from outside suppliers, it was dropped like a "hot potato" by GE et al. - because of the absolutely enormous (and unconscionable) profits that are derived from refueling. If you look at the bottom line in the nuclear power industry over the years you will probably find $100-300 billion of "excess" profits due directly to refueling, which is essentially unnecessary with the right design - but they are a sanctioned monopoly and that's another story. > except it would be to radioactive even after separation > of the Pu to be useful for any other purpose. Actually the most radioactive components (ash) are the easiest to separate by far. > We have more than enough depleted U238 without > using breeder fuel, which at this time is not even being produced. Sure we have enough, but spent reactor fuel is even more of a recurring sunk cost than is DU which was derived from feedstock. PLUS we recovered untold tons of Pu from those U slugs that went through the Hanford reactors and those thousands of tons of irradiate U looks to the Pentagon like just so much more of a problem to be solved by the ammo. Plus some of those rounds could have come from our allies and the French are huge in the business of reprocessing. > The presence of minute amounts Pu from natural processes is not > surprising. Then why was it never seen before in DU ubtill Iraq/Bosnia? > Until the amount of claimed Pu is known, such > speculation is pointless and potentially harmful to the truth. Au contraire. Speculation is almost always helpful, for without it there is no "prima facie case" to force the truth to come out into the open - and speculation can easily be squelched by the truth. Believe me, when the truth will eventually comes out, I can almost guarantee that you will find that spent reactor fuel WAS USED in these rounds. > True, very finely divided material of any kind has different > chemical properties compared to bulk material. For you to suggest > that the nuclear properties might be changed is pure speculation. No that nuclear priorities can be changed is pure fact. The only speculation is whether or not the general case applies to the case in point. > Nevertheless, once the UO2 enters the body and is dissolved, the > ions would have the same chemical and nuclear properties regardless > of the source. Not if the nuclei have been rearranged in a reactor to possess the quality that is called "super deformity." If you don't know what I'm talking about, I invite you to follow some of theses 50 or so references from a Google search, http://www.google.com/search?as_q=&num=10&btnG=Google+Search&as_oq=&as_epq=superdeformed+nucleus&as_eq=&as_occt=any&lr=&as_dt=i&as_sitesearch=&safe=off > This sickness has been suggested to have a very different source, > nerve gas and warm Aspartame (Diet Coke) being the most likely. I don't think you are going to find hundreds of preteens from the same village with thyroid cancer due to diet colas. Regards, Jones Beene From vortex-l-request eskimo.com Sun Feb 18 15:11:21 2001 Received: (from smartlst localhost) by mx1.eskimo.com (8.9.1a/8.8.8) id PAA17332; Sun, 18 Feb 2001 15:07:59 -0800 Resent-Date: Sun, 18 Feb 2001 15:07:59 -0800 Message-ID: <3A9056F9.C4C12233 gorge.net> Date: Sun, 18 Feb 2001 15:12:57 -0800 From: tom gorge.net (Tom Miller) X-Mailer: Mozilla 4.76 [en] (Win95; U) X-Accept-Language: en MIME-Version: 1.0 To: vortex-l eskimo.com Subject: Re: HONDA MOTOR COMPANY: INSIGHT References: <200102182107.NAA08120 mx1.eskimo.com> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=iso-8859-1 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit X-MIME-Autoconverted: from quoted-printable to 8bit by mx1.eskimo.com id PAA17313 Resent-Message-ID: <"m7hvo.0.jE4.FN5aw" mx1> Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/40843 X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com Status: RO X-Status: It would seem that the writer of the "Newman" post has failed to read the Honda2001 website correctly. >From the Honda2001.com website: "Horsepower rpm 67 @ 5700 / 73 @ 5700" "SAE net/with IMA™)" ( This is saying: Gas engine--without electric motor= 67 Horsepower Gas engine--WITH electric motor= 73 Horsepower. (73 minus 67=6) Alleged power output of ELECTRIC motor ONLY= 6 Horsepower When motor/generator is used as a Generator= "Power Output 10 kW 3000 rpm" Furthermore, they seemed to think "amp hours" is the same as "amps." > = 6.5 amp. hours x 144 volts = 936 watts I think this is 936 watt hours. Amps times volts equals watts, Amp hours times volts equals watt hours. The "amp hour" capacity of a battery pack relates to its ability to store energy. It is only peripherally related to the watts being put out at any instant. >Elec. Motor's Output Power = 10,000 watts/746 watts = 13.40 HP >or 10,000 watts of output power Actually, the motor GENERATOR, when acting as a GENERATOR puts out 10,000 watts, to the battery pack. I found NO mention (on Hpnda2001) of either "D-cells," or any measurement of the power supplied TO the motor-generator, (by the batteries) when it is acting as a MOTOR. Tom Miller From vortex-l-request eskimo.com Sun Feb 18 16:20:47 2001 Received: (from smartlst localhost) by mx1.eskimo.com (8.9.1a/8.8.8) id QAA32613; Sun, 18 Feb 2001 16:12:14 -0800 Resent-Date: Sun, 18 Feb 2001 16:12:14 -0800 Message-ID: <3A905738.4CD1FBD ix.netcom.com> Date: Sun, 18 Feb 2001 17:14:44 -0600 From: Edmund Storms X-Mailer: Mozilla 4.5 (Macintosh; U; PPC) X-Accept-Language: en,pdf MIME-Version: 1.0 To: vortex-l eskimo.com Subject: Re: More on DU toxicity References: <3A9000D0.1020009 pacbell.net> <3A901B71.7C068145@ix.netcom.com> <3A904CB7.5030607@pacbell.net> Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary="------------48F152D70B8819C34940695A" Resent-Message-ID: <"swtxz2.0.Rz7.UJ6aw" mx1> Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/40844 X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com Status: O X-Status: --------------48F152D70B8819C34940695A Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii; x-mac-type="54455854"; x-mac-creator="4D4F5353" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Jones Beene wrote: > Edmund Storms wrote: > > > > This speculation is not valid. U238 is not used in a normal > > reactor. > > Think this must be a typo, Ed. I agree, U238 is present in reactor fuel. However, as I replied to Robin, my statement had to do with the assumption that the detected Pu came from depleted U after it has been previously used in a reactor. I guess it never crossed my mind that someone would take reactor fuel, separate out the U238, and make this into tank rounds. Sorry for the confusion. snip > except it would be to radioactive even after separation > > > of the Pu to be useful for any other purpose. > > Actually the most radioactive components (ash) are the easiest > to separate by far. Nevertheless, the processed U238 still retains significant radioactivity simply because it is too expensive to remove all radioactivity. > > > > We have more than enough depleted U238 without > > using breeder fuel, which at this time is not even being produced. > > Sure we have enough, but spent reactor fuel is even more of a > recurring sunk cost than is DU which was derived from feedstock. > PLUS we recovered untold tons of Pu from those U slugs that went > through the Hanford reactors and those thousands of tons of > irradiate U looks to the Pentagon like just so much more of a > problem to be solved by the ammo. Plus some of those rounds > could have come from our allies and the French are huge in the > business of reprocessing. These are possible scenarios, but is there any proof that the ideas are real? > > > > The presence of minute amounts Pu from natural processes is not > > surprising. > > Then why was it never seen before in DU ubtill Iraq/Bosnia? I imagine that it has been seen before at very low levels, only now someone wants to make it an issue. Just how much Pu are we talking about? > > > > Until the amount of claimed Pu is known, such > > speculation is pointless and potentially harmful to the truth. > > Au contraire. Speculation is almost always helpful, for without > it there is no "prima facie case" to force the truth to come out > into the open - and speculation can easily be squelched by the > truth. Believe me, when the truth will eventually comes out, I > can almost guarantee that you will find that spent reactor fuel > WAS USED in these rounds. On the other hand, I would bet against this possibility. We will just have to wait and see. Unfortunately, no one will believe the government when they deny using spent fuel. > > > True, very finely divided material of any kind has different > > chemical properties compared to bulk material. For you to suggest > > that the nuclear properties might be changed is pure speculation. > > No that nuclear priorities can be changed is pure fact. The only > speculation is whether or not the general case applies to the > case in point. A nucleus has no way of knowing the size of the assembly it occupies. After all, nuclear forces have a much shorter range than chemical forces. How would you justify your previous statement? > > > > Nevertheless, once the UO2 enters the body and is dissolved, the > > ions would have the same chemical and nuclear properties regardless > > of the source. > > Not if the nuclei have been rearranged in a reactor to possess > the quality that is called "super deformity." If you don't know > what I'm talking about, I invite you to follow some of theses 50 > or so references from a Google search, The spin properties of a nucleus, to which your references refer, are changed by applying nonuniform energy. These changes have a very short lifetime, hence would not be present in normal matter. > > http://www.google.com/search?as_q=&num=10&btnG=Google+Search&as_oq=&as_epq=superdeformed+nucleus&as_eq=&as_occt=any&lr=&as_dt=i&as_sitesearch=&safe=off > > > This sickness has been suggested to have a very different source, > > nerve gas and warm Aspartame (Diet Coke) being the most likely. > > I don't think you are going to find hundreds of preteens from > the same village with thyroid cancer due to diet colas. That is an important fact, if true. However, the presence of uranium in their tumors would be easy to detect. Has this been done? Regards, Ed Storms --------------48F152D70B8819C34940695A Content-Type: text/html; charset=us-ascii Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit  

Jones Beene wrote:

Edmund Storms wrote:
 

> This speculation is not valid.  U238 is not used in a normal
> reactor.

Think this must be a typo, Ed.

I agree, U238 is present in reactor fuel. However, as I replied to Robin, my statement had to do with the assumption that the detected Pu came from depleted U after it has been previously used in a reactor.  I guess it never crossed my mind that someone would take reactor fuel, separate out the U238, and make this into tank rounds.  Sorry for the confusion.

snip
 

> except it would be to radioactive even after separation

 
> of the Pu to be useful for any other purpose.

Actually the most radioactive components (ash) are the easiest
to separate by far.

Nevertheless, the processed U238 still retains significant radioactivity simply because it is too expensive to remove all radioactivity.
 

> We have more than enough depleted U238 without
> using breeder fuel, which at this time is not even being produced.

Sure we have enough, but spent reactor fuel is even more of a
recurring sunk cost than is DU which was derived from feedstock.
PLUS we recovered untold tons of Pu from those U slugs that went
through the Hanford reactors and those thousands of tons of
irradiate U looks to the Pentagon like just so much more of a
problem to be solved by the ammo. Plus some of those rounds
could have come from our allies and the French are huge in the
business of reprocessing.

These are possible scenarios, but is there any proof that the ideas are real?
 

> The presence of minute amounts Pu from natural processes is not
> surprising.

Then why was it never seen before in DU ubtill Iraq/Bosnia?

I imagine that it has been seen before at very low levels, only now someone wants to make it an issue. Just how much Pu are we talking about?
 

> Until the amount of claimed Pu is known, such
> speculation is pointless and potentially harmful to the truth.

Au contraire. Speculation is almost always helpful, for without
it there is no "prima facie case" to force the truth to come out
into the open - and speculation can easily be squelched by the
truth. Believe me, when the truth will eventually comes out, I
can almost guarantee that you will find that spent reactor fuel
WAS USED in these rounds.

On the other hand, I would bet against this possibility.  We will just have to wait and see.  Unfortunately, no one will believe the government when they deny using spent fuel.
 
> True, very finely divided material of any kind has different
> chemical properties compared to bulk material.  For you to suggest
> that the nuclear properties might be changed is pure speculation.

No that nuclear priorities can be changed is pure fact. The only
speculation is whether or not the general case applies to the
case in point.

A nucleus has no way of knowing the size of the assembly it occupies.  After all, nuclear forces have a much shorter range than chemical forces.  How would you justify your previous statement?
 

> Nevertheless, once the UO2 enters the body and is dissolved, the
> ions would have the same chemical and nuclear properties regardless
> of the source.

Not if the nuclei have been rearranged in a reactor to possess
the quality that is called "super deformity." If you don't know
what I'm talking about, I invite you to follow some of theses 50
or so references from a Google search,

The spin properties of a nucleus, to which your references refer, are changed by applying nonuniform energy.  These changes have a very short lifetime, hence would not be present in normal matter.
 
http://www.google.com/search?as_q=&num=10&btnG=Google+Search&as_oq=&as_ep q=superdeformed+nucleus&as_eq=&as_occt=any&lr=&as_dt=i&as_sitesearch=&safe=off

> This sickness has been suggested to have a very different source,
> nerve gas and warm Aspartame (Diet Coke) being the most likely.

I don't think you are going to find hundreds of preteens from
the same village with thyroid cancer due to diet colas.

That is an important fact, if true.  However, the presence of uranium in their tumors would be easy to detect.  Has this been done?

Regards,
Ed Storms
  --------------48F152D70B8819C34940695A-- From vortex-l-request eskimo.com Sun Feb 18 17:00:47 2001 Received: (from smartlst localhost) by mx1.eskimo.com (8.9.1a/8.8.8) id QAA17407; Sun, 18 Feb 2001 16:56:43 -0800 Resent-Date: Sun, 18 Feb 2001 16:56:43 -0800 Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" X-Sender: mjones pop.jump.net (Unverified) Message-Id: In-Reply-To: <3A9000D0.1020009 pacbell.net> Date: Sun, 18 Feb 2001 15:11:08 -0600 To: vortex-l eskimo.com From: Mitchell Jones Subject: Re: More on DU toxicity Resent-Message-ID: <"JJfZf3.0.vF4.Az6aw" mx1> Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/40845 X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com Status: O X-Status: >For the doubters: > >Two more surprising stories on DU toxicity appeared today on the >BBC and the message is becoming loud and clear: The Japanese >atomic bomb survivors are simply not typical of what we should >expect from the many types of radiation exposure. > >In one story, small amounts of Pu, which is deadly in milligram >doses or less ***{Plutonium is primarily a beta- and alpha emitter, and so it is only the surface of a grain of plutonium which is dangerous: emissions that take place below the surface merely produce heat. Since alpha and beta- particles have very short range, damage to human tissue requires direct contact with the surface of an emitting substance. Because the vastly greater proportion of plutonium isotopes produced in reactors have halflives in the thousands of years, they aren't really very radioactive, and thus even if directly in contact with human flesh--e.g., lodged in the lungs--the only threat they pose is to produce cancer in 20 or 30 years. Thus it is an extreme exaggeration to claim that Pu is deadly in milligram doses or less. A more accurate statement would be that if you ingest plutonium in milligram doses, you *may* get cancer and die, decades later, assuming that your body fails to get rid of it before then. --MJ}*** , has been found in the rounds. If the so-called >"depleted" material in these rounds has actually been through a >reactor, instead of just the normal non-activating enrichment >process, then it opens up a whole new Pandoras box of previously >unknown possibilities which perhaps wouldn't have shown up on a >typical radiation monitor). > >Among the more speculative possibilities of what can happen to >material which has been irradiated in a reactor for years and >then "cleaned" i.e. putatively deactivated are: - subquark >enrichment? orbital rearrangement of nuclei? shrunken nuclei? a >new kind of radioactivity? Don't laugh yet, wait till you see >hundreds of preteenage Bosnians with thyroid cancer. > >In the case of orbital rearrangement of nuclei, there is some >widely scoffed-at research that suggests that high Z materials >behave far differently when subdivided to micro-aggregations of >a few atoms, which (yes, you guessed it) is not an unexpected >result of impact of a DU round with armor. > >Perhaps this DU ammunition should be called AU, as in activated. > >Here is another story from the Beeb. One suspects that this is >only the tip of a huge iceberg that the US government is saying >doesn't exist, mainly because we refused to believe our own >troops leaving Iraq, some of whom were very sick. ***{Some of the troops leaving any theater of battle are always very sick. The question of relevance, however, is whether more are sick than might be expected under ordinary circumstances, due to ordinary causes. While that may be the case here, I haven't yet seen any convincing evidence to that effect. On the other hand, from a more generalized point-of-view, where's the surprise? After all, inflicting suffering and death on the innocent is the stock in trade of bloated fascist and socialist mega-states. Thus perhaps we should simply assume that these stories are true, until the accused governments flatly prove otherwise. (How's this for a principle of jurisprudence: innocent until proven guilty for individuals; guilty until proven innocent for governments? :-) --Mitchell Jones}*** [snip] > >Jones ________________ Quote of the month: "Law is what the authorities use to ride the country." --Anatoly Schransky From vortex-l-request eskimo.com Sun Feb 18 17:20:06 2001 Received: (from smartlst localhost) by mx1.eskimo.com (8.9.1a/8.8.8) id RAA23742; Sun, 18 Feb 2001 17:14:33 -0800 Resent-Date: Sun, 18 Feb 2001 17:14:33 -0800 Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" X-Sender: mjones pop.jump.net Message-Id: Date: Sun, 18 Feb 2001 19:13:28 -0600 To: vortex-l eskimo.com From: Mitchell Jones Subject: Re: More on DU toxicity Resent-Message-ID: <"UtcEF2.0.to5.uD7aw" mx1> Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/40846 X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com Status: O X-Status: >----- Original Message ----- >From: Jones Beene >To: vortex-l >Sent: Sunday, February 18, 2001 9:05 AM >Subject: More on DU toxicity > >I thought that there is enough "Spontaneous Fission" (from residual U235?)in >Depleted Uranium 238 to breed Plutonium 239. Then enough neutrons from the >S.F. to >fission the Pu239 and so on. Slow but Sure. > >Regards, Frederick ***{It ain't worth worrying about. Pu-239 is an alpha emitter with a half-life of 24,400 years, which means it only emits from the surface and doesn't put out much radiation at any given time. About the only way to kill someone with it quickly would be to pick up a chunk of it and beat them to death. --MJ}*** ________________ Quote of the month: "Law is what the authorities use to ride the country." --Anatoly Schransky From vortex-l-request eskimo.com Sun Feb 18 17:23:20 2001 Received: (from smartlst localhost) by mx1.eskimo.com (8.9.1a/8.8.8) id RAA24982; Sun, 18 Feb 2001 17:18:52 -0800 Resent-Date: Sun, 18 Feb 2001 17:18:52 -0800 Date: Sun, 18 Feb 2001 17:08:32 -0800 From: Jones Beene Subject: Re: More on DU toxicity To: vortex-l eskimo.com Message-id: <3A907210.2020002 pacbell.net> MIME-version: 1.0 Content-type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii; format=flowed Content-transfer-encoding: 7bit User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (Windows; U; Win98; en-US; m18) Gecko/20001108 Netscape6/6.0 X-Accept-Language: en References: <3A9000D0.1020009 pacbell.net> <3A901B71.7C068145@ix.netcom.com> <3A904CB7.5030607 pacbell.net> <3A905738.4CD1FBD@ix.netcom.com> Resent-Message-ID: <"XI3pk.0.G66.yH7aw" mx1> Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/40847 X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com Status: O X-Status: Edmund Storms wrote: >JB That nuclear properties can be changed is pure fact. The only > speculation is whether or not the general case applies to the > case in point. > > A nucleus has no way of knowing the size of the assembly it occupies. > After all, nuclear forces have a much shorter range than chemical > forces. How would you justify your previous statement? Sure it "knows." The space the nucleus occupies - when its external environment is varied between say a crystalline alloy phase and a monatomic state comes part and parcel with an alteration in the overall balance of coulomb forces as felt by the nucleus. Even if very minute this external change can potentially have a cascading effect on a deformed nucleus, particularly one then undergoes, first a liberating expansion to a monatomic state, and then a subsequent compressive interaction by way of an oxidative reaction - after having been ingested. The deformed nucleus might then radiate a gamma and return to normal - or in some cases spontaneous fission might result. In other words, coulomb interactions which would make no difference at all to an un-irradiated nucleus, might make a significant difference to a superdeformed nucleus. Remember, I am only making a prima facie case, based on extending a proven but rare phenomenon to a specific but not yet proven instance. > > Nevertheless, once the UO2 enters the body and is dissolved, the > > ions would have the same chemical and nuclear properties regardless > > of the source. > > Not if the nuclei have been rearranged in a reactor to possess > the quality that is called "super deformity." If you don't know > what I'm talking about, I invite you to follow some of theses 50 > or so references from a Google search, > > The spin properties of a nucleus, to which your references refer, are > changed by applying nonuniform energy. These changes have a very short > lifetime, hence would not be present in normal matter. Not always. In some case the lifetime of a deformed nucleus can be very long indeed. In the case of the most deformed nucleus of all, deuterium, where its minor axis is half or less the dimension of its major axis, we have a lifetime that is several billion years at least. Regards, Jones Beene From vortex-l-request eskimo.com Sun Feb 18 18:31:24 2001 Received: (from smartlst localhost) by mx1.eskimo.com (8.9.1a/8.8.8) id SAA13772; Sun, 18 Feb 2001 18:29:04 -0800 Resent-Date: Sun, 18 Feb 2001 18:29:04 -0800 Message-ID: <005001c09a24$239a7880$b48f85ce fjsparber> Reply-To: "Frederick Sparber" From: "Frederick Sparber" To: Subject: Re: Reply To Header? Date: Sun, 18 Feb 2001 19:29:11 -0800 MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-Priority: 3 X-MSMail-Priority: Normal X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook Express 5.00.2615.200 X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V5.00.2615.200 Resent-Message-ID: <"lZXtM2.0.1N3.mJ8aw" mx1> Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/40848 X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com Status: O X-Status: > Hello Robin: > > Mitchell Jones, like you, said that I have something set wrong > so that instead of the reply going to vortex-l it goes back to me. > > I had no problem until I installed the latest Earthlink (5.0) upgrade. > > Now I don't know which buttons to push to get it fixed. P.S. I use Outlook Express. > > HELP!! > > Frederick > > From vortex-l-request eskimo.com Sun Feb 18 18:46:17 2001 Received: (from smartlst localhost) by mx1.eskimo.com (8.9.1a/8.8.8) id SAA18374; Sun, 18 Feb 2001 18:41:56 -0800 Resent-Date: Sun, 18 Feb 2001 18:41:56 -0800 Message-ID: <008801c09a25$ef4f6840$b48f85ce fjsparber> Reply-To: "Frederick Sparber" From: "Frederick Sparber" To: Subject: Re: Test Date: Sun, 18 Feb 2001 19:42:04 -0800 MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-Priority: 3 X-MSMail-Priority: Normal X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook Express 5.00.2615.200 X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V5.00.2615.200 Resent-Message-ID: <"TtpJn3.0.0V4.qV8aw" mx1> Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/40849 X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com Status: O X-Status: This might work. If anyone wants to reply,please do so. Tnx, Frederick From vortex-l-request eskimo.com Sun Feb 18 19:44:39 2001 Received: (from smartlst localhost) by mx1.eskimo.com (8.9.1a/8.8.8) id TAA05905; Sun, 18 Feb 2001 19:43:09 -0800 Resent-Date: Sun, 18 Feb 2001 19:43:09 -0800 Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1" X-Sender: mjones pop.jump.net Message-Id: In-Reply-To: Date: Sun, 18 Feb 2001 21:42:05 -0600 To: vortex-l eskimo.com From: Mitchell Jones Subject: Re: Neutrons from Electron Impact? Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit X-MIME-Autoconverted: from quoted-printable to 8bit by mx1.eskimo.com id TAA05878 Resent-Message-ID: <"3E7eC1.0.AS1.CP9aw" mx1> Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/40850 X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com Status: O X-Status: >At 7:54 PM 2/16/1, Mitchell Jones wrote: >>***{Hi Horace. I decided to go through your mathematical reasoning with a >>fine-toothed comb. Sorry for the delay. --MJ}*** >> >>Horace Heffner wrote: >> >>>My speculations are based roughly on the idea that the high energy 35 keV >>>electrons would have, in proximity to the nucleus, a kinetic energy of >>>about 511 keV + 35 kev = 546 keV >> >>***{At "infinity," by definition, the potential energy of the electron with >>respect to a 1 esu charge--e.g., a proton--is negligible. Given--also at >>"infinity"--a kinetic energy of 35 keV pointing straight toward that >>proton, the total kinetic energy of the electron upon impact will be the >>sum of the 35 keV with which it started, and the change in its potential >>energy when it reaches the surface of the nucleus--typically at a radius of >>about .5x10^-12 cm. > > >This is an interesting question, the size of the nucleus. The diameter of >the nucleus as given in Halliday and Resnick, third printing, 1963 ***{That was my undergraduate physics text, as it happens. I've still got it around here somewhere, but it is buried too deep to be easily retrievable. (In my personal library, the "stacks" really are stacks! :-) --MJ}*** , ranges >as follows: H 1x10^-15 m to heavies (like U) 7x10^-15 m. However, what >about the size of the deBroglie wavelength? A slow interaction should >involve a nucleus with a larger cross section (wavelength) than a fast one? >Unfortuantely I don't know of any tables available for electron-deuteron >cross sections. If they exist then they are probably highly distorted due >to the need for a weak interaction to obtain electron capture, which would >produce the very short half-life nn particle. > >It seems to me, from one perspective that the electron and nucleus should >be visualized as balls of charge having radii determined each in the >other's frame of reference, with the charge distributed throughout the >balls. The interesting part occurs when the balls begin to overlap. The >attraction doesn't drop to zero but gradually wanes until the centers of >charge overlap, when the force drops to zero. However, I have read various >things (sorry no refs handy) that indicate this is not a good mental model >except maybe in calxulating the force of piezoelectric effects, where the >nucleus gets displaced from the center of charge of the electron cloud. I >think this model might be reasonably be extended to our case of the >electron "falling into the Coulomb well," at least to obtain a rule fo thmb >estimate. However, other visualization of the electron quantum waveform >have it being a point jumping all over the place. This visulaization is >apparently more appropriate for approximating the likelyhood of a weak >interaction based on the range of the weak force and probability of the >point-like electron being in the nucleus. > >In the case of the point-like charge model, another significant force takes >root as the electron approaches the nucleus the 1/r^3 dipole magnetic >force. The incoming electron rotates to align its magnetic field in the >direction opposite the magnetic field of the nucleus. If the neutron and >protron in the D nucleus retain their identities, i.e. their quarj triads >remain intact and retain their magnetic moments, then the D nucleus >consists of two opposed magnets, one will be attracted and one repulsed by >the electron's magnetic field, and one or the other or both will be torqued >in opposing directions by the electron's magnetic field, and this torque >will result in a tendency to recess in mutually opposed directions. > > >> >>The potential energy at radius r is defined as the work required to lower >>the electron from infinity to its position at distance r from the proton, >>and is computed by determining the average value of F over the interval >>from r to infinity, and then multiplying that value by the distance from >>infinity to r. The average value of F over that interval would be [1/(ƒ - >>r) Int(r,ƒ)F(ƒ - r)dr = Int(r,ƒ)(-e^2/r^2)dr = -e^2 Int(r,ƒ)(1/r^2)dr = >>-e^2 (r,ƒ)[-1/r] = -e^2[0 - (-1/r)] = -e^2/r. >> >>In the present case, -e^2/r = -(4.8x10^-10)^2/(.5x10^-12) = 4.61x10^-7 >>ergs, and, at 6.25x10^11 ev/erg, that becomes 288125 ev, or 288 keV. Hence >>288 keV, not 511 keV, has been transformed from potential to kinetic energy >>when the electron strikes the nucleus. Thus the total kinetic energy at >>that point would be 288 + 35 = 323 keV. >> >>Therefore, by what reasoning did you obtain 511 keV rather than 288 keV? > > >Well you got me there! 8^) I picked it out of memory from some other calc >where the kinetic energy gained by the incoming electron equalled (doubled) >its own mass. When I started writing the post I didn't expect it to get as >detailed as it did, which even so was not nearly enough. To do a good job >I suppose both the Coulomb force and the magnetic forces would have to be >computed on a relativistic basis, with compensation for waveform overlap. >However, if I recall correctly Robert Eachus's posts of the past on this >subject, the magnetic bond of the protron and neutron in the D nucleus is >about half the binding energy, or about 0.5 MeV. If the electron could >enter the nucleus (if it really is merely a point ***{No real entity, obviously, can be a dimensionless mathematical point. To exist, a thing must have inertial mass and occupy space, and the popular fad which claims otherwise is simply nonsense. The fact that the electron must have specific dimensions, however, does not mean it must be easy to measure those dimensions, and, apparently, it is not. The old number from the 1930's, based on light scattering experiments, supported the formula r = e^2/mc^2 = (4.8x10^-10 esu)^2/[(9.11x10^-28 gm)(3x10^10 m/s)^2] = 2.81x10^-13 cm, but there are some recent results which suggest the electron is much smaller than that in one of its dimensions. (It may have the form of a spinning disc or a toroid, for example.) --MJ}*** ) it could completely >nullify this portion of the nuclear bond - a very unique quality to the D >nucleus. In addition, it would supply another .5 MeV energy to the >electron. Further, if the electron is merely a point then it can >accelerate all the way down to a radius of about 2x10^15 m ***{The nucleus is just a region in which massive particles fly about at enormous velocities in somewhat erratic orbits of their own--which means: it probably doesn't have a clearly demarcated surface like a billiard ball, and it is reasonable to suppose that the electron can accelerate all the way down to that "surface" even if the electron has a non-zero radius. --MJ}*** (I don't think >this is correct though. ***{My faith is restored. :-) --MJ}*** ) In light of the above uncertainties, an arbitrary >selection of .511 MeV was just that, arbitrary. I liked it because it >seemed to fit the common sense feeling of the probability of the electron >acting as a catalyst. > > >> >>--Mitchell Jones}*** >> >>, and, including rest mass of 511 keV, a >>>total energy of 1057 keV for use in the relativistic momentum calculation: >> >>***{As per the above, that should be 834 keV. --MJ}*** > >Or maybe 2 MeV? ***{It depends on what collision we are talking about. If we are talking about a collision between an electron and a naked proton, then in theory you could get more than 2 MeV. To see how, let's take the radius of the proton as .6x10^-13 cm (from *The Particle Hunters*, by Neeman and Kirsch, pg. 61) and take the charge of the electron/proton as -/+ 4.8x10^-10 esu. Result: the potential energy of the electron at the surface of the proton is P = -e^2/r = -(4.8x10^-10)^2/(.6x10^-13) = -3.8x10^-6 ergs, and since there are 6.25x10^11 ev/erg, that becomes -2.4x10^6 ev, or -2.4 MeV. Thus the change in the potential energy of the electron as it moved from "infinity"--i.e., far enough away to have an approximately zero potential energy--to the surface of the proton, is 0 - (-2.4) = 2.4 MeV. However, the chance of an electron falling straight down into a nucleus in the manner assumed by the above calculation is, in the plasma of a gas discharge tube, essentially zero. The reason: that scenario would require that the electron have at "infinity" an *exactly zero* component of velocity perpendicular to the line of centers of the two particles, and such a state of affairs is virtually inconceivable. The problem is that if the electron has even a tiny perpendicular component of velocity at "infinity," then conservation of angular momentum will enormously increase it as the distance from the proton decreases, eventually forcing the electron into one of the stable Bohr orbits. Bottom line: special circumstances are required, in order to somehow force the electron to surrender its perpendicular component of velocity as it approaches the proton. The only situation that I know of which could lead to that outcome is simply this: the electron and proton must meet under conditions where there isn't enough space for the electron to settle into one of the stable orbits. For example, they may meet in a loaded region of a palladium lattice. In that case, even the lowest of the stable orbits is not available, and, logically, the electron would spiral down to the surface of the nucleus, giving off 2.4 - .78 = 1.62 MeV and becoming a neutron. The problem with such a scenario is that (a) if the resulting neutrons come out of the cathode, they will be detected; (b) if the 1.62 MeV comes out as gammas, it will be detected; and (c) if the neutrons induce transmutations in the lattice, the resulting radionuclides will be detected. Thus a complex array of assumptions is required to explain why such results, for CF, typically are *not* detected, and we have the various theories--hydrino, protoneutron, light lepton, hydrax, etc.--that have been brought forward by various individuals, including myself. With the Sternglass experiment, however, those difficulties go away: the neutrons are there in large numbers, and if Sternglass had looked for them, it seems likely that the gammas and transmutation byproducts would have been detected as well. Hence this experiment is an entirely robust result that both violates the conventional paradigm, and produces the emissions that logic would lead us to expect. My explanation for it, therefore, is just as noted above: the electrons strike protons in regions of the tungsten lattice where there is not enough room for them to orbit at the n = 1 radius, and so they spiral down into the nucleus, giving off 1.62 MeV and combining with the proton to form a neutron. After all, why not? :-) --Mitchell Jones}*** >>> E^2 = E0^2 + (pc)^2 >> >>***{The following is for those who have never seen a detailed derivation of >>the above. > >[snip] > >>Einstein distinguished between m, the "rest mass," and m', the >>increased mass that occurs with velocity, as follows: >> >>m' = m/[1 - (V^2/c^2)]^.5 >> >[snip explanation] > >note: I think there was independent experimental evidence that supported >the above equation before Einstein derived it. At any rate it is a good >place to start. ***{The Lorentz transform--i.e., using (1 - V^2/c^2)^.5 to modify other expressions--antedated Einstein's various papers, but I don't know of anyone using it to modify mass before he did so. --MJ}*** >>E^2 = E0^2 + (pc)^2 (7 >> >>Q.E.D. > >Here is a brief derivation of the above from your starting point, but with >E = mc^2 conveniently assumed: > > m = m0/[1 - (V^2/c^2)]^.5 > >now square and multiply both sides by c^4(1-(v^2/c^2)) to get: > > m^2c^4 - m^2v^2c^2 = m0^2c^4 > > (mc^2)^2 = (m0c^2)^2 + (mvc)^2 > > (mc^2)^2 = (m0c^2)^2 + (pc)^2 > >It is at this point you need to know E=mc^2. ***{No, you needed to know it from the beginning. This series of manipulations was guided by the foreknowledge that the endpoint--the form given above--was significant. And the significance of that form was based on the awareness that E = mc^2. That's why the brief derivation given above, while very interesting, could not have formed the basis for the discovery that E + mc^2, and is not useful for conveying that basis to students. Instead it is necessary to struggle through the more meaningful albeit longer and more difficult pathway, in order to obtain a formula containing a symbol for kinetic energy. Only when that has been done does it become possible to recognize the term denoting the total energy of a body at rest, when it is finally found. (It is always possible to come up with a more direct path, once the location of an object has been discovered. The explorer, however, is always forced to hack his way through the undergrowth. :-) --MJ}*** >>Fascinating stuff, in my opinion. > >Yep. > >> >>--Mitchell Jones}*** >> >>> >>>or >>> p = ([E^2 - E0^2]^0.5)/c >>> >>> p = ([(1.057x10^6 ev)^2 - (5.11x10^5 eV)^2]^0.5)/c >> >>***{You do not show a conversion factor to mks energy units in the above. > > >No need to. My TI-89 calculator takes eV as a unit of energy. ***{Um, you may not need to plug a conversion factor into your calculator to get the right answer, but you do need to show one in your formula, if you want your readers to follow your reasoning. --MJ}*** [snip] >>, about a 1/10,000 chance >>>of being "found in the nucleus" at any moment during the interaction >> >>***{If you assume that the electron will be somewhere within a "matter >>wave" of radius lambda/2 then, using your lambda, that gives a >>cross-sectional area of ¼[(.528x10^-12)^2] = 8.76x10^-25 m^2, whereas the >>cross-sectional area of a typical nucleus, again using your number, would >>be ¼[(1x10^-14)^2] = 3.14x10^-28 m^2. Thus the probability that the >>electron would pass into the nucleus would be 3.14x10^-28/8.76x10^-25 = >>3.59x10^-4, which, as you say, is roughly 1 chance in 10,000. > >Yes, but unfortunately a fairly arbitrary number on my part. I simply >wanted to show the idea might be in some kind of ballpark of reality. ***{How did you do that? From my perspective you either calculate, or you don't obtain a number. (Did you use a ouija board? :-) --MJ}*** >>Using my numbers, on the other hand, the same probability would be: >> >>¼[(.5x10^-14)^2]/¼[(1.89x10^-12)^2] = (.5x10^-14)^2/(1.89x10^-12)^2 = >>7x10^-6. >> >>The problem with such reasoning, however, is that it ignores the fact that >>the electron will not be approaching just one tungsten atom, but a surface >>consisting of millions of them, > >The definition of stripping that I used doesn't require that the electrons >enter the tungsten. I think the tungsten's role is primarily to be able to >be hot enough to be a good low resistance electron source. The electron, >once it interacts with a D nucleus will scatter and find other nucleii. >Being light, if it doesn't come out of the nucleus with a hadron, then it >should carry away most of its momentum. The momentum stealer for the >electron is the brehmstrahlung and interaction with other electrons. ***{Exactly: if it doesn't hit a nucleus in the first layer of W atoms, it will lose too much energy to reach the nucleus of a second one, I think. --MJ}*** Since >the deutron has only one or maybe no electrons, the electron has a prospect >of interacting with lots of nucleii, and thus the probability of a hit is >greatly increased through repetition. ***{It is only when approaching a naked proton that the electron has the prospect of getting the extra 2.4 MeV that it needs to produce a neutron, and the chance of its hitting even one naked proton during its passage from cathode to anode is very slim, due to the requirement that it have an *exactly zero* velocity component perpendicular to the line of centers. --MJ}*** Note that, if the electron could >lose more than 35 keV to brehmsstrahlung, due to its large energy in close >proximity to the nucleus, then the electron is energetically trapped and a >source of free energy exists right there via the electron extraction of ZPE >to climb back up out of the well. ***{The only situation which permits the electron to tap the potential energy it has with respect to a specific deuterium nucleus is the one where the nucleus is *naked*--i.e, sans electrons--which happens to also be the specific case in which bremsstrahlung cannot happen. --MJ}*** The electron current density is nearly >as critical a value as is the initial energy of the electron before it >heads into the coulomb well, because a large flux causes many repeated >fallings into the well for each electron. Another factor is that the >electron is a guided missile, a magic bullet. Unlike the case in fusion, >the electrostatic force is not a barrier that repels the electron, but >rather a well into which it falls. Since its initial kinetic energy of >35,000 volts is small compared to the energy it acquires from the nucleus, >it should tend to hit the mark fairly closely. ***{No, no, no, no. It is a virtual impossibility that an electron have no perpendicular component of velocity vis-a-vis a particular deuteron, and if it *does* have such a component, however small, then that component will be *enormously* exaggerated as the electron falls into the Coulomb well, due to conservation of angular momentum. (Angular momentum, L, is the product of the moment of inertia, I, and the angular velocity, w, and is such that L = Iw. Since the stable orbits of hydrogen and deuterium are circular, I = m(r^2), w = 2¼/T, (where T is the period of the orbit) and we obtain: L = m(r^2)( 2¼/T) = mr(2¼r/T) = mrV, where V denotes the perpendicular component of velocity. Since angular momentum is conserved, we have: mr1V1 = mr2V2, or r1V1 = r2V2 The implication: when r decreases as the electron approaches the proton or deuteron, the perpendicular velocity, V, will increase proportionately. Result: the probability of an electron striking a direct hit on a deuteron inside a gas-discharge tube is infinitesimally small. As a practical matter, it doesn't happen. --Mitchell Jones}*** Since, except in the rare >case where a weak interaction occurs, the electron is freed no matter >whether the D nucleus is fissioned or not, its role is purely catalytic. > > >>with lots of space in between. Result: you >>can't assume that *any* W nucleus will fall within the cross-sectional area >>of an incoming "matter wave". Since the W-W bond length at 25 deg. C is >>2.7409x10^-10 meters, with each sheet laid out in a square array, there >>will be [1/(2.7409x10^-10)]^2 = 1.33x10^19 nuclei/m^2. Thus in the wave >>packet cross sectional area of ¼(1.89x10^-12)^2 = 1/12x10^-23 m, there will >>be (1.33x10^19)(1/12x10^-23) = 1.49x10^-4 nuclei, on average, rather than 1 >>nucleus, as you assumed. Thus the actual probability would be >>(1.49x10^-4)(7x10^-6) = 1.04x10^-9, or about 1 chance in a billion. > >The more nucleii in the vicinity the more chance the electron has to >repeatedly fall into wells. The main problem is keeping the electron >energy up, and making the current density and D density as large as >possible consistent with sustaining a high relative velocity. Note that a >plasma pinch meets these criteria extremely well. It all the electorns >tend to be going one direction while all the nucleii tend to be going the >other, then the electrons will tend to lose less kinetic energy to each >other. ***{Yes, but the problem of getting rid of the perpendicular component of velocity remains, and kills all hope of producing significant numbers of neutrons this way in a gas discharge tube. The source of the neutron generating reaction in the Sternglass experiment, therefore, must have been the tungsten lattice on the cathode end of the system, where it would be reasonable to suppose that, due to the confined conditions within the lattice, significant numbers of electrons were stripped of their perpendicular components of velocity, and forced to fall irreversibly down into the Coulomb potential well, thereby striking protons or deuterons, and generating neutrons. --MJ}*** >>Of course, it is a bit more complicated than that, since beneath layer >>number one of W atoms, there will be layer number two. However, an electron >>that makes it through the first layer is likely to be deflected and of much >>lower energy, due to its passage through the thick electron shell structure >>of a W atom in the first layer. Hence it is only if it happens to go >>through the hole between shells, at the center of a square, that the second >>layer becomes relevant to the calculation, and if you factor that in, I >>doubt it will improve the odds very much. > >Yes, all true, but the suggested catalytic action of the electron is not >upon the tungsten, but upon the D nucleus in plasma form. ***{But it won't work, Horace. :-) --MJ}*** > >Regards, > >Horace Heffner ________________ Quote of the month: "Law is what the authorities use to ride the country." --Anatoly Schransky From vortex-l-request eskimo.com Sun Feb 18 19:46:32 2001 Received: (from smartlst localhost) by mx1.eskimo.com (8.9.1a/8.8.8) id TAA06780; Sun, 18 Feb 2001 19:45:38 -0800 Resent-Date: Sun, 18 Feb 2001 19:45:38 -0800 Message-ID: <412001211944528660 earthlink.net> X-EM-Version: 5, 0, 0, 0 X-EM-Registration: #3003520714B31D032830 Reply-To: fjsparber earthlink.net X-Mailer: EarthLink MailBox 5.03.42 (Windows) From: "Frederick Sparber" To: "vortex-leskimo.com" Subject: Re: Test II Date: Sun, 18 Feb 2001 20:45:28 -0800 MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary="----=_NextPart_84815C5ABAF209EF376268C8" Resent-Message-ID: <"aKgis3.0.sf1.YR9aw" mx1> Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/40851 X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com Status: O X-Status: ------=_NextPart_84815C5ABAF209EF376268C8 Content-type: text/plain; charset=US-ASCII Still Trying. :-) --- Frederick Sparber --- fjsparber earthlink.net --- EarthLink: It's your Internet. ------=_NextPart_84815C5ABAF209EF376268C8 Content-Type: text/html; charset=US-ASCII

Still Trying.  :-)
 
--- Frederick Sparber
--- EarthLink: It's your Internet.
 

------=_NextPart_84815C5ABAF209EF376268C8-- From vortex-l-request eskimo.com Sun Feb 18 19:56:18 2001 Received: (from smartlst localhost) by mx1.eskimo.com (8.9.1a/8.8.8) id TAA10921; Sun, 18 Feb 2001 19:53:39 -0800 Resent-Date: Sun, 18 Feb 2001 19:53:39 -0800 From: Robin van Spaandonk To: vortex-l eskimo.com Subject: Re: More on DU toxicity Date: Mon, 19 Feb 2001 13:19:43 +1100 Organization: Improving Message-ID: <7k019t495nl6r03okijraegrbdotu8oaal 4ax.com> References: In-Reply-To: X-Mailer: Forte Agent 1.8/32.548 MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit X-MIME-Autoconverted: from quoted-printable to 8bit by mx1.eskimo.com id TAA10871 Resent-Message-ID: <"RN3Xu1.0.Gg2.1Z9aw" mx1> Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/40852 X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com Status: O X-Status: In reply to Mitchell Jones's message of Sun, 18 Feb 2001 19:13:28 -0600: [snip] >***{It ain't worth worrying about. Pu-239 is an alpha emitter with a >half-life of 24,400 years, which means it only emits from the surface and >doesn't put out much radiation at any given time. About the only way to >kill someone with it quickly would be to pick up a chunk of it and beat >them to death. --MJ}*** [snip] Are there any Pu compounds that are chemically toxic (or Pu itself)? Regards, Robin van Spaandonk A Future For Humanity see: http://users.bigpond.net.au/rvanspaa/ From vortex-l-request eskimo.com Sun Feb 18 20:02:51 2001 Received: (from smartlst localhost) by mx1.eskimo.com (8.9.1a/8.8.8) id UAA15287; Sun, 18 Feb 2001 20:02:05 -0800 Resent-Date: Sun, 18 Feb 2001 20:02:05 -0800 Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" X-Sender: mjones pop.jump.net Message-Id: In-Reply-To: <008801c09a25$ef4f6840$b48f85ce fjsparber> Date: Sun, 18 Feb 2001 21:59:52 -0600 To: "Frederick Sparber" From: Mitchell Jones Subject: Re: Test Cc: vortex-l eskimo.com Resent-Message-ID: <"A6lxg1.0.nk3.yg9aw" mx1> Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/40853 X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com Status: O X-Status: >This might work. If anyone wants to reply,please do so. > >Tnx, Frederick ***{It didn't work. Your "reply-to" header is still wrong. I had to carbon vortex to get this done in one shot. :-( Since I use Eudora Pro rather than Outlook Express, I'm afraid I can't tell you what to do to fix the problem, other than suggesting that you read the manual, if you have one, or that you send a query to the Outlook Express website. Another idea: find a usenet newsgroup that discusses problems with vendor software, and post a query there. (That will work pdq, guaranteed.) --Mitchell Jones}*** ________________ Quote of the month: "Law is what the authorities use to ride the country." --Anatoly Schransky From vortex-l-request eskimo.com Sun Feb 18 20:11:51 2001 Received: (from smartlst localhost) by mx1.eskimo.com (8.9.1a/8.8.8) id UAA18802; Sun, 18 Feb 2001 20:11:13 -0800 Resent-Date: Sun, 18 Feb 2001 20:11:13 -0800 Message-ID: <412001211951057730 earthlink.net> X-EM-Version: 5, 0, 0, 0 X-EM-Registration: #3003520714B31D032830 Reply-To: fjsparber earthlink.net X-Mailer: EarthLink MailBox 5.03.42 (Windows) From: "Frederick Sparber" To: vortex-l eskimo.com Subject: Re: Test Date: Sun, 18 Feb 2001 21:10:57 -0800 MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary="----=_NextPart_84815C5ABAF209EF376268C8" Resent-Message-ID: <"uR25Q2.0.db4.Xp9aw" mx1> Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/40854 X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com Status: O X-Status: ------=_NextPart_84815C5ABAF209EF376268C8 Content-type: text/plain; charset=US-ASCII ----- Original Message ----- From: Mitchell Jones To: Frederick Sparber Cc: vortex-l eskimo.com Sent: 2/18/01 8:03:08 PM Subject: Re: Test Thanks Mitchell. Enough Trauma for one day. :-) These so-called upgrades have me caught between Microsoft and Earthlink's software. Regards, Frederick This might work. If anyone wants to reply,please do so. Tnx, Frederick ***{It didn't work. Your "reply-to" header is still wrong. I had to carbon vortex to get this done in one shot. :-( Since I use Eudora Pro rather than Outlook Express, I'm afraid I can't tell you what to do to fix the problem, other than suggesting that you read the manual, if you have one, or that you send a query to the Outlook Express website. Another idea: find a usenet newsgroup that discusses problems with vendor software, and post a query there. (That will work pdq, guaranteed.) --Mitchell Jones}*** ________________ Quote of the month: "Law is what the authorities use to ride the country." --Anatoly Schransky --- Frederick Sparber --- fjsparber earthlink.net --- EarthLink: It's your Internet. ------=_NextPart_84815C5ABAF209EF376268C8 Content-Type: text/html; charset=US-ASCII
 
----- Original Message -----
To: Frederick Sparber
Sent: 2/18/01 8:03:08 PM
Subject: Re: Test
 
Thanks Mitchell.    Enough Trauma for one day.  :-)
 
These so-called upgrades have me caught between Microsoft and Earthlink's software.
 
 
Regards,   Frederick

>This might work.   If anyone wants to reply,please do so.
>
>Tnx,     Frederick
 
***{It didn't work. Your "reply-to" header is still wrong. I had to carbon
vortex to get this done in one shot. :-(
 
Since I use Eudora Pro rather than Outlook Express, I'm afraid I can't tell
you what to do to fix the problem, other than suggesting that you read the
manual, if you have one, or that you send a query to the Outlook Express
website. Another idea: find a usenet newsgroup that discusses problems with
vendor software, and post a query there. (That will work pdq, guaranteed.)
 
--Mitchell Jones}***
 
 
 
________________
Quote of the month:
 
"Law is what the authorities use to ride the country." --Anatoly Schransky
 
 

 
--- Frederick Sparber
--- EarthLink: It's your Internet.
 
------=_NextPart_84815C5ABAF209EF376268C8-- From vortex-l-request eskimo.com Sun Feb 18 20:29:30 2001 Received: (from smartlst localhost) by mx1.eskimo.com (8.9.1a/8.8.8) id UAA25158; Sun, 18 Feb 2001 20:28:30 -0800 Resent-Date: Sun, 18 Feb 2001 20:28:30 -0800 Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" X-Sender: mjones pop.jump.net (Unverified) Message-Id: In-Reply-To: <7k019t495nl6r03okijraegrbdotu8oaal 4ax.com> References: Date: Sun, 18 Feb 2001 22:19:00 -0600 To: vortex-l eskimo.com From: Mitchell Jones Subject: Re: More on DU toxicity Resent-Message-ID: <"rrZJH1.0.096.k3Aaw" mx1> Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/40855 X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com Status: O X-Status: >In reply to Mitchell Jones's message of Sun, 18 Feb 2001 19:13:28 -0600: >[snip] >>***{It ain't worth worrying about. Pu-239 is an alpha emitter with a >>half-life of 24,400 years, which means it only emits from the surface and >>doesn't put out much radiation at any given time. About the only way to >>kill someone with it quickly would be to pick up a chunk of it and beat >>them to death. --MJ}*** >[snip] >Are there any Pu compounds that are chemically toxic (or Pu itself)? ***{Since it isn't an element that occurs naturally--or, at any rate, not in significant quantities--I doubt that much is known about its chemistry. If it does have chemical toxicity, either in compounds or in pure form, it is no different from thousands of other substances that require special handling in that regard. In any case, my intent in the above was to downplay the alleged radiation danger, which is much ado about very little. Frankly, I am sick and tired of hearing people chant that plutonium has a halflife of "thousands of years," as if that makes it more dangerous, rather than less so. In point of fact, if an ounce of Pu-239 had a half-life of 1 second, it would instantly fry everyone in the vicinity; whereas with a half-life of 24,400 years, nobody in the vicinity would even notice it, unless some ignoramus screamed: "AAAUGH!!! THAT'S PLUTONIUM 239, THE MOST DEADLY SUBSTANCE KNOWN TO MAN!!!!!!" --Mitchell Jones}*** >Regards, > >Robin van Spaandonk > >A Future For Humanity see: http://users.bigpond.net.au/rvanspaa/ ________________ Quote of the month: "Law is what the authorities use to ride the country." --Anatoly Schransky From vortex-l-request eskimo.com Sun Feb 18 21:06:26 2001 Received: (from smartlst localhost) by mx1.eskimo.com (8.9.1a/8.8.8) id VAA02771; Sun, 18 Feb 2001 21:01:40 -0800 Resent-Date: Sun, 18 Feb 2001 21:01:40 -0800 From: Robin van Spaandonk To: vortex-l eskimo.com Subject: Re: Neutrons from Electron Impact? Date: Mon, 19 Feb 2001 16:01:05 +1100 Organization: Improving Message-ID: References: In-Reply-To: X-Mailer: Forte Agent 1.8/32.548 MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit X-MIME-Autoconverted: from quoted-printable to 8bit by mx1.eskimo.com id VAA02742 Resent-Message-ID: <"uAbp23.0.Ch.pYAaw" mx1> Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/40856 X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com Status: O X-Status: In reply to Mitchell Jones's message of Sun, 18 Feb 2001 21:42:05 -0600: [snip] >lattice. In that case, even the lowest of the stable orbits is not >available, and, logically, the electron would spiral down to the surface of >the nucleus, giving off 2.4 - .78 = 1.62 MeV and becoming a neutron. [snip] The mass of a proton and an electron together is .78 MeV short of the mass of a neutron, which means that not only do you not get any energy out when combining an electron and a proton to form a neutron, but you actually have to add .78 MeV on top of what you already have. IOW as the electron is accelerated toward the proton, and the potential energy decreases, the kinetic energy increases to compensate. The kinetic energy of the electron however is not something that you can add on to the combined mass electron and proton "to get even more energy". It was already included in the mass energy of the pair before this little jaunt took off. This in itself is interesting. If the combined mass energy of the hydrogen atom (including field energy) is written: c^2 x (mp + me), then it would appear that the field energy forms part of the mass of the particles. Note that in all the text books, the *total* mass of the hydrogen atom ( including any mass attributable to field energy) is given as mp+me. Regards, Robin van Spaandonk A Future For Humanity see: http://users.bigpond.net.au/rvanspaa/ From vortex-l-request eskimo.com Sun Feb 18 21:29:09 2001 Received: (from smartlst localhost) by mx1.eskimo.com (8.9.1a/8.8.8) id VAA10013; Sun, 18 Feb 2001 21:22:51 -0800 Resent-Date: Sun, 18 Feb 2001 21:22:51 -0800 From: Robin van Spaandonk To: vortex-l eskimo.com Subject: Re: Neutrons from Electron Impact? Date: Mon, 19 Feb 2001 16:22:14 +1100 Organization: Improving Message-ID: <6ab19t0pm6o8pnnr43ancem3c3v2jfltne 4ax.com> References: In-Reply-To: X-Mailer: Forte Agent 1.8/32.548 MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit X-MIME-Autoconverted: from quoted-printable to 8bit by mx1.eskimo.com id VAA09985 Resent-Message-ID: <"956MG2.0.NS2.gsAaw" mx1> Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/40857 X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com Status: O X-Status: In reply to Robin van Spaandonk's message of Mon, 19 Feb 2001 16:01:05 +1100: >This in itself is interesting. If the combined mass energy of the hydrogen >atom (including field energy) is written: > >c^2 x (mp + me), then it would appear that the field energy forms part of Make that c^2 x (mp +me) - 13.6 eV >the mass of the particles. > >Note that in all the text books, the *total* mass of the hydrogen atom ( >including any mass attributable to field energy) is given as mp+me. (with appropriate change here too). Regards, Robin van Spaandonk A Future For Humanity see: http://users.bigpond.net.au/rvanspaa/ From vortex-l-request eskimo.com Sun Feb 18 21:37:15 2001 Received: (from smartlst localhost) by mx1.eskimo.com (8.9.1a/8.8.8) id VAA12734; Sun, 18 Feb 2001 21:31:50 -0800 Resent-Date: Sun, 18 Feb 2001 21:31:50 -0800 Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" X-Sender: mjones pop.jump.net Message-Id: In-Reply-To: References: <4.2.0.58.20010216083952.009633f0 postoffice.swbell.net> Date: Sun, 18 Feb 2001 23:30:44 -0600 To: vortex-l eskimo.com From: Mitchell Jones Subject: Sternglass Experiment Resent-Message-ID: <"GXBRt3.0.p63.5_Aaw" mx1> Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/40858 X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com Status: O X-Status: Keith Nagel wrote: >Hi All. > >No mention was made about geometry of electrodes, gas fill pressure, >etc. The experimental description by Mitchell was quite vague, and I will >repost it here > >>>***{Ernest Sternglass did an experiment back in the '50's in which he >>>passed 35000 volts between two tungsten electrodes inside a >hydrogen-filled >>>tube, and generated lots of neutrons. This result had physicists >scratching >>>their heads at the time because, according to theory, an electron needs to >>>be accelerated through a potential of roughly 780000 volts in order to >slam >>>into a proton with enough energy to produce a neutron. Nobody ever came up >>>with an explanation for the result that accorded well with prevailing >>>theory, and so they simply stopped talking about it. > >I presume from this description that a glow discharge was established >at 35KV and the effect was noted. It is a known experimental fact >that stripping can occur as low as 20KV, as other list members can >confirm. Mitchell's source claimed this was tested for, as follows > >"The possibility that a small normal admixture of deuterium, a form of >heavy hydrogen, was the source of neutrons was eliminated both >theoretically and subsequently by deliberately adding known amounts of this >gas and measuring the neutron production rate. To everyone's consternation, >no one in the physics department was able to suggest a known nuclear >reaction that might explain the observed activity." > >Perhaps Mitchell can write in the relevant passages from the book >describing the experiment, if there is any more than what was >presented. ***{There was a lot more, and too much for me to copy it all verbatim onto this list, though there were some technical details missing that would have been mandatory if the experiment had been published in a physics journal. I will, however, be happy to respond to specific questions about the design, to the extent that the writeup in the book permits me to do so. As I said, I think Sternglass is still alive. Since he clearly considered this experiment to be important, I'll bet he would deluge us with technical detail if we could obtain his e-mail or snail-mail address. Does anybody have any suggestions in that regard? --MJ}*** I don't agree with Horace that you'd automatically >have an arc discharge, but I understand his concern. A rather large >tube would be required to sustain the 35KV, but it certainly >seems feasable. I do question whether their tests for stripping >were adequate. ***{As it happens, Einstein himself followed this experiment with interest, and corresponded with Sternglass about it. He apparently considered the stripping tests to be foolproof, and saw only one possible conventional explanation. Here is the pertinent passage: "A few days after I sent my letter to Einstein, a reply arrived that did in fact contain a possibvle explanation of my anomalous result.... After pointing out that an electron would have to acquire an energy of 780,000 volts to form a neutron, Einstein suggested that perhaps more than the energy produced by the applied potential might become available if more than one electron were to give up its energy to a proton at the same time, something that is conceivable according to quantum theory. He ended his letter by saying that since the results of the experiment s were clearly important, further pursuit of the method would be necessary. He also raised the question whether it might not be advantageous to use an electron beam of known energy, and let it fall on a solid target such as paraffin that contained hydrogen so that the energy of the electrons could be brought under better control." Sternglass was not able to immediately conduct the experiment suggested by Einstein, but he eventually did so: "...some nine years later at the Westinghouse Research Laboratories, I finally had an opportunity to carry out the experiment with a separate electron bean interacting with both solid and gaseous targets in the form suggested by Einstein, but no neutrons were produiced. To this day, just exactly how neutrons can be formed at much lower energies than expected in the complex environment of a gas-discharge tube remains a mystery." So there you have it: the only theory Einstein could think of was shot down. Thus this result looks eerily like CF to me. --Mitchell Jones}*** > >K. ________________ Quote of the month: "Law is what the authorities use to ride the country." --Anatoly Schransky From vortex-l-request eskimo.com Sun Feb 18 22:10:20 2001 Received: (from smartlst localhost) by mx1.eskimo.com (8.9.1a/8.8.8) id WAA22865; Sun, 18 Feb 2001 22:05:51 -0800 Resent-Date: Sun, 18 Feb 2001 22:05:51 -0800 Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" X-Sender: mjones pop.jump.net Message-Id: In-Reply-To: References: Date: Mon, 19 Feb 2001 00:01:11 -0600 To: vortex-l eskimo.com From: Mitchell Jones Subject: Re: Neutrons from Electron Impact? Resent-Message-ID: <"6R7L.0.4b5.-UBaw" mx1> Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/40859 X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com Status: O X-Status: >In reply to Mitchell Jones's message of Sun, 18 Feb 2001 21:42:05 -0600: >[snip] >>lattice. In that case, even the lowest of the stable orbits is not >>available, and, logically, the electron would spiral down to the surface of >>the nucleus, giving off 2.4 - .78 = 1.62 MeV and becoming a neutron. >[snip] >The mass of a proton and an electron together is .78 MeV short of the mass >of a neutron, which means that not only do you not get any energy out when >combining an electron and a proton to form a neutron, but you actually have >to add .78 MeV on top of what you already have. ***{Correct, but those masses are *rest* masses, and do not include the kinetic energy that an electron may acquire by falling down a Coulomb potential well. Hence in the *extremely unlikely* event that an electron were to do that and actually strike a naked proton or deuteron, the kinetic energy so acquired would be *added* to the total energy obtained by summing the rest masses of the two particles. --MJ}*** >IOW as the electron is accelerated toward the proton, and the potential >energy decreases, the kinetic energy increases to compensate. ***{Of course, but that is irrelevant. What matters here is that rest masses do not include potential energy or the kinetic energy to which potential energies can be converted. How could they? After all, electrons exist in millions of distinct circumstances, and hence are capable of having millions of different potential and kinetic energies. How could one number for rest mass possibly reflect such an immensely variable mass of information? The answer is obvious: it cannot. --MJ}*** The kinetic >energy of the electron however is not something that you can add on to the >combined mass electron and proton "to get even more energy". It was already >included in the mass energy of the pair before this little jaunt took off. ***{We are talking about an electron at "infinity," with an energy due to that position which could not possibly be part of the electron rest mass number given in textbooks. Indeed, such a notion is ridiculous: the rest mass of the electron is .00054854807 amu, which is .51 MeV. How can that number possibly include the 2.4 MeV of potential energy that an electron at infinity has with respect to a naked proton? It just doesn't compute, Robin! --MJ}*** >This in itself is interesting. If the combined mass energy of the hydrogen >atom (including field energy) is written: > >c^2 x (mp + me), then it would appear that the field energy forms part of >the mass of the particles. > >Note that in all the text books, the *total* mass of the hydrogen atom ( >including any mass attributable to field energy) is given as mp+me. ***{The potential energy of an electron at infinity is not, and cannot, be part of its rest mass. --MJ}*** >Regards, > >Robin van Spaandonk > >A Future For Humanity see: http://users.bigpond.net.au/rvanspaa/ ________________ Quote of the month: "Law is what the authorities use to ride the country." --Anatoly Schransky From vortex-l-request eskimo.com Sun Feb 18 23:38:27 2001 Received: (from smartlst localhost) by mx1.eskimo.com (8.9.1a/8.8.8) id XAA16295; Sun, 18 Feb 2001 23:36:44 -0800 Resent-Date: Sun, 18 Feb 2001 23:36:44 -0800 Message-Id: Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1" Date: Sun, 18 Feb 2001 22:46:29 -0900 To: vortex-l eskimo.com From: hheffner mtaonline.net (Horace Heffner) Subject: Re: Neutrons from Electron Impact? Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit X-MIME-Autoconverted: from quoted-printable to 8bit by mx1.eskimo.com id XAA16248 Resent-Message-ID: <"Ysap1.0.X-3.BqCaw" mx1> Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/40860 X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com Status: O X-Status: At 9:42 PM 2/18/1, Mitchell Jones wrote: [snip] >***{No real entity, obviously, can be a dimensionless mathematical point. Well, by your principle of continuity there is no limit to how small it can be, so it can logically be assumed to be capable of being a point for all practical purposes just as well as not. >To exist, a thing must have inertial mass and occupy space, and the popular >fad which claims otherwise is simply nonsense. The fact that the electron >must have specific dimensions, however, does not mean it must be easy to >measure those dimensions, and, apparently, it is not. The old number from >the 1930's, based on light scattering experiments, supported the formula r >= e^2/mc^2 = (4.8x10^-10 esu)^2/[(9.11x10^-28 gm)(3x10^10 m/s)^2] = >2.81x10^-13 cm, but there are some recent results which suggest the >electron is much smaller than that in one of its dimensions. (It may have >the form of a spinning disc or a toroid, for example.) --MJ}*** I think there is much evidence that the above is false. The high energy electrons at SLAC have been used to determine that there are lumps in the nucleus. The electron deBroglie wavelength can be made arbitrarily small by adding momentum. > >) it could completely >>nullify this portion of the nuclear bond - a very unique quality to the D >>nucleus. In addition, it would supply another .5 MeV energy to the >>electron. Further, if the electron is merely a point then it can >>accelerate all the way down to a radius of about 2x10^15 m > >***{The nucleus is just a region in which massive particles fly about at >enormous velocities in somewhat erratic orbits of their own--which means: >it probably doesn't have a clearly demarcated surface like a billiard ball, Yes - this is proven. >and it is reasonable to suppose that the electron can accelerate all the >way down to that "surface" even if the electron has a non-zero radius. >--MJ}*** Yes, electrons can be made to go right through the nucleus and also to scatter off components of the nucleus. > >(I don't think >>this is correct though. > >***{My faith is restored. :-) --MJ}*** > >) In light of the above uncertainties, an arbitrary >>selection of .511 MeV was just that, arbitrary. I liked it because it >>seemed to fit the common sense feeling of the probability of the electron >>acting as a catalyst. >> >> >>> >>>--Mitchell Jones}*** >>> >>>, and, including rest mass of 511 keV, a >>>>total energy of 1057 keV for use in the relativistic momentum calculation: >>> >>>***{As per the above, that should be 834 keV. --MJ}*** >> >>Or maybe 2 MeV? > >***{It depends on what collision we are talking about. No - not the collision type. I was implying that extra energy can be added by the magnetic attraction at closer ranges, and this energy would be further increased as separation of neutron and proton occurs. >If we are talking >about a collision between an electron and a naked proton, then in theory >you could get more than 2 MeV. To see how, let's take the radius of the >proton as .6x10^-13 cm (from *The Particle Hunters*, by Neeman and Kirsch, >pg. 61) and take the charge of the electron/proton as -/+ 4.8x10^-10 esu. >Result: the potential energy of the electron at the surface of the proton >is P = -e^2/r = -(4.8x10^-10)^2/(.6x10^-13) = -3.8x10^-6 ergs, and since >there are 6.25x10^11 ev/erg, that becomes -2.4x10^6 ev, or -2.4 MeV. Thus >the change in the potential energy of the electron as it moved from >"infinity"--i.e., far enough away to have an approximately zero potential >energy--to the surface of the proton, is 0 - (-2.4) = 2.4 MeV. Sure, you can work -e^2/r to be any energy you want. The question at hand is how small can you assume the electron and deuteron wavelengths are at a given relative velocity, thus the minimum value of r, and the answer to that question depends on the visualization of the nature of the quantum wavelength. There is also the question of the added velocity frm the dipole attraction at close range, which dramtically throws off the -e^2/r estimate of potential energy at close range. Since the full binding energy can be undone by flipping the neutron and proton mututal orientation, there is a matter of about an MeV at stake in the magnetic component calculation. > >However, the chance of an electron falling straight down into a nucleus in >the manner assumed by the above calculation is, in the plasma of a gas >discharge tube, essentially zero. The reason: that scenario would require >that the electron have at "infinity" an *exactly zero* component of >velocity perpendicular to the line of centers of the two particles, and >such a state of affairs is virtually inconceivable. The problem is that if >the electron has even a tiny perpendicular component of velocity at >"infinity," then conservation of angular momentum will enormously increase >it as the distance from the proton decreases, eventually forcing the >electron into one of the stable Bohr orbits. > >Bottom line: special circumstances are required, in order to somehow force >the electron to surrender its perpendicular component of velocity as it >approaches the proton. This makes no sense. If protons, which repel each other, can collide head on, then electrons, which are magic bullets, can certainly collide head on. > >The only situation that I know of which could lead to that outcome is >simply this: the electron and proton I was talking deuterons here, not protons, but that's a minor point. >must meet under conditions where there >isn't enough space for the electron to settle into one of the stable >orbits. There will be no orbit at 35 keV. The only way that can happen is if brehmsstrahlung somehow magically dumps off the 35 keV or more incoming kinetic energy. Even then, it is conceptually feasible that a hydrino would result, or my pet theory that ZPE, which prevents the electron from collapsing inward in a ground state atom, will re-inflate the atom to ground state. Heiseberg has to be at work in setting the wavelength of the electron, and thus its orbital radius. I can not see that there is a reason to believe that the electron can spiral on down to the nucleus. By increasing its radiation the electron loses energy, which increases the uncertainty in its position, and thus increases its apparent wavelength. It simply can't spiral on down. It has to be captured in the nucleaus via a particle exchange that involves a neutrino. That is not to say that an electron and hydrogen nucleus, if involved in a high energy close encounter, can not approach a nucleus sufficiently to permit fusion by tunneling. >For example, they may meet in a loaded region of a palladium >lattice. In that case, even the lowest of the stable orbits is not >available, and, logically, the electron would spiral down to the surface of >the nucleus, giving off 2.4 - .78 = 1.62 MeV and becoming a neutron. How does an electron "spiral down to the surface" of the neutron? If it loses kinetic energy to radiation then its wavelength must increase. If it maintains kinetic energy, then its orbital remains fixed in mean radius. > >The problem with such a scenario is that (a) if the resulting neutrons come >out of the cathode, they will be detected; Yes, and this happens. That IS the mystery with the deuteron. How does the neutron get stripped at what appears to be low kinetic energies? My answer is that the process may be catalysed by the electron by destroying the magnetic portion of the deuteron bond. >(b) if the 1.62 MeV comes out as >gammas, it will be detected; and (c) if the neutrons induce transmutations >in the lattice, the resulting radionuclides will be detected. Thus a >complex array of assumptions is required to explain why such results, for >CF, typically are *not* detected, and we have the various >theories--hydrino, protoneutron, light lepton, hydrax, etc.--that have been >brought forward by various individuals, including myself. I'm a bit confused. I thought we were talking about neutron striping. However, I also think fusion can be catalysed by electrons. In fact it seems self evident to me. Consider the following equidistant particles: 2v v D----> e--> D Where v is sufficiently large that that wavelength of the electron is small. There is no net repulsion between the two D nucleii. Fusion appears to be practically inevitable. This situation is not terrribly different from a D2+ molecule entering a target, except that the electrons are moving in the opposite direction in a massive flux about the lead deuteron. There should still be shielding provided by the electrons between the deuterons becuase the electorn flux is continuous, and the electrons are deflected across the back side of the first deuteron creating a dense conical wake of flux. I suppose this shilding principle could work for protrons as well, it is just that the p + p cross section is a lot smaller. I guess electron catalysis would be even more important to such a fusion, because the half life for tunneling is much longer at a given distance. There is also the possibility that enough energy can be applied to some of the wake electrons to make a neutron from a protron. The cross section is small because the reaction is a weak force reaction, but the electron flux would be astonomical. Further, the k shell electrons of tungsten would have a significant added kinetic energy to start with. > >With the Sternglass experiment, however, those difficulties go away: the >neutrons are there in large numbers, and if Sternglass had looked for them, >it seems likely that the gammas and transmutation byproducts would have >been detected as well. Hence this experiment is an entirely robust result >that both violates the conventional paradigm, and produces the emissions >that logic would lead us to expect. My explanation for it, therefore, is >just as noted above: the electrons strike protons in regions of the >tungsten lattice where there is not enough room What does this mean "not enough room". A 35 keV electron makes its OWN room in a sea of near ground state energy electrons. >for them to orbit at the n >= 1 radius, and so they spiral down into the nucleus, giving off 1.62 MeV >and combining with the proton to form a neutron. > >After all, why not? :-) See above. I think the main problems are the "spirling down" notion and the "not enough room" notion. [snip] >> >>Yes, but unfortunately a fairly arbitrary number on my part. I simply >>wanted to show the idea might be in some kind of ballpark of reality. > >***{How did you do that? From my perspective you either calculate, or you >don't obtain a number. (Did you use a ouija board? :-) --MJ}*** No Mitchell. It is just that we have been over all this stuff many times in the last 5 years. I was just speaking conversationally about stuff we've been over a lot, not publishing a manifesto. The 511 keV was picked as an approximation of the energy that might be obtained by "falling into the well". There are plenty of reasons why that energy might be much higher or a bit lower. I'll probably (unadvisedly!) use it again because it is an easy to remember rule of thumb, because it involves the electron's own mass. There's about a half MeV kinetic energy advantage for negative single charge particles heading for the hydrogen nucleus, and about a half MeV disadvantage for the same if positive. For that reason the catalytic potential of the electron should be practially self-evident in my opinion. >> >>The definition of stripping that I used doesn't require that the electrons >>enter the tungsten. I think the tungsten's role is primarily to be able to >>be hot enough to be a good low resistance electron source. The electron, >>once it interacts with a D nucleus will scatter and find other nucleii. >>Being light, if it doesn't come out of the nucleus with a hadron, then it >>should carry away most of its momentum. The momentum stealer for the >>electron is the brehmstrahlung and interaction with other electrons. > >***{Exactly: if it doesn't hit a nucleus in the first layer of W atoms, it >will lose too much energy to reach the nucleus of a second one, I think. >--MJ}*** What on earth are you talking about? No one has ever implied that 35 keV electrons can be targeted at tungsten producing lots of deutrons. The tungsten nucleii play no role in anything at all, unless you are possibly discussing D + W exchange reactions. A deuteron or protron can be deflected by W nucleii, but most all the kinetic stopping power comes from the electron cloud, and it takes a lot of electrons flowing by the D nucleus in comet-like fashion to slow it down since there is a 3600 to 1 mass ratio. Further, each one of these close approach electrons falls into the Coulomb well, producing a massive power flux in the vicinity of the incoming nucleus. > >Since >>the deutron has only one or maybe no electrons, the electron has a prospect >>of interacting with lots of nucleii, and thus the probability of a hit is >>greatly increased through repetition. > >***{It is only when approaching a naked proton Again I was talking about deuterons, but small point. >that the electron has the >prospect of getting the extra 2.4 MeV that it needs to produce a neutron, I think a 35 keV electron can likely often penetrate a hydrogen orbital unimpeded. >and the chance of its hitting even one naked proton during its passage from >cathode to anode is very slim, due to the requirement that it have an >*exactly zero* velocity component perpendicular to the line of centers. >--MJ}*** This depends on the mean free path vs electrode separation. There is also not a requirement that there be exactly zero velocity component only that it be sufficiently small to approach within the desired cross section. A cross section has this information built into it - there need be no corrections for lateral velocity for either a +,- or +,+ collision. However, a +,- collision should have a much larger cross section, all else being equal. [snip] > >***{No, no, no, no. It is a virtual impossibility that an electron have no >perpendicular component of velocity vis-a-vis a particular deuteron, and if >it *does* have such a component, however small, then that component will be >*enormously* exaggerated as the electron falls into the Coulomb well, due >to conservation of angular momentum. (Angular momentum, L, is the product >of the moment of inertia, I, and the angular velocity, w, and is such that >L = Iw. Since the stable orbits of hydrogen and deuterium are circular, I = >m(r^2), w = 2¼/T, (where T is the period of the orbit) and we obtain: > >L = m(r^2)( 2¼/T) = mr(2¼r/T) = mrV, where V denotes the perpendicular >component of velocity. > >Since angular momentum is conserved, we have: > >mr1V1 = mr2V2, or r1V1 = r2V2 > >The implication: when r decreases as the electron approaches the proton or >deuteron, the perpendicular velocity, V, will increase proportionately. >Result: the probability of an electron striking a direct hit on a deuteron >inside a gas-discharge tube is infinitesimally small. As a practical >matter, it doesn't happen. You are simply incorrect. Yes angular momentum is conserved. The nucleus presents a physical cross section to the incoming electron. In computing a cross section, based on particle size, it is already assumed that the orientation of incoming particles is random. Adding arbitrary lateral vectors to all the incoming particles does not change that one bit. It only changes the direction from which they approach. The probability that the path intersects a fixed area target is unchanged. If the colliding particles were mutually neutral, then the cross section is unchanged. If the colliding particles are the same charge, then they are mutally deflected and the probability of a hit on a given size target is diminished. If the particles are of opposite charge, then the probability of a hit is increased. This should be self evident. The orbital dynamics of the particles that miss the cross section are irrelevant. [snip] >>The more nucleii in the vicinity the more chance the electron has to >>repeatedly fall into wells. The main problem is keeping the electron >>energy up, and making the current density and D density as large as >>possible consistent with sustaining a high relative velocity. Note that a >>plasma pinch meets these criteria extremely well. It all the electorns >>tend to be going one direction while all the nucleii tend to be going the >>other, then the electrons will tend to lose less kinetic energy to each >>other. > >***{Yes, but the problem of getting rid of the perpendicular component of >velocity remains, and kills all hope of producing significant numbers of >neutrons this way in a gas discharge tube. This is a non-problem. Further, there are discharge tubes where copius quantities of neutrons issue directly from D2 plasma with a temperature far less than 2 MeV. The question reamins as to exacly what roles electrons play in such a device and whether that role can be enhanced by design. >The source of the neutron >generating reaction in the Sternglass experiment, therefore, must have been >the tungsten lattice on the cathode end of the system, where it would be >reasonable to suppose that, due to the confined conditions within the >lattice, significant numbers of electrons were stripped of their >perpendicular components of velocity, and forced to fall irreversibly down >into the Coulomb potential well, thereby striking protons or deuterons, and >generating neutrons. --MJ}*** Yes - here I agree to the extent that the probability of electron-deuteron interaction is much higher in the target due to the electron density there. Also, it seems to me that a pair of (molecularly) bound deuterons hitting the target would be more likely to produce a neutron than just a single deuteron. However, if the cathode is hot, then the flow of electrons between electrodes can be very large and should not be completely discounted. > >>>Of course, it is a bit more complicated than that, since beneath layer >>>number one of W atoms, there will be layer number two. However, an electron >>>that makes it through the first layer electron? >>>is likely to be deflected and of much >>>lower energy, due to its passage through the thick electron shell structure >>>of a W atom in the first layer. Hence it is only if it happens to go >>>through the hole between shells, at the center of a square, that the second >>>layer becomes relevant to the calculation, and if you factor that in, I >>>doubt it will improve the odds very much. >> >>Yes, all true, but the suggested catalytic action of the electron is not >>upon the tungsten, but upon the D nucleus in plasma form. > >***{But it won't work, Horace. :-) --MJ}*** I think I did not make my point clear here. I am not talking about shooting an electron at the tungsten or at hydrogen trapped in the tungsten. I am talking about electrons in plasma hitting D, or D hitting the tugsten, which is really the same thing, electrons impinging on the deuteron, with the exception that the initial velocity of the tungsten target electrons is way lower than the free plasma electrons. In either case the electron kinetic energy is amplified by falling into a .5 MeV well. In the case of a deuteron molecular pair hitting the target, the second trainling deuteron can be hit by much higher enery electrons than the first deuteron due to the kinetic interaction, the "electron aerodynamics" to coin a phrase, in the wake of the first deuteron. It may even be worth considering that such wake dynamics can bring proton pairs close enough for long enough to fuse. It may be that sufficient electron kinetic energy is created by the wake electron dynamics that, on occasion, when added to the magnetic dipole attraction of the electron and proton, it is enough energy to create a neutron from the trailing proton of a molecular pair. Regards, Horace Heffner From vortex-l-request eskimo.com Mon Feb 19 02:16:58 2001 Received: (from smartlst localhost) by mx1.eskimo.com (8.9.1a/8.8.8) id CAA22325; Mon, 19 Feb 2001 02:16:19 -0800 Resent-Date: Mon, 19 Feb 2001 02:16:19 -0800 Message-ID: <001201c09a65$586bad40$918f85ce fjsparber> From: "Frederick Sparber" To: Subject: Re: Test III :-) Date: Mon, 19 Feb 2001 03:15:58 -0800 MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-Priority: 3 X-MSMail-Priority: Normal X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook Express 5.00.2615.200 X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V5.00.2615.200 Resent-Message-ID: <"9mWoj2.0.lS5.p9Faw" mx1> Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/40861 X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com Status: O X-Status: The third time is a charm? Regards, Frederick From vortex-l-request eskimo.com Mon Feb 19 03:36:18 2001 Received: (from smartlst localhost) by mx1.eskimo.com (8.9.1a/8.8.8) id DAA03717; Mon, 19 Feb 2001 03:35:26 -0800 Resent-Date: Mon, 19 Feb 2001 03:35:26 -0800 Message-ID: <000001c09a58$5c6e35a0$ec8f209a nikspentium> From: "Nick Palmer" To: Subject: Fw: new IPCC report on climate impacts Date: Mon, 19 Feb 2001 09:38:00 -0000 MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit X-Priority: 3 X-MSMail-Priority: Normal X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook Express 5.50.4133.2400 X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V5.50.4133.2400 Resent-Message-ID: <"XA6cZ.0.xv.-JGaw" mx1> Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/40862 X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com Status: O X-Status: Why we need new energy now... Nick Palmer ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- --- ----- Original Message ----- From: "Nick Rau" To: "climatelcs" ; "climate_change" Sent: Monday, February 19, 2001 10:36 AM Subject: new IPCC report on climate impacts EMBARGOED until 1000 GMT 19 Feb NEW REPORT PAINTS GRIM PICTURE OF FLOODS, DROUGHT AND SUFFERING Tropical island paradises and glistening Alpine skiing retreats may be lost to future generations, while melting ice caps in polar regions unleash climate changes that will continue for centuries, according to a UN report released today. The report by the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change said poor countries would bear the brunt of devastating changes as a result of global warming. But it warned that the rich wouldn't be immune, with Florida and parts of the American Atlantic coast likely to be lashed by storms and rising sea levels. ``Projected climate changes during the 21st century have the potential to lead to future large-scale and possible irreversible changes in Earth systems,'' said the report. It said this would have ``continental and global'' consequences. The report was a summary of 1,000 pages of research into Climate Change 2001: Impacts, Adaptation and Vulnerability, conducted by 700 scientists. Given the political sensitivities of the climate debate, the 19 page summary was subject to line-by-line scrutiny by government representatives during week long discussions prior to release. The final message was frightening, saying the effects of man-made climate change will lead to: :: more ``freak'' weather conditions like cyclones, floods and droughts; :: massive displacement of populations in the worst-affected areas; :: potentially enormous loss of life; :: greater risk from diseases like malaria as the mosquito widens its reach; :: and extinction of entire species as their habitat is wiped out. The report said global economic losses from so-called natural catastrophes increased from about £2.75 billion per year in the 1950s to £27.5 billion in 1999. Total costs were in reality twice as high, taking into account smaller weather-related events, it said. The Geneva report followed one released last month in China, by the international climate change panel. That predicted that global temperatures could rise by as much as 5.8C (10.5F) over the next century. It said the increase was much higher than expected and there was clear evidence that industrial pollution, including emissions from cars, was to blame. The third volume, on solutions, will be released in March. But effective international action remains elusive, not least because of the reluctance of the United States to commit itself to firm targets to reduce emissions of greenhouse gases, which trap heat in the atmosphere, and the push in developing countries like China toward economic progress. Scientists have for years warned about the impact of global warming. What is significant about the new reports, however, is the degree of precision about the extent and impact of climate change. ``The effects of climate change are expected to be greatest in developing countries in terms of loss of life and relative effects on investment and the economy,'' said the report released in Geneva. Changing rainfall patterns coupled with population growth would lead to huge pressure on water supplies, it predicted. It said that at present 1.7 billion people live in areas where water resources are tight. This will likely to increase to around 5.4 billion in the next 25 years. ``Projected climate change will be accompanied by an increase in heatwaves, often exacerbated by increased humidity and urban air pollution, which would cause an increase in heat-related deaths and illness,'' it said. It said a reduction in crop yields would lead to an increase in malnutrition in vulnerable areas especially in drought-prone parts of Africa. Even more serious was the risk from flooding as a result of rising sea levels in densely populated coastal areas ranging from Egypt to Poland to Vietnam. ``The most widespread direct risk to human settlements is flooding and landslides,'' it said. ``Coastal settlements are particularly at risk, but urban flooding could be a problem anywhere that storm drains, water supply and waste management systems have inadequate capacity.'' The report said that the change in temperature was most extreme in the polar regions and this would have potentially disastrous consequences. ``Climate change in polar regions is expected to be among the largest and most rapid of any region of earth,'' it said. ``Polar regions contain important drivers of change. Once triggered, they may continue for centuries, long after greenhouse gas concentrations are stabilised, and cause irreversible impacts on ice sheets, global ocean circulation and sea-rise.'' The report predicted that half of Alpine glaciers could disappear in the next 100 years, and said less reliable snow conditions would have an adverse impact on winter tourism in Europe. In the United States, sea-level rise would result in increased coastal erosion, flooding and risk of storm surges, particularly in Florida and much of the Atlantic coast. Small island nations would be ``among the countries most seriously impacted by climate change,'' it warned. Tourism not to mention life in general would be severely disrupted. A breakdown of the regional consequences of global warming: :: Europe: Southern Europe will become more prone to drought. In other areas, flood hazards will increase. Half of Alpine glaciers and large permafrost areas could disappear by the end of the 21st century. Heat waves may change traditional summer tourist destinations and less reliable snow conditions may hurt winter tourism. Agricultural productivity may increase in northern Europe, but decrease in southern Europe. :: Asia: Low ability to adapt in much of the region. High temperatures, drought, floods and soil degradation likely will diminish food production in arid, tropical and temperate parts of Asia. Northern areas may see an increase in productivity. Rises in the sea level and more intense tropical cyclones likely will displace tens of millions of people in low-lying coastal areas of temperate and tropical Asia. :: Australia and New Zealand: A more mixed picture. Impact on some temperate crops may initially be positive but this will likely alter with further climate change. Much of the region may dry out, but there will also be more, intense heavy rains and cyclones resulting in flooding, storm and wind damage. :: Africa: Low ability to adapt. Grain yields are expected to decrease, and there will be less water available. Desertification will be worsened by reductions in average annual rainfall, especially in southern, North and West Africa. Coastal settlements in Nigeria, Senegal, Gambia, Egypt and along the East-Southern African coast will be hit by rising sea levels and coastal erosion. Infectious disease carriers like mosquitos will increase. This will combine to ``constrain development in Africa.'' :: Latin America: Floods and droughts will become more frequent. Yields of important crops likely will decrease in many parts of Latin America. Subsistence farming in northeastern Brazil could be threatened. Exposure to diseases such as malaria and cholera likely will increase. :: North America: Food production could benefit from modest warming, but there will be strong regional effects like declines in Canada's Prairies and the US. Great Plains. Sea level rises could increase coastal erosion, flooding and lead to more storm surges, particularly in Florida and the Atlantic coast. Diseases like malaria, dengue fever and lyme disease may expand their ranges in North America and there likely will be more heat-related deaths. :: Polar: Climate change in polar regions is expected to be among the largest anywhere on Earth. Already, the extent and thickness of Arctic sea ice have decreased, permafrost has thawed and the distribution and abundance of species has been effected. The trends may continue even long after greenhouse gas emissions are stabilized and cause irreversible impact on ice sheets, global ocean circulation and sea levels. :: Small island states: A projected sea level rise of two tenths of an inch per year for the next 100 years will increase coastal erosion, damage to ecosystems, loss of land and dislocation of people. Coral reefs will be damaged and fisheries harmed. Tourism an important source of income likely will face severe disruption from climate change and sea level rise. AP 190934 FEB 01 to unsubscribe from climatelcs, send a message to majordomo foe.co.uk majordomo@foe.co.uk with
unsubscribe climatelcs
in the message body From vortex-l-request eskimo.com Mon Feb 19 05:19:54 2001 Received: (from smartlst localhost) by mx1.eskimo.com (8.9.1a/8.8.8) id FAA21582; Mon, 19 Feb 2001 05:19:03 -0800 Resent-Date: Mon, 19 Feb 2001 05:19:03 -0800 Message-ID: <3A911F0A.2BBFEC95 bellsouth.net> Date: Mon, 19 Feb 2001 08:26:34 -0500 From: Terry Blanton X-Mailer: Mozilla 4.73 [en] (WinNT; U) X-Accept-Language: en MIME-Version: 1.0 To: vortex-l eskimo.com Subject: Re: Test III :-) References: <001201c09a65$586bad40$918f85ce fjsparber> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Resent-Message-ID: <"Pynh-.0.8H5.7rHaw" mx1> Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/40863 X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com Status: O X-Status: Frederick Sparber wrote: > > The third time is a charm? > > Regards, Frederick I believe you've got it, old chap. From vortex-l-request eskimo.com Mon Feb 19 05:34:46 2001 Received: (from smartlst localhost) by mx1.eskimo.com (8.9.1a/8.8.8) id FAA24378; Mon, 19 Feb 2001 05:33:54 -0800 Resent-Date: Mon, 19 Feb 2001 05:33:54 -0800 Message-ID: <3A912285.B21203C3 bellsouth.net> Date: Mon, 19 Feb 2001 08:41:25 -0500 From: Terry Blanton X-Mailer: Mozilla 4.73 [en] (WinNT; U) X-Accept-Language: en MIME-Version: 1.0 To: vortex-l eskimo.com Subject: Re: More on DU toxicity References: <3A9000D0.1020009 pacbell.net> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Resent-Message-ID: <"aYogM.0.ly5.13Iaw" mx1> Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/40864 X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com Status: O X-Status: Jones Beene wrote: > "It's true that DU is not very radioactive. But when you inhale > it, it does go to the lymph nodes surrounding the lungs, and > that means it could irradiate all the blood cells which pass > through the nodes. One British study found DU in the semen of those living near weapons test ranges. This could explain why spouses of veterans with GWS sometimes show symptoms. Terry From vortex-l-request eskimo.com Mon Feb 19 07:35:08 2001 Received: (from smartlst localhost) by mx1.eskimo.com (8.9.1a/8.8.8) id HAA26796; Mon, 19 Feb 2001 07:33:06 -0800 Resent-Date: Mon, 19 Feb 2001 07:33:06 -0800 Date: Mon, 19 Feb 2001 07:30:11 -0800 From: Jones Beene Subject: Re: More on DU toxicity To: vortex-l eskimo.com Message-id: <3A913C03.4080000 pacbell.net> MIME-version: 1.0 Content-type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii; format=flowed Content-transfer-encoding: 7bit User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (Windows; U; Win98; en-US; m18) Gecko/20001108 Netscape6/6.0 X-Accept-Language: en References: Resent-Message-ID: <"YNoyu.0.cY6.ooJaw" mx1> Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/40865 X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com Status: O X-Status: Regarding the previous posts, let me clarify a couple of points. Pu-239 was found in very small quantities in the DU round used in the Balkans. The importance of this fact is that NOT primarily related to the toxicity of PU vs. that of depleted U but does demonstrate or suggest that the depleted material used in the rounds could have have come from reprocessed reactor fuel or reprocessed slugs from the former Hanford PU facility. This has never been reported in the press before now. First point: Frederick mentioned that some Pu can show up in natural U. This is both true and false. Pu cannot be detected in mined U from most sites in the USA down to the PPB range. UNLESS that ore deposit has itself undergone a critical mass reaction in the ancient past there is just no mechanism for the appearance of much PU in the U - as alpha decay produces so few secondary neutrons. There is only one place on earth where a "natural" chain reaction is known to have happened millions of years ago and that is famous mines in the former Congo - but little of this U is imported to the US. Second: The toxicity implications all relate to what if any transitions may have taken place to the U nucleus while in the reactor for prolonged periods. Obviously these nuclear changes do not show up as an increase in radiation in the rounds when they are delivered to the military. If an increased health risk exists, it is most likely in the form of a previously unresearched kind of nuclear excitation that results in superdeformity of the nucleus, and whose effects may not materialize at all unless the material is reduced to a monatomic state. This would happen primarily when the round is vaporized on impact or if some of the material was somehow ingested. There is research that indicates that this superdeformity mechanism is possible. But, is there any factual basis for the suggestion that there is an increased health risk that results from exposure to vaporized ammo which utilized reprocessed fuel as the source of U as opposed to those rounds that used enrichment feedstock as the source of U? NOT TO MY KNOWLEDGE. But this is all brand new and it has not been openly researched at all. Furthermore, the only way that it will be investigated is if enough pressure is exerted on the responsible military officials by way the international community. Again, everyone keeps forgetting, or is in denial of the indisputable fact, that an alarming and unprecedented increase in cancer rates occurs ONLY in those areas where the rounds were used. When you overlay two maps, one showing where increased cancer is found and the other showing where the rounds were used, it is absolutely clear what has happened and only a fool or a lawyer can claim that the two are not connected in a cause and effect relationship (although there may be other contributing factors). BUT the problem is, up till now, there has been no conventional or even speculative explanation of HOW the two facts are connected, since normal exposure to radioactivity takes decades rather than a few years to cause cancer. IF and when it is admitted that reprocessed U was used in these rounds, then things may be clearer - at least insofar as to how to direct future research. Two of the top government doctors in England have recently gone against enormous peer pressure and risked their careers to affirm what is obvious to any statistician and eventually I think the truth will come out as more people take the time to look into all of the details. To keep saying that this is a ploy by the Serbs and Iraqis to get funding from poor old Uncles Sam is an absolute insult to the hundreds of highly trained medical specialists in Europe, (not just those in third world countries), who have seen and reported things that our government does not want to deal with. Regards, Jones Beene From vortex-l-request eskimo.com Mon Feb 19 09:29:44 2001 Received: (from smartlst localhost) by mx1.eskimo.com (8.9.1a/8.8.8) id JAA03727; Mon, 19 Feb 2001 09:20:18 -0800 Resent-Date: Mon, 19 Feb 2001 09:20:18 -0800 Message-ID: <3A914842.6B32116D ix.netcom.com> Date: Mon, 19 Feb 2001 10:22:30 -0600 From: Edmund Storms X-Mailer: Mozilla 4.5 (Macintosh; U; PPC) X-Accept-Language: en,pdf MIME-Version: 1.0 To: vortex-l eskimo.com Subject: Re: More on DU toxicity References: <3A913C03.4080000@pacbell.net> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii; x-mac-type="54455854"; x-mac-creator="4D4F5353" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Resent-Message-ID: <"zNQ621.0.8w.HNLaw" mx1> Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/40866 X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com Status: O X-Status: Jones Beene wrote: > snip > To keep saying that this is a ploy by the Serbs and Iraqis to > get funding from poor old Uncles Sam is an absolute insult to > the hundreds of highly trained medical specialists in Europe, > (not just those in third world countries), who have seen and > reported things that our government does not want to deal with. The issue is how to interpret incomplete data. It is no more of an insult to suggest that the Serbs favor an interpretation that favors them than to suggest, as you have done, that the US government favors the opposite interpretation. The insult only depends on which side you are on. Given that all governments lie, the only issue is what the facts show. If and when the facts become known, we can then discuss who should be insulted. A simple test for the presence of uranium in people with cancer and its absence in those who are healthy would take care of the problem. Why is this not done? Ed Storms > > > Regards, > > Jones Beene From vortex-l-request eskimo.com Mon Feb 19 11:28:56 2001 Received: (from smartlst localhost) by mx1.eskimo.com (8.9.1a/8.8.8) id LAA17926; Mon, 19 Feb 2001 11:13:07 -0800 Resent-Date: Mon, 19 Feb 2001 11:13:07 -0800 Date: Mon, 19 Feb 2001 10:53:57 -0800 From: Jones Beene Subject: Re: More on DU toxicity To: vortex-l eskimo.com Message-id: <3A916BC5.7060307 pacbell.net> MIME-version: 1.0 Content-type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii; format=flowed Content-transfer-encoding: 7bit User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (Windows; U; Win98; en-US; m18) Gecko/20001108 Netscape6/6.0 X-Accept-Language: en References: <3A913C03.4080000@pacbell.net> <3A914842.6B32116D ix.netcom.com> Resent-Message-ID: <"X8b-k.0.0O4.21Naw" mx1> Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/40867 X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com Status: O X-Status: Edmund Storms wrote: > A simple test for the presence of > uranium in people with cancer and its absence in those who are > healthy would take care of the problem. Why is this not done? It probably will be done in time, if funds are made available. The only testing for Uranium that I could find in a quick web search just now comes from Canada, one of the more trustworthy sources of info. They have found trace uranium in the urine of their Gulf War troops 10 years later!!! NATO forces used depleted uranium during the Gulf War, of course. A scientific advisor to the Gulf Veterans Association, Professor Michael Hooper, believes there is a link between its use and illness. "The circumstantial evidence is very strong," he said. "We have a known carcinogen mutagen being released in small amounts and in fine particles into the atmosphere which can be inhaled and lodge into the lung. "We have evidence from Gulf War veterans who've been tested in Canada, which shows that they're still excreting depleted uranium. "The only source could be the Gulf War and that was nearly 10 years ago and many of those are sick." But even this startling admission does not explain how so many rare cancers could appear in so many Bosnian children so quickly. I suspect that the answer is a combination of these factors: 1) Cancer is much swifter to develop in children 2) The children may have already been exposed to fallout from Chernobyl and/or food products from that region 3) The rounds were actively handled by the children and/or 4) There is a completely new risk factor that is unknown in the literature. It relates to previously irradiated U238 material that does NOT show any signs of increased radioactivity until it is used, i.e. it doesn't register higher on rad meters until it has vaporized. The last factor is admittedly PURE speculation on my part. My case, however, is bolstered by the little amount of field testing that is going on now in the region. In some cases where similar impact sites are tested, the radioactivity is up to 100 times higher in those sites where the round was at least partially pulverized compared to where the round was intact. Of course no one can say for sure that several rounds were not responsible for the pulverized sites but all this does is point out the absolute necessity for more testing. And there could be fringe benefits from this kind of research to those of us who are searching for answers to the energy crisis. Regards, Jones BTW for the benefit of those who are tiring of this subject as being off topic for vortex, let me point out a linkage between "deformed nuclei" research and a possible explanation for some CF phenomena, however tenuous it may be. I was informed yesterday by a David Hudson supporter that he has claimed in the past that CF is due in whole or in part to superdeformity in palladium. Stretch's ones' credulity to a new level, doesn't it? Apparently, Hudson has found Pd to be one of the most copious of what he calls ORMES or whatever. Maybe I should read up on it. Not that I would want to use that info as any kind of an authoritative reference but I am considering applying for a DARPA grant - as this stuff is intriging for any number of reasons. I'm not a far-left antiwar whiner. Anyone want to sign on? From vortex-l-request eskimo.com Mon Feb 19 11:54:39 2001 Received: (from smartlst localhost) by mx1.eskimo.com (8.9.1a/8.8.8) id LAA10364; Mon, 19 Feb 2001 11:39:10 -0800 Resent-Date: Mon, 19 Feb 2001 11:39:10 -0800 Date: Mon, 19 Feb 2001 11:38:02 -0800 From: Jones Beene Subject: Re: More on DU toxicity To: vortex-l eskimo.com Message-id: <3A91761A.5090604 pacbell.net> MIME-version: 1.0 Content-type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii; format=flowed Content-transfer-encoding: 7bit User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (Windows; U; Win98; en-US; m18) Gecko/20001108 Netscape6/6.0 X-Accept-Language: en References: <3A913C03.4080000@pacbell.net> <3A914842.6B32116D ix.netcom.com> Resent-Message-ID: <"W0RYi.0.kX2.SPNaw" mx1> Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/40868 X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com Status: O X-Status: Please disregard if this is a resend. I am having major ISP problems recently Edmund Storms wrote: > A simple test for the presence of > uranium in people with cancer and its absence in those who are > healthy would take care of the problem. Why is this not done? It should be done certainly and probably will be done in time, if funds are made available. The only testing for Uranium that I could find in a quick web search just now comes from Canada, one of the more trustworthy sources of info. They have found trace uranium in the urine of their Gulf War troops 10 years later!!! NATO forces used depleted uranium during the Gulf War, of course. A scientific advisor to the Gulf Veterans Association, Professor Michael Hooper, believes there is a link between its use and illness. "The circumstantial evidence is very strong," he said. "We have a known carcinogen mutagen being released in small amounts and in fine particles into the atmosphere which can be inhaled and lodge into the lung. "We have evidence from Gulf War veterans who've been tested in Canada, which shows that they're still excreting depleted uranium. "The only source could be the Gulf War and that was nearly 10 years ago and many of those are sick." But even this startling admission does not explain how so many rare cancers could appear in so many Bosnian children so quickly. I suspect that the answer is a combination of these factors: 1) Cancer is much swifter to develop in children 2) The children may have already been exposed to fallout from Chernobyl and/or food products from that region 3) The rounds were actively handled by the children and/or 4) There is a completely new risk factor that is unknown in the literature. It relates to previously irradiated U238 material that does NOT show any signs of increased radioactivity until it is used, i.e. it doesn't register higher on rad meters until it has vaporized. The last factor is admittedly PURE speculation on my part. My case, however, is bolstered by the little amount of field testing that is going on now in the region. In some cases where similar impact sites are tested, the radioactivity is up to 100 times higher in those sites where the round was at least partially pulverized compared to where the round was intact. Of course no one can say for sure that several rounds were not responsible for the pulverized sites but all this does is point out the absolute necessity for more testing. And there could be fringe benefits from this kind of research to those of us who are searching for answers to the energy crisis. Regards, Jones BTW for the benefit of those who are tiring of this subject as being off topic for vortex, let me point out a linkage between "deformed nuclei" research and a possible explanation for some CF phenomena, however tenuous it may be. I was informed yesterday by a David Hudson supporter that he has claimed in the past that CF is due in whole or in part to superdeformity in palladium. Stretch's ones' credulity to a new level, doesn't it? Apparently, Hudson has found Pd to be one of the most copious of what he calls ORMES or whatever. Maybe I should read up on it. Not that I would want to use that info as any kind of an authoritative reference but I am considering applying for a DARPA grant - as this stuff is intriging for any number of reasons. I'm not a far-left antiwar whiner. Anyone want to sign on? From vortex-l-request eskimo.com Mon Feb 19 12:04:32 2001 Received: (from smartlst localhost) by mx1.eskimo.com (8.9.1a/8.8.8) id LAA16627; Mon, 19 Feb 2001 11:53:37 -0800 Resent-Date: Mon, 19 Feb 2001 11:53:37 -0800 Message-Id: <5.0.2.1.2.20010219144831.026cd318 pop.mindspring.com> X-Sender: jedrothwell pop.mindspring.com X-Mailer: QUALCOMM Windows Eudora Version 5.0.2 Date: Mon, 19 Feb 2001 14:53:32 -0500 To: vortex-l eskimo.com From: Jed Rothwell Subject: Re: More on DU toxicity - U similar to Pb In-Reply-To: <3A916BC5.7060307 pacbell.net> References: <3A913C03.4080000 pacbell.net> <3A914842.6B32116D ix.netcom.com> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"; format=flowed Resent-Message-ID: <"Wwax5.0.i34.0dNaw" mx1> Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/40869 X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com Status: O X-Status: DU may cause cancer for reasons having nothing to do with radiation. In general, it shares many same biological risks with lead. Is lead carcinogenic? I don't know, but here is one answer: http://www.atsdr.cdc.gov/HEC/caselead.html "Carcinogenic Effects EPA's Science Advisory Board has recommended that lead be considered a probable human carcinogen. Case reports have implicated lead as a potential renal carcinogen in humans, but the association remains uncertain. Soluble salts, such as lead acetate and lead phosphate, have been reported to cause kidney tumors in rats." - Jed From vortex-l-request eskimo.com Mon Feb 19 12:42:03 2001 Received: (from smartlst localhost) by mx1.eskimo.com (8.9.1a/8.8.8) id MAA30244; Mon, 19 Feb 2001 12:22:24 -0800 Resent-Date: Mon, 19 Feb 2001 12:22:24 -0800 Date: Tue, 13 Feb 2001 11:22:03 -0800 From: Jones Beene Subject: Re: Neutrons from D2-Ar-N2-Hot W? To: vortex-l eskimo.com Message-id: <3A89895B.8000201 pacbell.net> MIME-version: 1.0 Content-type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii; format=flowed Content-transfer-encoding: 7bit User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (Windows; U; Win98; en-US; m18) Gecko/20001108 Netscape6/6.0 X-Accept-Language: en References: Resent-Message-ID: <"B7Y891.0.SO7._1Oaw" mx1> Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/40870 X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com Status: O X-Status: Horace Heffner wrote: > This experiment would only be mysterious if isotopically pure protium were > used, because deuterium present in ordinary hydrogen will strip neutrons > upon hitting the tungsten at that high energy. If there are more neutrons > than would be obtained from stipping in deuterioum at its partial pressure > in the tube then maybe something special is going on. Horace, do you have any reference for "stripping" cross sections? or even any citations to authoritative anecdotal reports? According to experimenters who are getting low energy neutrons at "The Open Source Fusor Research Consortium" - formerly the Farnswoth Fusor group, D+D fusion is so much more likely than stripping at low energy that they don't even consider it to be a factor. I don't necessarily agree with them but this much is certain, in a Fusor you will get a measurable neutron producing reaction down to 10 kev and substantial at 20 kev. Note that the Fusor has a nearly spherical convergence region whereas with the facing cathode geometry that MJ refers to, there is no convergence region to multiply the apparent ion energy. This 10Kev threshold would not be true in a hydrogen plasma, however, even if it were enriched with D, as the Maxwellian curve is substantially different for anything less than pure D. Check out Preston, Shaw and Young, "Fast Neutron Physics" as early as 1954 they demonstrated substantial neutrons at low energies. On page 82 they offer a detailed cross sectional curve for the reaction down to 10 kev and note that the angular distribution of neutrons is asymetric at real low energies, showing that we have known for a long time that the He3 and tritium are NOT equally probable from D+D. (thanks to Richard Hull for this info). I would really like to find an authoritative citation for stripping neutrons, as it seems everything that appears on Vortex and elsewhere is just anecdotal. I have personally performed some experiments with deuterium filled arc lamp tubes (the kind that are used for uv sources) and found neutrons at less than 10 Kev but will freely admit that it could be measurement error as it is very difficult to measure a low flux of low energy neutrons (especially on my budget). Regards, Jones Beene From vortex-l-request eskimo.com Mon Feb 19 14:06:41 2001 Received: (from smartlst localhost) by mx1.eskimo.com (8.9.1a/8.8.8) id NAA05207; Mon, 19 Feb 2001 13:57:00 -0800 Resent-Date: Mon, 19 Feb 2001 13:57:00 -0800 Mime-Version: 1.0 Message-Id: In-Reply-To: References: Date: Mon, 19 Feb 2001 03:56:23 -0600 To: vortex-l eskimo.com From: thomas malloy Subject: Re: HONDA MOTOR COMPANY: INSIGHT Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" ; format="flowed" Resent-Message-ID: <"VZHHy.0.HH1.hQPaw" mx1> Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/40871 X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com Status: O X-Status: > > HONDA MOTOR CORPORATION IS NOW UTILIZING > JOSEPH NEWMAN'S TECHNOLOGY > >electric motor operated on 120 "D-sized" batteries that were connected in >SERIES and PRODUCED OVER 13 HORSEPOWER that augmented the horsepower >produced by the gasoline engine. It is important to note that the electric When I think of a D cell, I picture a flashlight battery, a flashlight sized power supply that can produce 13 HP, that's quite a trick, especially if you can do it for any length of time, that being over 10 aeconds > > That represents a production efficiency of more than: > 10 to 1! This sounds more like 100,000 to one to me. > > > >That was documented by CBS News as well as recorded by Japanese TV reporters >who were present at the demonstration of my automobile's historic performance >and later broadcast that performance in Japan. I'd sure like to see a video tape of this! > > >Fact: The Honda Motor Corporation - by utilizing a Motor/Generator based >upon Joseph Newman's technology - has once again proven that Joseph >Newman's technology is correct. Too bad they wouldn't let you patent it. > > >Together, we and humanity will win. When I hear a story like this I'm reminded of that my attorney says, "how do you know this? I assume that Honda is planning on marketing this car. If this motor generator is so good, why do they need a gasoline motor? Why can't you close the loop with two battery packs? > > [Signed] > Joseph Westley Newman From vortex-l-request eskimo.com Mon Feb 19 14:29:56 2001 Received: (from smartlst localhost) by mx1.eskimo.com (8.9.1a/8.8.8) id OAA18270; Mon, 19 Feb 2001 14:24:55 -0800 Resent-Date: Mon, 19 Feb 2001 14:24:55 -0800 Mime-Version: 1.0 X-Sender: rick mail.highsurf.com Message-Id: Date: Mon, 19 Feb 2001 12:20:19 -1000 To: vortex-l eskimo.com From: Rick Monteverde Subject: Fwd: [FG]: Peltier Effect thermo-gravity experiments Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" ; format="flowed" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit X-MIME-Autoconverted: from quoted-printable to 8bit by mx1.eskimo.com id OAA18228 Resent-Message-ID: <"44a8c3.0.IT4.sqPaw" mx1> Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/40872 X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com Status: O X-Status: Forward from freenrg-l, by Nick Reiter : Gentlemen; After about a week and a half of mind numbing and emotional roller-coastering experimentation, I tender for your consideration something very cool. All input and commentary is welcome, although I beg you not to be overly cranky if I can't reply back individually to each posted or e-mailed comment. I can only spend so much time here at the computer. The report on this set of experiments is on an Avalon page: http:/ /www.alliancelink.com/users/avalon/thermograv160201a.htm In essence, I have observed an interesting weight change effect that, if genuine, may relate to deep thermodynamics. The materials needed to play with it are not extravagant, and I encourage anyone with a milligram level balance or torsion pendulum to try it, if they feel it's merit. Also, if anyone could be so kind as to pass this on to VortexL, I would be indebted, since I am not currently on that list but I know a number of you fellows are. Submitted Humbly; NR From vortex-l-request eskimo.com Mon Feb 19 14:31:50 2001 Received: (from smartlst localhost) by mx1.eskimo.com (8.9.1a/8.8.8) id OAA19080; Mon, 19 Feb 2001 14:26:50 -0800 Resent-Date: Mon, 19 Feb 2001 14:26:50 -0800 X-Apparently-From: Message-Id: <4.2.0.58.20010219151550.0095d230 postoffice.swbell.net> X-Sender: cjford1 pop.mail.yahoo.com X-Mailer: QUALCOMM Windows Eudora Pro Version 4.2.0.58 Date: Mon, 19 Feb 2001 16:27:00 -0600 To: vortex-l eskimo.com From: Charles Ford Subject: Re: More on DU toxicity - U similar to Pb In-Reply-To: <5.0.2.1.2.20010219144831.026cd318 pop.mindspring.com> References: <3A916BC5.7060307 pacbell.net> <3A913C03.4080000 pacbell.net> <3A914842.6B32116D ix.netcom.com> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"; format=flowed Resent-Message-ID: <"c5Thg.0._f4.fsPaw" mx1> Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/40873 X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com Status: O X-Status: Jed: Are we making a mountain out of a molehill? Lead phosphate and lead acetate are not common of natural decay of metallic lead. are they? One has to make these compounds. I do not disagree that most of the soft heavy metals have a certain level of toxicity including silver that we sometimes eat with. This is also suspect as renal irritant. The only reason that lead has made such a stink of its self it that it has ben used for hundreds of years to make everything from indoor plumbing to roof flashing to paint pigments to parts of baby toys. Still about a hundred years before we figured out how bad it is. By the way how bad is it? Even with all of that exposure do you know anybody suffering from lead poisoning? Also you are not talking about ordinary bullets here. These where armor piercing rounds. This high dollar high tech round is used to destroy armored equipment that was a darn side more toxic then a little lead acetate in your kidneys. Lets face it warfare is a very nasty business. When you use better armor you ask to get hit by better armor piercing rounds. Or if anybody has a suggestion on a different way to pierce an inter cooled laminate armor? Alas we are talking about uranium and although it is a kissing cousin to lead it is not lead. The chemical properties are different and it will behave differently even if only slightly. Just a thought... At 02:53 PM 2/19/01 -0500, you wrote: >DU may cause cancer for reasons having nothing to do with radiation. In >general, it shares many same biological risks with lead. Is lead >carcinogenic? I don't know, but here is one answer: > >http://www.atsdr.cdc.gov/HEC/caselead.html > >"Carcinogenic Effects > >EPA's Science Advisory Board has recommended that lead be considered a >probable human carcinogen. > >Case reports have implicated lead as a potential renal carcinogen in >humans, but the association remains uncertain. Soluble salts, such as lead >acetate and lead phosphate, have been reported to cause kidney tumors in rats." > >- Jed Charlie Ford KC5-OWZ cjford1 yahoo.com cjford1 swbell.net _________________________________________________________ Do You Yahoo!? Get your free yahoo.com address at http://mail.yahoo.com From vortex-l-request eskimo.com Mon Feb 19 14:36:00 2001 Received: (from smartlst localhost) by mx1.eskimo.com (8.9.1a/8.8.8) id OAA21901; Mon, 19 Feb 2001 14:32:22 -0800 Resent-Date: Mon, 19 Feb 2001 14:32:22 -0800 From: Robin van Spaandonk To: vortex-l eskimo.com Subject: Re: Sternglass Experiment Date: Tue, 20 Feb 2001 09:24:21 +1100 Organization: Improving Message-ID: <64739t8pi0p7o31gcefi2fgc0nngs4ve8i 4ax.com> References: <4.2.0.58.20010216083952.009633f0 postoffice.swbell.net> In-Reply-To: X-Mailer: Forte Agent 1.8/32.548 MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit X-MIME-Autoconverted: from quoted-printable to 8bit by mx1.eskimo.com id OAA21800 Resent-Message-ID: <"D23bf2.0.-L5.rxPaw" mx1> Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/40874 X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com Status: RO X-Status: In reply to Mitchell Jones's message of Sun, 18 Feb 2001 23:30:44 -0600: [snip] >detail if we could obtain his e-mail or snail-mail address. Does anybody >have any suggestions in that regard? --MJ}*** Would that be Sternglass; Ernest J. , Bloomington, IN ? (from patent # US4696022) He probably has a phone number if you look in the directory for Bloomington. Regards, Robin van Spaandonk A Future For Humanity see: http://users.bigpond.net.au/rvanspaa/ From vortex-l-request eskimo.com Mon Feb 19 14:51:34 2001 Received: (from smartlst localhost) by mx1.eskimo.com (8.9.1a/8.8.8) id OAA30593; Mon, 19 Feb 2001 14:45:34 -0800 Resent-Date: Mon, 19 Feb 2001 14:45:34 -0800 Message-ID: <3A91A3CC.31AF8C5B bellsouth.net> Date: Mon, 19 Feb 2001 17:53:00 -0500 From: Terry Blanton X-Mailer: Mozilla 4.73 [en] (WinNT; U) X-Accept-Language: en MIME-Version: 1.0 To: vortex-l eskimo.com Subject: Re: Fwd: [FG]: Peltier Effect thermo-gravity experiments References: Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Resent-Message-ID: <"RADUp1.0.pT7.C8Qaw" mx1> Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/40875 X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com Status: O X-Status: Rick Monteverde wrote: > > Forward from freenrg-l, by Nick Reiter : > > Gentlemen; > > After about a week and a half of mind numbing and emotional > roller-coastering experimentation, I tender for your consideration > something very cool. > > All input and commentary is welcome, although I beg you not to be > overly cranky if I can't reply back individually to each posted or > e-mailed comment. I can only spend so much time here at the computer. > > The report on this set of experiments is on an Avalon page: > > http:/ > /www.alliancelink.com/users/avalon/thermograv160201a.htm > > In essence, I have observed an interesting weight change effect > that, if genuine, may relate to deep thermodynamics. The materials > needed to play with it are not extravagant, and I encourage anyone > with a milligram level balance or torsion pendulum to try it, if they > feel it's merit. Also, if anyone could be so kind as to pass this on > to VortexL, I would be indebted, since I am not currently on that > list but I know a number of you fellows are. Rick, I happen to have one of those Melcor thermoelectric coolers but no scale nor variable power supply. I can ship it to you if you'd like to give it a try. Terry From vortex-l-request eskimo.com Mon Feb 19 19:54:43 2001 Received: (from smartlst localhost) by mx1.eskimo.com (8.9.1a/8.8.8) id TAA02942; Mon, 19 Feb 2001 19:38:02 -0800 Resent-Date: Mon, 19 Feb 2001 19:38:02 -0800 X-Apparently-From: Message-Id: <4.2.0.58.20010219214556.00b76db0 postoffice.swbell.net> X-Sender: cjford1 pop.mail.yahoo.com X-Mailer: QUALCOMM Windows Eudora Pro Version 4.2.0.58 Date: Mon, 19 Feb 2001 21:48:21 -0600 To: vortex-l eskimo.com From: Charles Ford Subject: Fwd: [FG]: Peltier Effect thermo-gravity experiments Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"; format=flowed Resent-Message-ID: <"Oi6h-2.0.tj.PQUaw" mx1> Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/40876 X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com Status: RO X-Status: Folks! This little experiment has stirred up quite a bit of discussion on freenrg-l Nick asked for someone to post it here and I seen nobody has done this yet So here tiz >Gentlemen; > > After about a week and a half of mind numbing and emotional > roller-coastering experimentation, I tender for your consideration > something very cool. > > All input and commentary is welcome, although I beg you not to be > overly cranky if I can't reply back individually to each posted or > e-mailed comment. I can only spend so much time here at the computer. > > The report on this set of experiments is on an Avalon page: > >http://www. >alliancelink.com/users/avalon/thermograv160201a.htm > > In essence, I have observed an interesting weight change effect that, > if genuine, may relate to deep thermodynamics. The materials needed to > play with it are not extravagant, and I encourage anyone with a milligram > level balance or torsion pendulum to try it, if they feel it's > merit. Also, if anyone could be so kind as to pass this on to VortexL, I > would be indebted, since I am not currently on that list but I know a > number of you fellows are. > >Submitted Humbly; > >NR > > > > _________________________________________________________ Do You Yahoo!? Get your free yahoo.com address at http://mail.yahoo.com From vortex-l-request eskimo.com Mon Feb 19 19:55:41 2001 Received: (from smartlst localhost) by mx1.eskimo.com (8.9.1a/8.8.8) id TAA07622; Mon, 19 Feb 2001 19:49:38 -0800 Resent-Date: Mon, 19 Feb 2001 19:49:38 -0800 Mime-Version: 1.0 X-Sender: rick mail.highsurf.com Message-Id: In-Reply-To: <3A91A3CC.31AF8C5B bellsouth.net> References: <3A91A3CC.31AF8C5B bellsouth.net> Date: Mon, 19 Feb 2001 17:49:22 -1000 To: vortex-l eskimo.com From: Rick Monteverde Subject: Re: Fwd: [FG]: Peltier Effect thermo-gravity experiments Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" ; format="flowed" Resent-Message-ID: <"OB1pE3.0._s1.HbUaw" mx1> Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/40877 X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com Status: RO X-Status: Terry - >Rick, > >I happen to have one of those Melcor thermoelectric coolers but >no scale nor variable power supply. I can ship it to you if >you'd like to give it a try. > >Terry I've got the Variac (g) but no scale. I could build a balance or torsion balance easily enough. Need to think about this one a bit. I'm kind of busy with "real world" issues these days, $ and time need to be doled out carefully. Thanks for the offer! - Rick Monteverde Honolulu, HI From vortex-l-request eskimo.com Mon Feb 19 20:06:19 2001 Received: (from smartlst localhost) by mx1.eskimo.com (8.9.1a/8.8.8) id TAA11717; Mon, 19 Feb 2001 19:59:29 -0800 Resent-Date: Mon, 19 Feb 2001 19:59:29 -0800 X-Apparently-From: Message-Id: <4.2.0.58.20010219215329.00bcee50 postoffice.swbell.net> X-Sender: cjford1 pop.mail.yahoo.com X-Mailer: QUALCOMM Windows Eudora Pro Version 4.2.0.58 Date: Mon, 19 Feb 2001 22:10:07 -0600 To: vortex-l eskimo.com From: Charles Ford Subject: Re: HONDA MOTOR COMPANY: INSIGHT In-Reply-To: References: Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"; format=flowed Resent-Message-ID: <"TRdBp1.0.ps2.WkUaw" mx1> Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/40878 X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com Status: RO X-Status: >>electric motor operated on 120 "D-sized" batteries that were connected in >>SERIES and PRODUCED OVER 13 HORSEPOWER that augmented the horsepower >>produced by the gasoline engine. It is important to note that the electric > >When I think of a D cell, I picture a flashlight battery, a flashlight >sized power supply that can produce 13 HP, that's quite a trick, >especially if you can do it for any length of time, that being over 10 aeconds 120 D-cells will produce a voltage of about 180V You need only produce about 4.3 A to get your 13HP there is nothing magic here. A D-cell Energizer will do that for a little over an hour total given some relaxation time between surges. There is no OU here. That was documented by CBS News as well as recorded by Japanese TV reporters >>who were present at the demonstration of my automobile's historic performance >>and later broadcast that performance in Japan. > >I'd sure like to see a video tape of this! Me too. I watch CBS pretty regularly and never saw a hint of it. >>Together, we and humanity will win. > >When I hear a story like this I'm reminded of that my attorney says, "how >do you know this? I assume that Honda is planning on marketing this car. >If this motor generator is so good, why do they need a gasoline motor? Why >can't you close the loop with two battery packs? Couldn't agree more! Did anybody notice there is no mention of Newman on the Honda pages... Are they embaresed? _________________________________________________________ Do You Yahoo!? Get your free yahoo.com address at http://mail.yahoo.com From vortex-l-request eskimo.com Mon Feb 19 20:43:19 2001 Received: (from smartlst localhost) by mx1.eskimo.com (8.9.1a/8.8.8) id UAA27870; Mon, 19 Feb 2001 20:38:29 -0800 Resent-Date: Mon, 19 Feb 2001 20:38:29 -0800 Date: Mon, 19 Feb 2001 22:39:52 -0600 From: Scott Little Subject: Re: Fwd: [FG]: Peltier Effect thermo-gravity experiments In-reply-to: X-Sender: little earthtech.org To: vortex-l eskimo.com, vortex-l@eskimo.com Message-id: <5.0.2.1.0.20010219223355.03049fb8 earthtech.org> MIME-version: 1.0 X-Mailer: QUALCOMM Windows Eudora Version 5.0.2 Content-type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"; format=flowed References: <3A91A3CC.31AF8C5B bellsouth.net> <3A91A3CC.31AF8C5B@bellsouth.net> Resent-Message-ID: <"VJbQ31.0.Op6.5JVaw" mx1> Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/40879 X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com Status: RO X-Status: At 05:49 PM 2/19/2001 -1000, Rick Monteverde wrote: >I've got the Variac (g) but no scale. I could build a balance or torsion >balance easily enough. Need to think about this one a bit. I'm kind of >busy with "real world" issues these days, $ and time need to be doled out >carefully. Thanks for the offer! We've got everything needed for this experiment, including some Melcor coolers that are a bit larger than the ones Reiter used and a venerable old Mettler analytical balance with 0.1 milligram sensitivity. Normally I'd be terribly skeptical of such a claim but I've worked with Reiter before and he is a careful, thorough investigator. Since the effect reverses with polarity, my first guess would be a magnetic influence....but apparently he can rearrange the leads pretty much at will and get the same effect AND he does not get the effect with a dummy resistive load! Does anybody have a hypothesis for a mundane explanation for this observation? Scott Little EarthTech International, Inc. 4030 Braker Lane West, Suite 300 Austin TX 78759 512-342-2185 512-346-3017 (FAX) http://www.earthtech.org From vortex-l-request eskimo.com Mon Feb 19 21:09:24 2001 Received: (from smartlst localhost) by mx1.eskimo.com (8.9.1a/8.8.8) id VAA06810; Mon, 19 Feb 2001 21:08:09 -0800 Resent-Date: Mon, 19 Feb 2001 21:08:09 -0800 Mime-Version: 1.0 Message-Id: In-Reply-To: References: Date: Mon, 19 Feb 2001 11:07:44 -0600 To: vortex-l eskimo.com From: thomas malloy Subject: Re: More on DU toxicity Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" ; format="flowed" Resent-Message-ID: <"9k1uE1.0.Jg1.ukVaw" mx1> Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/40880 X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com Status: O X-Status: > >For the doubters: >> > >Two more surprising stories on DU toxicity appeared today on the > > >In one story, small amounts of Pu, which is deadly in milligram > >doses or less I remember one of my chemistry professors, Dr. Gebelt pointing out that Pu occurs in nature, Perhaps that is the origin of it > > >, has been found in the rounds. If the so-called > >"depleted" material in these rounds has actually been through a I like the explanation of an activation occurring because of the heating and vaporization which occurs on impact. From vortex-l-request eskimo.com Mon Feb 19 21:47:49 2001 Received: (from smartlst localhost) by mx1.eskimo.com (8.9.1a/8.8.8) id VAA17804; Mon, 19 Feb 2001 21:45:49 -0800 Resent-Date: Mon, 19 Feb 2001 21:45:49 -0800 From: Robin van Spaandonk To: vortex-l eskimo.com Subject: Re: Neutrons from Electron Impact? Date: Tue, 20 Feb 2001 16:45:12 +1100 Organization: Improving Message-ID: References: In-Reply-To: X-Mailer: Forte Agent 1.8/32.548 MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit X-MIME-Autoconverted: from quoted-printable to 8bit by mx1.eskimo.com id VAA17733 Resent-Message-ID: <"X1z3e.0.6M4.DIWaw" mx1> Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/40881 X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com Status: O X-Status: In reply to Mitchell Jones's message of Mon, 19 Feb 2001 00:01:11 -0600: [snip] >What matters here is that rest >masses do not include potential energy or the kinetic energy to which >potential energies can be converted. How could they? After all, electrons >exist in millions of distinct circumstances, and hence are capable of >having millions of different potential and kinetic energies. How could one >number for rest mass possibly reflect such an immensely variable mass of >information? The answer is obvious: it cannot. --MJ}*** Actually, to all intents and purposes, all electrons exist in the same circumstance. They are all infinitely far removed from their positive charges (or nearly so, not quite so true for 1S orbital electrons in heavy atoms). Furthermore, the potential energy available per proton is precisely the energy from 1 electron approaching that proton, all other electrons are irrelevant. This is easily seen if one considers that when the charge on a proton is neutralised by combination with the electron, all potential energy of that proton with respect to all other electrons in the universe disappears. It therefore seems reasonable that the total field energy available is a constant, and that it is the amount released by one electron. As to kinetic energy, we were talking about rest mass, not relativistic mass. Furthermore, every particle has an almost infinite number of different relativistic masses concurrently, depending on the frame of reference used to measure the mass, this takes care of your "millions of distinct circumstances". The rest mass is the lowest mass measurable, and is the mass measured when in the special frame of reference in which the particle is at rest relative to the measuring device. (Auw! - how did that bullet get in my foot?) Now as to your statement: >What matters here is that rest >masses do not include potential energy or the kinetic energy to which >potential energies can be converted. Consider the following thought experiment: We have a means of converting mass into energy and back again with 100% efficiency. We have a means of storing energy as potential energy in a device H (for heavy) which is at ground level. A separate mass s (for small) is converted totally into energy, and this energy is stored as potential energy in H, where according to you it has no mass. H is now taken to the top of Old Smokey. On top of Old Smokey, the potential energy stored in H is removed, and converted once again into mass s. Both H and s are allowed to fall back to the bottom of Old Smokey, where their kinetic energy is collected. The kinetic energy collected from H is reused in the next cycle to lift the fully charged H back to the top of Old Smokey, while the kinetic energy from s is siphoned off and sold to buy lunch. This process is repeated as rapidly as possible. Who says there is no such thing as a "free lunch"? ;) > >The kinetic >>energy of the electron however is not something that you can add on to the >>combined mass electron and proton "to get even more energy". It was already >>included in the mass energy of the pair before this little jaunt took off. > >***{We are talking about an electron at "infinity," with an energy due to >that position which could not possibly be part of the electron rest mass >number given in textbooks. Indeed, such a notion is ridiculous: the rest >mass of the electron is .00054854807 amu, which is .51 MeV. How can that >number possibly include the 2.4 MeV of potential energy that an electron at >infinity has with respect to a naked proton? It just doesn't compute, >Robin! --MJ}*** It does if you choose the correct size for the proton, and furthermore, you are assuming that all the mass comes from the electron, while in my previous post I deliberately referred to the total mass of the pair, rather than just that of either particle independently (IOW some portion may come from the proton too). [snip] Regards, Robin van Spaandonk A Future For Humanity see: http://users.bigpond.net.au/rvanspaa/ From vortex-l-request eskimo.com Mon Feb 19 22:04:09 2001 Received: (from smartlst localhost) by mx1.eskimo.com (8.9.1a/8.8.8) id WAA22992; Mon, 19 Feb 2001 22:02:45 -0800 Resent-Date: Mon, 19 Feb 2001 22:02:45 -0800 From: Robin van Spaandonk To: vortex-l eskimo.com Subject: Re: Neutrons from Electron Impact? Date: Tue, 20 Feb 2001 17:02:09 +1100 Organization: Improving Message-ID: References: In-Reply-To: X-Mailer: Forte Agent 1.8/32.548 MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit X-MIME-Autoconverted: from quoted-printable to 8bit by mx1.eskimo.com id WAA22938 Resent-Message-ID: <"JGrQZ.0.5d5.5YWaw" mx1> Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/40882 X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com Status: O X-Status: In reply to Horace Heffner's message of Sun, 18 Feb 2001 22:46:29 -0900: [snip] >>electron is much smaller than that in one of its dimensions. (It may have >>the form of a spinning disc or a toroid, for example.) --MJ}*** > > >I think there is much evidence that the above is false. The high energy >electrons at SLAC have been used to determine that there are lumps in the >nucleus. The electron deBroglie wavelength can be made arbitrarily small >by adding momentum. These two apparently contradictory statements may actually not be. According to Mills, the free electron is indeed a flat disk, with a circumference(radius?) equal to the de Broglie wavelength. (However this may be somewhat problematic IMO, if you consider that the de Broglie wavelength depends on your frame of reference, i.e. the electron would need to have differing radii depending on who was watching it :). [snip] >>***{The nucleus is just a region in which massive particles fly about at >>enormous velocities in somewhat erratic orbits of their own--which means: >>it probably doesn't have a clearly demarcated surface like a billiard ball, > >Yes - this is proven. Well at least that's one thing we know for certain, right? :) Actually, I think nuclear physics is one of the worst understood branches of physics, and it wouldn't surprise me in the least if a completely off beat model such as that of Theodore M. Lach, II were correct. [snip] Regards, Robin van Spaandonk A Future For Humanity see: http://users.bigpond.net.au/rvanspaa/ From vortex-l-request eskimo.com Mon Feb 19 23:02:28 2001 Received: (from smartlst localhost) by mx1.eskimo.com (8.9.1a/8.8.8) id WAA10438; Mon, 19 Feb 2001 22:57:32 -0800 Resent-Date: Mon, 19 Feb 2001 22:57:32 -0800 Message-Id: Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Date: Mon, 19 Feb 2001 22:06:57 -0900 To: vortex-l eskimo.com From: hheffner mtaonline.net (Horace Heffner) Subject: Re: Neutrons from D2-Ar-N2-Hot W? Resent-Message-ID: <"hHgs13.0.0Z2.SLXaw" mx1> Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/40883 X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com Status: O X-Status: At 11:22 AM 2/13/1, Jones Beene wrote: > >Horace, do you have any reference for "stripping" cross >sections? or even any citations to authoritative anecdotal reports? Sorry, I have no refs handy. I would suggest a literature search on "Stellerator" and "Project Sherwood." >According to experimenters who are getting low energy neutrons >at "The Open Source Fusor Research Consortium" - formerly the >Farnswoth Fusor group, D+D fusion is so much more likely than >stripping at low energy that they don't even consider it to be a >factor. I don't necessarily agree with them but this much is >certain, in a Fusor you will get a measurable neutron producing >reaction down to 10 kev and substantial at 20 kev. Note that the >Fusor has a nearly spherical convergence region whereas with the >facing cathode geometry that MJ refers to, there is no >convergence region to multiply the apparent ion energy. It seems to me that electron catalysis might be the reason the fusor works, not the fact that the nucleii whiz past each other in the center, or (alternately) create a hot plasma there, depending on the mean free path. It seems to me it is the fact that the electrons and nucleii are always moving in opposite directions at high eneries across the grid that may be the critical feature. Has the fusor group actually measured He3 and He4 production? > >This 10Kev threshold would not be true in a hydrogen plasma, >however, even if it were enriched with D, as the Maxwellian >curve is substantially different for anything less than pure D. >Check out Preston, Shaw and Young, "Fast Neutron Physics" as >early as 1954 they demonstrated substantial neutrons at low >energies. Substantial neutrons from what kind of device? Regards, Horace Heffner From vortex-l-request eskimo.com Mon Feb 19 23:05:50 2001 Received: (from smartlst localhost) by mx1.eskimo.com (8.9.1a/8.8.8) id XAA11549; Mon, 19 Feb 2001 23:02:44 -0800 Resent-Date: Mon, 19 Feb 2001 23:02:44 -0800 From: Robin van Spaandonk To: vortex-l eskimo.com Subject: Re: Neutrons from D2-Ar-N2-Hot W? Date: Tue, 20 Feb 2001 18:02:04 +1100 Organization: Improving Message-ID: References: <3A89895B.8000201@pacbell.net> In-Reply-To: <3A89895B.8000201 pacbell.net> X-Mailer: Forte Agent 1.8/32.548 MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit X-MIME-Autoconverted: from quoted-printable to 8bit by mx1.eskimo.com id XAA11509 Resent-Message-ID: <"jB3Y42.0.Iq2.KQXaw" mx1> Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/40884 X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com Status: O X-Status: In reply to Jones Beene's message of Tue, 13 Feb 2001 11:22:03 -0800: >Horace Heffner wrote: > > >> This experiment would only be mysterious if isotopically pure protium were >> used, because deuterium present in ordinary hydrogen will strip neutrons >> upon hitting the tungsten at that high energy. If there are more neutrons >> than would be obtained from stipping in deuterioum at its partial pressure >> in the tube then maybe something special is going on. > > >Horace, do you have any reference for "stripping" cross >sections? or even any citations to authoritative anecdotal reports? You (and others) may find this useful: http://depni.npi.msu.su/cdfe/services/index.html . It has info on giant dipole resonance and charged particle reactions etc. (choose the required database from the drop down list). The left hand column contains references, and there is also a legend available if you look around. Regards, Robin van Spaandonk A Future For Humanity see: http://users.bigpond.net.au/rvanspaa/ From vortex-l-request eskimo.com Tue Feb 20 07:24:08 2001 Received: (from smartlst localhost) by mx1.eskimo.com (8.9.1a/8.8.8) id HAA15353; Tue, 20 Feb 2001 07:18:11 -0800 Resent-Date: Tue, 20 Feb 2001 07:18:11 -0800 Message-ID: <3A928A96.236A0163 verisoft.com.tr> Date: Tue, 20 Feb 2001 17:17:42 +0200 From: hamdi ucar X-Mailer: Mozilla 4.7 [en] (Win98; I) X-Accept-Language: en-US MIME-Version: 1.0 To: vortex-l eskimo.com Subject: Re: Fwd: [FG]: Peltier Effect thermo-gravity experiments References: <3A91A3CC.31AF8C5B bellsouth.net> <3A91A3CC.31AF8C5B@bellsouth.net> <5.0.2.1.0.20010219223355.03049fb8@earthtech.org> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Resent-Message-ID: <"mOzcJ2.0.pl3.ogeaw" mx1> Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/40885 X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com Status: O X-Status: Scott Little wrote: > [snip] > Does anybody have a hypothesis for a mundane explanation for this observation? > No :), but it should be careful on thermal capability of the cell. It may generate too much heat which is not be obtainable with substitution of ohmic load. The cooled side may collect moisture, which should be avoided. As suggested already, in order to dissipate/neutralize the heat and the cooling, a thermal short-circuit would be necessary, I hope this modification does not kill the effect. I suggest wide range spectral monitoring of the current and possible electromagnetic emission. In the search of non conventional effects, one should be very careful on assumptions. For example it is not safe to assume the peltier cells are electrically equivalent to a passive load. If the phenomenon depends on electrical characteristics, may the every components in the circuit, power supply, wires, etc. are sensitive. If conditions are not meet, reproduction may fail. Regards, hamdi ucar From vortex-l-request eskimo.com Tue Feb 20 08:03:18 2001 Received: (from smartlst localhost) by mx1.eskimo.com (8.9.1a/8.8.8) id HAA30830; Tue, 20 Feb 2001 07:57:04 -0800 Resent-Date: Tue, 20 Feb 2001 07:57:04 -0800 Message-Id: <5.0.1.4.0.20010220095128.03233e70 earthtech.org> X-Sender: little earthtech.org X-Mailer: QUALCOMM Windows Eudora Version 5.0.1 Date: Tue, 20 Feb 2001 09:56:47 -0600 To: vortex-l eskimo.com, vortex-l@eskimo.com From: Scott Little Subject: Peltier Effect thermo-gravity experiments In-Reply-To: <3A928A96.236A0163 verisoft.com.tr> References: <3A91A3CC.31AF8C5B bellsouth.net> <3A91A3CC.31AF8C5B bellsouth.net> <5.0.2.1.0.20010219223355.03049fb8 earthtech.org> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"; format=flowed Resent-Message-ID: <"83NGc1.0.dX7.GFfaw" mx1> Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/40886 X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com Status: RO X-Status: At 05:17 PM 2/20/01 +0200, hamdi ucar wrote: >No :), but it should be careful on thermal capability of the cell. It may >generate too much heat which is not be obtainable with substitution of >ohmic load. It is true that, for a given power, the hot side of the Peltier device will get hotter than an ohmic load with the same power because the Peltier device both dissipates all its input power on the hot side and pumps some heat form the cold side to the hot side. > The cooled side may collect moisture, which should be avoided. Good point. However, that would always cause the weight to increase, no? >As suggested already, in order to dissipate/neutralize the heat and the >cooling, a thermal short-circuit would be necessary, I hope this >modification does not kill the effect. I believe that is essentially what he did with the Cu foil covering...and he reports that it IMPROVES the effect! >I suggest wide range spectral monitoring of the current and possible >electromagnetic emission. In the search of non conventional effects, one >should be very careful on assumptions. Indeed! Scott Little, EarthTech Int'l, Inc. http://www.earthtech.org Suite 300, 4030 Braker Lane West, Austin TX 78759, USA 512-342-2185 (voice), 512-346-3017 (FAX), little earthtech.org (email) From vortex-l-request eskimo.com Tue Feb 20 08:25:41 2001 Received: (from smartlst localhost) by mx1.eskimo.com (8.9.1a/8.8.8) id IAA06179; Tue, 20 Feb 2001 08:16:36 -0800 Resent-Date: Tue, 20 Feb 2001 08:16:36 -0800 Message-Id: <5.0.2.1.2.20010220110245.00a8b3f8 pop.mindspring.com> X-Sender: jedrothwell pop.mindspring.com X-Mailer: QUALCOMM Windows Eudora Version 5.0.2 Date: Tue, 20 Feb 2001 11:16:32 -0500 To: vortex-l eskimo.com From: Jed Rothwell Subject: Re: HONDA MOTOR COMPANY: INSIGHT In-Reply-To: <4.2.0.58.20010219215329.00bcee50 postoffice.swbell.net> References: Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"; format=flowed Resent-Message-ID: <"n2xhB2.0.TW1.ZXfaw" mx1> Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/40887 X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com Status: RO X-Status: Charles Ford & various others wrote: >That was documented by CBS News as well as recorded by Japanese TV reporters >>>who were present at the demonstration of my automobile's historic >>>performance >>>and later broadcast that performance in Japan. The performance of the car is remarkable, but not o-u. It is well within thermodynamic limits. It is a light car and it gets 70 miles per gallon. My seat of the pants guess is that makes it ~40% efficient, which is remarkable. Lightweight, high efficiency conventional automobiles are ~20% efficient, according to the JPL. They get roughly 30 mpg. >>>Together, we and humanity will win. >> >>When I hear a story like this I'm reminded of that my attorney says, "how >>do you know this? I assume that Honda is planning on marketing this car. They are already selling it. A fellow I know has one, and recommends it. I think I would prefer to have a Toyota Prius. >> If this motor generator is so good, why do they need a gasoline motor? >> Why can't you close the loop with two battery packs? > >Couldn't agree more! Did anybody notice there is no mention of Newman on >the Honda pages... Are they embaresed? Newman claims this design is based on his work. Hmmm . . . Hybrid automobiles were first patented in 1905 by H. Piper, and railroad locomotives have used the same principle since the late 1940s. So I guess there is nothing original in Newman's work. - Jed From vortex-l-request eskimo.com Tue Feb 20 08:55:43 2001 Received: (from smartlst localhost) by mx1.eskimo.com (8.9.1a/8.8.8) id IAA21170; Tue, 20 Feb 2001 08:50:06 -0800 Resent-Date: Tue, 20 Feb 2001 08:50:06 -0800 Message-ID: <3A92A1EA.846079A0 bellsouth.net> Date: Tue, 20 Feb 2001 11:57:14 -0500 From: Terry Blanton X-Mailer: Mozilla 4.73 [en] (WinNT; U) X-Accept-Language: en MIME-Version: 1.0 To: vortex-l eskimo.com Subject: Re: HONDA MOTOR COMPANY: INSIGHT References: <5.0.2.1.2.20010220110245.00a8b3f8@pop.mindspring.com> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Resent-Message-ID: <"LIcla3.0.eA5.-0gaw" mx1> Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/40888 X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com Status: O X-Status: Jed Rothwell wrote: > > Charles Ford & various others wrote: > >>When I hear a story like this I'm reminded of that my attorney says, "how > >>do you know this? I assume that Honda is planning on marketing this car. > > They are already selling it. A fellow I know has one, and recommends it. I > think I would prefer to have a Toyota Prius. The Toyota seats 4 whereas the Honda seats only two. Terry From vortex-l-request eskimo.com Tue Feb 20 09:13:59 2001 Received: (from smartlst localhost) by mx1.eskimo.com (8.9.1a/8.8.8) id JAA27116; Tue, 20 Feb 2001 09:03:18 -0800 Resent-Date: Tue, 20 Feb 2001 09:03:18 -0800 Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" X-Sender: mjones pop.jump.net Message-Id: In-Reply-To: <5.0.1.4.0.20010220095128.03233e70 earthtech.org> References: <3A928A96.236A0163 verisoft.com.tr> <3A91A3CC.31AF8C5B bellsouth.net> <3A91A3CC.31AF8C5B bellsouth.net> <5.0.2.1.0.20010219223355.03049fb8 earthtech.org> Date: Tue, 20 Feb 2001 10:58:54 -0600 To: vortex-l eskimo.com From: Mitchell Jones Subject: Re: Peltier Effect thermo-gravity experiments Resent-Message-ID: <"M41bQ2.0.cd6.MDgaw" mx1> Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/40889 X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com Status: O X-Status: >At 05:17 PM 2/20/01 +0200, hamdi ucar wrote: > >>No :), but it should be careful on thermal capability of the cell. It may >>generate too much heat which is not be obtainable with substitution of >>ohmic load. > >It is true that, for a given power, the hot side of the Peltier device will >get hotter than an ohmic load with the same power because the Peltier >device both dissipates all its input power on the hot side and pumps some >heat form the cold side to the hot side. > >> The cooled side may collect moisture, which should be avoided. > >Good point. However, that would always cause the weight to increase, no? ***{If the cold side was at the bottom, the moisture might drip off, whereas if it were on the top, it might not drip off. Result: the device would appear to be heavier when the cold side was on top, and lighter when it was on the bottom. That is exactly the situation in fig. A, in the writeup at http:/. Furthermore, in a Peltier device reversing the current causes the cool side to become hot and the hot side to become cool, so reversing the current in this experiment would reverse the effect, which also appears to be what was observed in the posted experiment. I think Hamdi may have found the artifact that causes this result. --Mitchell Jones}*** >>As suggested already, in order to dissipate/neutralize the heat and the >>cooling, a thermal short-circuit would be necessary, I hope this >>modification does not kill the effect. > >I believe that is essentially what he did with the Cu foil covering...and >he reports that it IMPROVES the effect! > >>I suggest wide range spectral monitoring of the current and possible >>electromagnetic emission. In the search of non conventional effects, one >>should be very careful on assumptions. > >Indeed! > > > >Scott Little, EarthTech Int'l, Inc. http://www.earthtech.org >Suite 300, 4030 Braker Lane West, Austin TX 78759, USA >512-342-2185 (voice), 512-346-3017 (FAX), little earthtech.org (email) ________________ Quote of the month: "Law is what the authorities use to ride the country." --Anatoly Schransky From vortex-l-request eskimo.com Tue Feb 20 09:28:17 2001 Received: (from smartlst localhost) by mx1.eskimo.com (8.9.1a/8.8.8) id JAA03570; Tue, 20 Feb 2001 09:22:48 -0800 Resent-Date: Tue, 20 Feb 2001 09:22:48 -0800 X-Apparently-From: Message-Id: <4.2.0.58.20010220103155.009618e0 postoffice.swbell.net> X-Sender: cjford1 pop.mail.yahoo.com X-Mailer: QUALCOMM Windows Eudora Pro Version 4.2.0.58 Date: Tue, 20 Feb 2001 11:23:07 -0600 To: vortex-l eskimo.com From: Charles Ford Subject: Re: Fwd: [FG]: Peltier Effect thermo-gravity experiments In-Reply-To: <3A928A96.236A0163 verisoft.com.tr> References: <3A91A3CC.31AF8C5B bellsouth.net> <3A91A3CC.31AF8C5B bellsouth.net> <5.0.2.1.0.20010219223355.03049fb8 earthtech.org> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"; format=flowed Resent-Message-ID: <"YH1wp.0.ht.dVgaw" mx1> Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/40890 X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com Status: O X-Status: At 05:17 PM 2/20/01 +0200, you wrote: >Scott Little wrote: > > >[snip] > > Does anybody have a hypothesis for a mundane explanation for this > observation? > > What? First we show you magic and now you want miracles. :-) There are no conjectures about cause to my knowledge at this time. I have ben thinking about some possibility but nothing clear has come up. I will have to pull the chain on Newtons 3rd in order to think in a way that will make a difference.... Charlie Ford KC5-OWZ cjford1 yahoo.com cjford1 swbell.net _________________________________________________________ Do You Yahoo!? Get your free yahoo.com address at http://mail.yahoo.com From vortex-l-request eskimo.com Tue Feb 20 09:42:15 2001 Received: (from smartlst localhost) by mx1.eskimo.com (8.9.1a/8.8.8) id JAA30456; Tue, 20 Feb 2001 09:35:16 -0800 Resent-Date: Tue, 20 Feb 2001 09:35:16 -0800 From: "xplorer" To: Subject: RE: Fwd: [FG]: Peltier Effect thermo-gravity experiments Date: Wed, 21 Feb 2001 00:28:12 +0700 Message-ID: MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-Priority: 3 (Normal) X-MSMail-Priority: Normal X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook IMO, Build 9.0.2416 (9.0.2910.0) X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V4.72.3110.3 In-Reply-To: <5.0.2.1.0.20010219223355.03049fb8 earthtech.org> Importance: Normal Resent-Message-ID: <"N_H_N3.0.QR7.Jhgaw" mx1> Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/40892 X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com Status: O X-Status: > From: Scott Little [mailto:little earthtech.org] > Sent: 2001 February 20, Tuesday 11:40 > To: vortex-l eskimo.com; vortex-l@eskimo.com > Subject: Re: Fwd: [FG]: Peltier Effect thermo-gravity experiments >x< > Normally I'd be > terribly skeptical of such a claim but I've worked with Reiter before and > he is a careful, thorough investigator. Since the effect reverses with > polarity, my first guess would be a magnetic influence....but > apparently he > can rearrange the leads pretty much at will and get the same > effect AND he > does not get the effect with a dummy resistive load! > > Does anybody have a hypothesis for a mundane explanation for this > observation? The Graneau effect, perhaps ? From vortex-l-request eskimo.com Tue Feb 20 09:42:28 2001 Received: (from smartlst localhost) by mx1.eskimo.com (8.9.1a/8.8.8) id JAA29964; Tue, 20 Feb 2001 09:34:54 -0800 Resent-Date: Tue, 20 Feb 2001 09:34:54 -0800 Message-Id: <5.0.2.1.2.20010220122112.02644298 pop.mindspring.com> X-Sender: jedrothwell pop.mindspring.com X-Mailer: QUALCOMM Windows Eudora Version 5.0.2 Date: Tue, 20 Feb 2001 12:34:47 -0500 To: vortex-l eskimo.com From: Jed Rothwell Subject: Re: HONDA MOTOR COMPANY: INSIGHT In-Reply-To: <3A92A1EA.846079A0 bellsouth.net> References: <5.0.2.1.2.20010220110245.00a8b3f8 pop.mindspring.com> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"; format=flowed Resent-Message-ID: <"v0OJu3.0.wJ7.yggaw" mx1> Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/40891 X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com Status: RO X-Status: Terry Blanton wrote: > > They are already selling it. A fellow I know has one, and recommends it. I > > think I would prefer to have a Toyota Prius. > >The Toyota seats 4 whereas the Honda seats only two. Yeah, and it looks more practical in other ways too. Better for grocery shopping or hauling stuff from Home Depot. I get the impression the Honda employs more "heroic engineering" such as ultra-light weight, sculpted body parts, whereas the Toyota is a modified conventional body. The Honda may be more expensive to repair after a minor collision. When it comes to spending $20,000 of my own money for a utilitarian machine, I would probably be a conservative wimp. I would stick to semi-conventional design -- an incremental improvement, rather than a great leap forward. I think most people would. That is an important lesson for people in marketing. Customers talk big and say they want futuristic features, but when it comes time to shell out real money, they often pick dull, safe, tried-and-true products instead. - Jed From vortex-l-request eskimo.com Tue Feb 20 12:11:13 2001 Received: (from smartlst localhost) by mx1.eskimo.com (8.9.1a/8.8.8) id MAA30941; Tue, 20 Feb 2001 12:02:36 -0800 Resent-Date: Tue, 20 Feb 2001 12:02:36 -0800 Mime-Version: 1.0 X-Sender: rick mail.highsurf.com Message-Id: Date: Tue, 20 Feb 2001 10:02:07 -1000 To: vortex-l eskimo.com From: Rick Monteverde Subject: Re: Peltier Effect thermo-gravity experiments Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" ; format="flowed" Resent-Message-ID: <"jN-0e3.0.8Z7.Priaw" mx1> Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/40893 X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com Status: RO X-Status: Mitchell - At 10:58 AM -0600 2/20/01, Mitchell Jones wrote: >***{If the cold side was at the bottom, the moisture might drip off, >whereas if it were on the top, it might not drip off. Result: the device >would appear to be heavier when the cold side was on top, and lighter when >it was on the bottom. That is exactly the situation in fig. A, in the >writeup at You'd think Nick might have noticed a bunch of condensation adding to the weight of the sample in all cases, and dripping off the bottom in some making it weigh a bit less. And when the thing is covered completely in foil it makes this effect larger? Even more area with condensation dripping off that Nick still doesn't notice? Hmm... Do you *really* think Hamdi has found the artifact? - Rick Monteverde Honolulu, HI From vortex-l-request eskimo.com Tue Feb 20 16:30:10 2001 Received: (from smartlst localhost) by mx1.eskimo.com (8.9.1a/8.8.8) id QAA26258; Tue, 20 Feb 2001 16:27:24 -0800 Resent-Date: Tue, 20 Feb 2001 16:27:24 -0800 X-Apparently-From: Message-Id: <4.2.0.58.20010220163405.00967320 postoffice.swbell.net> X-Sender: cjford1 pop.mail.yahoo.com X-Mailer: QUALCOMM Windows Eudora Pro Version 4.2.0.58 Date: Tue, 20 Feb 2001 16:40:32 -0600 To: vortex-l eskimo.com From: Charles Ford Subject: Re: Peltier Effect thermo-gravity experiments In-Reply-To: Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"; format=flowed Resent-Message-ID: <"sVNES1.0.zP6.hjmaw" mx1> Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/40894 X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com Status: RO X-Status: At 10:02 AM 2/20/01 -1000, you wrote: >Mitchell - > >At 10:58 AM -0600 2/20/01, Mitchell Jones wrote: > >>***{If the cold side was at the bottom, the moisture might drip off, >>whereas if it were on the top, it might not drip off. Result: the device >>would appear to be heavier when the cold side was on top, and lighter when >>it was on the bottom. That is exactly the situation in fig. A, in the >>writeup at > >You'd think Nick might have noticed a bunch of condensation adding to the >weight of the sample in all cases, and dripping off the bottom in some >making it weigh a bit less. And when the thing is covered completely in >foil it makes this effect larger? Even more area with condensation >dripping off that Nick still doesn't notice? Hmm... > >Do you *really* think Hamdi has found the artifact? > >- Rick Monteverde >Honolulu, HI Further problem with this.. There is not enough time for this to take place. If moisture was to build up into a drop this would take several minuets. most of these Peltier chips will melt down in a mater of seconds when run without heat sink.. Charlie Ford KC5-OWZ cjford1 yahoo.com cjford1 swbell.net _________________________________________________________ Do You Yahoo!? Get your free yahoo.com address at http://mail.yahoo.com From vortex-l-request eskimo.com Tue Feb 20 19:43:03 2001 Received: (from smartlst localhost) by mx1.eskimo.com (8.9.1a/8.8.8) id TAA19823; Tue, 20 Feb 2001 19:42:19 -0800 Resent-Date: Tue, 20 Feb 2001 19:42:19 -0800 Mime-Version: 1.0 Message-Id: In-Reply-To: <3A92A1EA.846079A0 bellsouth.net> References: <5.0.2.1.2.20010220110245.00a8b3f8 pop.mindspring.com> <3A92A1EA.846079A0 bellsouth.net> Date: Mon, 19 Feb 2001 21:40:43 -0600 To: vortex-l eskimo.com From: thomas malloy Subject: Re: HONDA MOTOR COMPANY: INSIGHT Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" ; format="flowed" Resent-Message-ID: <"Ns7JK.0.fr4.Qapaw" mx1> Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/40895 X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com Status: O X-Status: >Jed Rothwell wrote: >> >> Charles Ford & various others wrote: > > > >> >>When I hear a story like this I'm reminded of that my attorney says, "how >> >>do you know this? I assume that Honda is planning on marketing this car. >> >> They are already selling it. A fellow I know has one, and recommends it. I > > think I would prefer to have a Toyota Prius. >What I was referring to was Newman's ascertion that the design of >this motor generator was based on his. BTW I question that even 120 >D cell batteries would move a car very far or very fast. From vortex-l-request eskimo.com Tue Feb 20 19:43:17 2001 Received: (from smartlst localhost) by mx1.eskimo.com (8.9.1a/8.8.8) id TAA19847; Tue, 20 Feb 2001 19:42:24 -0800 Resent-Date: Tue, 20 Feb 2001 19:42:24 -0800 Mime-Version: 1.0 Message-Id: Date: Mon, 19 Feb 2001 21:40:43 -0600 To: vortex-l eskimo.com From: thomas malloy Subject: what did Joseph Newman do? Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" ; format="flowed" Resent-Message-ID: <"K9e_T1.0.1s4.Vapaw" mx1> Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/40896 X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com Status: O X-Status: Frank Znidarsic asked the above question I'm suprised that you haven't heard of Joe's energy machine. A local physicist, Roger Hastings measured the input and output and determined that it was over unity. What fascinates me is the anecdotal evidence which suggests that the machine cools off the environment in which it operates. It is also a great high torque motor. Joe has been selling what he says are working models. I'd love to test one, but it is a physics experiment. Joe has been unable to secure patent protection for the design. He fought the PTO all the way to the appeals court. From vortex-l-request eskimo.com Tue Feb 20 20:11:31 2001 Received: (from smartlst localhost) by mx1.eskimo.com (8.9.1a/8.8.8) id UAA30241; Tue, 20 Feb 2001 20:04:28 -0800 Resent-Date: Tue, 20 Feb 2001 20:04:28 -0800 X-Apparently-From: Message-Id: <4.2.0.58.20010220221100.00b9c6f0 postoffice.swbell.net> X-Sender: cjford1 pop.mail.yahoo.com X-Mailer: QUALCOMM Windows Eudora Pro Version 4.2.0.58 Date: Tue, 20 Feb 2001 22:15:21 -0600 To: vortex-l eskimo.com From: Charles Ford Subject: RE: Fwd: [FG]: Peltier Effect thermo-gravity experiments In-Reply-To: References: <5.0.2.1.0.20010219223355.03049fb8 earthtech.org> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"; format=flowed Resent-Message-ID: <"MvDmF1.0.RO7.Bvpaw" mx1> Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/40897 X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com Status: O X-Status: At 12:28 AM 2/21/01 +0700, Xplorer wrote: > > apparently he > > can rearrange the leads pretty much at will and get the same > > effect AND he > > does not get the effect with a dummy resistive load! > > > > Does anybody have a hypothesis for a mundane explanation for this > > observation? > >The Graneau effect, perhaps ? Would you be so kind as to briefly explain this effect? I was unable to find any info. _________________________________________________________ Do You Yahoo!? Get your free yahoo.com address at http://mail.yahoo.com From vortex-l-request eskimo.com Tue Feb 20 20:28:55 2001 Received: (from smartlst localhost) by mx1.eskimo.com (8.9.1a/8.8.8) id UAA08552; Tue, 20 Feb 2001 20:23:12 -0800 Resent-Date: Tue, 20 Feb 2001 20:23:12 -0800 Date: Tue, 20 Feb 2001 22:22:01 -0600 From: Scott Little Subject: replication of Peltier force xducer X-Sender: little earthtech.org To: reit ezworks.net Cc: vortex-l eskimo.com Message-id: <5.0.2.1.0.20010220171027.038fa0e8 earthtech.org> MIME-version: 1.0 X-Mailer: QUALCOMM Windows Eudora Version 5.0.2 Content-type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"; format=flowed Resent-Message-ID: <"MymrV1.0.T52.lAqaw" mx1> Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/40898 X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com Status: O X-Status: Hello Nick, I got wind of your latest discovery on the Vortex-l discussion group and today I tried the experiment myself. In short, it works! I used a larger Melcor Peltier device...about 1.5" square and fed it about 2.5 amps from a constant current supply. Initially I just set the bare device on the pan of our old Mettler H6 analytical balance (0.1 milligram readability) and arranged the leads, twisted tightly together so they ran more-or-less horizontally out the door of the balance compartment to a fixed mooring point then on to the power supply. Upon energizing the device I immediately observed the effect you described...and in the same direction as you observed. It is as if the flow of heat exerts a small force in the same direction as the heat is flowing thru the Peltier device. The magnitude of my effect was 5-10 milligrams, perhaps larger due to my larger device. Indeed the effect reverses direction with reversed polarity. With no place for the heat to go, the device quickly becomes rather hot all over...and probably doesn't pump heat very well anymore. When the device was very hot, the effect was greatly reduced. When I cooled the device back down to room temperature and tried again, the effect was back at full strength! I tried a quick Cu sheet heat shunt around the device and didn't notice any significant improvement...but it still worked. I then wrapped the device entirely in several layers of paper towel to provide insulation so as to greatly reduce convection currents around the device. The effect was undiminished by this treatment. I replaced the Peltier device with a 5 ohm resistor and put the same current thru it. No discernible effect with either polarity!!! There was no sign of moisture condensing on the device. Needless to say, I am intrigued. I expect to find a mundane explanation for this phenomenon but, right now, I have no idea what it will be! ....back to the lab. Meanwhile, if any of you vorts have any ideas about this experiment, let's hear 'em. Scott Little EarthTech International, Inc. 4030 Braker Lane West, Suite 300 Austin TX 78759 512-342-2185 512-346-3017 (FAX) http://www.earthtech.org From vortex-l-request eskimo.com Tue Feb 20 20:29:46 2001 Received: (from smartlst localhost) by mx1.eskimo.com (8.9.1a/8.8.8) id UAA10091; Tue, 20 Feb 2001 20:25:56 -0800 Resent-Date: Tue, 20 Feb 2001 20:25:56 -0800 X-Apparently-From: Message-Id: <4.2.0.58.20010220221808.00b77960 postoffice.swbell.net> X-Sender: cjford1 pop.mail.yahoo.com X-Mailer: QUALCOMM Windows Eudora Pro Version 4.2.0.58 Date: Tue, 20 Feb 2001 22:30:08 -0600 To: vortex-l eskimo.com From: Charles Ford Subject: Re: what did Joseph Newman do? In-Reply-To: Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"; format=flowed Resent-Message-ID: <"jL1My1.0.YT2.JDqaw" mx1> Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/40899 X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com Status: O X-Status: At 09:40 PM 2/19/01 -0600, you wrote: >Frank Znidarsic asked the above question > >I'm suprised that you haven't heard of Joe's energy machine. A local >physicist, Roger Hastings measured the input and output and determined >that it was over unity. What fascinates me is the anecdotal evidence which >suggests that the machine cools off the environment in which it operates. >It is also a great high torque motor. Joe has been selling what he says >are working models. I'd love to test one, but it is a physics experiment. >Joe has been unable to secure patent protection for the design. He fought >the PTO all the way to the appeals court. Perhaps you should place the question back into context. Most of us are aware of what Newman thinks he did. In context the compleat question is "What did Newman do for Honda?" _________________________________________________________ Do You Yahoo!? Get your free yahoo.com address at http://mail.yahoo.com From vortex-l-request eskimo.com Tue Feb 20 20:44:18 2001 Received: (from smartlst localhost) by mx1.eskimo.com (8.9.1a/8.8.8) id UAA17671; Tue, 20 Feb 2001 20:39:57 -0800 Resent-Date: Tue, 20 Feb 2001 20:39:57 -0800 From: FZNIDARSIC aol.com Message-ID: Date: Tue, 20 Feb 2001 23:39:08 EST Subject: Re: what did Joseph Newman do? To: vortex-l eskimo.com MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="US-ASCII" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-Mailer: AOL 5.0 for Windows sub 128 Resent-Message-ID: <"T7hK-3.0.-J4.RQqaw" mx1> Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/40900 X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com Status: O X-Status: In a message dated 2/20/01 10:43:20 PM Eastern Standard Time, temalloy metro.lakes.com writes: << I'm suprised that you haven't heard of Joe's energy machine. A local physicist, Roger Hastings measured the input and output and >> I have heard of Joe Newman's machine. He should sent one to Scott Little for testing Yuri and I tested his machine at Los Alamos. No anomalous energy was detected, however, I give Yuri a lot of credit for trying. EPRI tested heavy water cold fusion cells and reported anomalous energy. Thats a big difference. Frank Znidarsic From vortex-l-request eskimo.com Tue Feb 20 21:27:07 2001 Received: (from smartlst localhost) by mx1.eskimo.com (8.9.1a/8.8.8) id VAA05117; Tue, 20 Feb 2001 21:26:14 -0800 Resent-Date: Tue, 20 Feb 2001 21:26:14 -0800 Message-ID: <3A935168.E86750B verisoft.com.tr> Date: Wed, 21 Feb 2001 07:26:00 +0200 From: hamdi ucar X-Mailer: Mozilla 4.7 [en] (Win98; I) X-Accept-Language: en-US MIME-Version: 1.0 To: vortex-l eskimo.com Subject: Re: Peltier Effect thermo-gravity experiments References: Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Resent-Message-ID: <"q1y4w2.0.pF1.q5raw" mx1> Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/40901 X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com Status: O X-Status: Mitch, I was not looking for artifacts but thinking of precautions to avoid artifacts. Condensation may NOT occurs when the cell sides are thermally shorted as Rick said. 2.5 mg condensation is 2.5mm3 water, clearly noticeable on a surface before evaporate. Symmetric reversal of weight rule out most of artifacts possibilities. I think it is not possible to determine an artifact without doing the experiment by self. BTW, I dislike connections made by crocodile cables. They are unreliable, easily worn and iron clips may be affected by magnetic forces. Anyway, as Mitch pointed out, weight change would be directly determined by the heat (gradient) direction. If so, holding the cell vertically on its side would not result to weight change. Rick Monteverde wrote: > > Mitchell - > > At 10:58 AM -0600 2/20/01, Mitchell Jones wrote: > > >***{If the cold side was at the bottom, the moisture might drip off, > >whereas if it were on the top, it might not drip off. Result: the device > >would appear to be heavier when the cold side was on top, and lighter when > >it was on the bottom. That is exactly the situation in fig. A, in the > >writeup at > > You'd think Nick might have noticed a bunch of condensation adding to > the weight of the sample in all cases, and dripping off the bottom in > some making it weigh a bit less. And when the thing is covered > completely in foil it makes this effect larger? Even more area with > condensation dripping off that Nick still doesn't notice? Hmm... > > Do you *really* think Hamdi has found the artifact? > > - Rick Monteverde > Honolulu, HI Regards, hamdi ucar From vortex-l-request eskimo.com Tue Feb 20 21:36:39 2001 Received: (from smartlst localhost) by mx1.eskimo.com (8.9.1a/8.8.8) id VAA07870; Tue, 20 Feb 2001 21:34:19 -0800 Resent-Date: Tue, 20 Feb 2001 21:34:19 -0800 Message-ID: <001c01c09bbf$a23958e0$46d9323f computer> From: "Frederick Sparber" To: Subject: replication of Peltier force xducer Date: Tue, 20 Feb 2001 22:33:57 -0600 MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-Priority: 3 X-MSMail-Priority: Normal X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook Express 5.00.2615.200 X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V5.00.2615.200 Resent-Message-ID: <"ZUnZU3.0.jw1.RDraw" mx1> Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/40902 X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com Status: O X-Status: Scott wrote: snip Based on an experiment I did using an infrared heat lamp with a coating of carbon-based paint on the lamp face, I maintain that unidirectional heat flow through a solid at a given delta-T is a Carnot Limited Engine with efficiency = (Th-Tc)/Th or 1-(Tc/Th). This IS NOT a Closed System if the heat can be radiated from the cold side in a vacuum-space. At the time, I calculated about 20 Kw/ kilogram force. Right Colin? :-) Regards, Frederick From vortex-l-request eskimo.com Tue Feb 20 22:30:25 2001 Received: (from smartlst localhost) by mx1.eskimo.com (8.9.1a/8.8.8) id WAA26956; Tue, 20 Feb 2001 22:27:58 -0800 Resent-Date: Tue, 20 Feb 2001 22:27:58 -0800 From: "xplorer" To: Subject: RE: Fwd: [FG]: Peltier Effect thermo-gravity experiments Date: Wed, 21 Feb 2001 13:27:41 +0700 Message-ID: MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-Priority: 3 (Normal) X-MSMail-Priority: Normal X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook IMO, Build 9.0.2416 (9.0.2910.0) X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V4.72.3110.3 In-Reply-To: <4.2.0.58.20010220221100.00b9c6f0 postoffice.swbell.net> Importance: Normal Resent-Message-ID: <"Vcspl2.0.6b6.k_raw" mx1> Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/40903 X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com Status: O X-Status: The Graneau effect was something about a force exerted by: a current through a conductor on: a conductive medium. See: www.eskimo.com/~bilb/freenrgl/graneau.txt ... A force is found to exist in a direction longitudinal to current flow. Graneau ran a variety of types of experiments with a metal rod conductor immersed in a ... > -----Original Message----- > From: Charles Ford [mailto:cjford1 yahoo.com] > Sent: 2001 February 21, Wednesday 11:15 > To: vortex-l eskimo.com > Subject: RE: Fwd: [FG]: Peltier Effect thermo-gravity experiments > > > At 12:28 AM 2/21/01 +0700, Xplorer wrote: > > > apparently he > > > can rearrange the leads pretty much at will and get the same > > > effect AND he > > > does not get the effect with a dummy resistive load! > > > > > > Does anybody have a hypothesis for a mundane explanation for this > > > observation? > > > >The Graneau effect, perhaps ? > > Would you be so kind as to briefly explain this effect? I was unable to > find any info. > > > > _________________________________________________________ > Do You Yahoo!? > Get your free yahoo.com address at http://mail.yahoo.com > > From vortex-l-request eskimo.com Tue Feb 20 22:53:42 2001 Received: (from smartlst localhost) by mx1.eskimo.com (8.9.1a/8.8.8) id WAA00606; Tue, 20 Feb 2001 22:53:08 -0800 Resent-Date: Tue, 20 Feb 2001 22:53:08 -0800 Date: Wed, 21 Feb 2001 01:59:05 -0500 (EST) From: John Schnurer To: Scott Little cc: reit ezworks.net, vortex-l@eskimo.com Subject: Re: replication of Peltier force xducer In-Reply-To: <5.0.2.1.0.20010220171027.038fa0e8 earthtech.org> Message-ID: MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: TEXT/PLAIN; charset=US-ASCII Resent-Message-ID: <"Somb82.0.I9.JNsaw" mx1> Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/40904 X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com Status: O X-Status: Put device on non metallic beam... operate away from electronic systems On Tue, 20 Feb 2001, Scott Little wrote: > Hello Nick, > > I got wind of your latest discovery on the Vortex-l discussion group and > today I tried the experiment myself. In short, it works! > > I used a larger Melcor Peltier device...about 1.5" square and fed it about > 2.5 amps from a constant current supply. Initially I just set the bare > device on the pan of our old Mettler H6 analytical balance (0.1 milligram > readability) and arranged the leads, twisted tightly together so they ran > more-or-less horizontally out the door of the balance compartment to a > fixed mooring point then on to the power supply. > > Upon energizing the device I immediately observed the effect you > described...and in the same direction as you observed. It is as if the > flow of heat exerts a small force in the same direction as the heat is > flowing thru the Peltier device. The magnitude of my effect was 5-10 > milligrams, perhaps larger due to my larger device. Indeed the effect > reverses direction with reversed polarity. > > With no place for the heat to go, the device quickly becomes rather hot all > over...and probably doesn't pump heat very well anymore. When the device > was very hot, the effect was greatly reduced. When I cooled the device > back down to room temperature and tried again, the effect was back at full > strength! > > I tried a quick Cu sheet heat shunt around the device and didn't notice any > significant improvement...but it still worked. > > I then wrapped the device entirely in several layers of paper towel to > provide insulation so as to greatly reduce convection currents around the > device. The effect was undiminished by this treatment. > > I replaced the Peltier device with a 5 ohm resistor and put the same > current thru it. No discernible effect with either polarity!!! > > There was no sign of moisture condensing on the device. > > Needless to say, I am intrigued. I expect to find a mundane > explanation for this phenomenon but, right now, I have no idea what it > will be! > > ....back to the lab. Meanwhile, if any of you vorts have any ideas about > this experiment, let's hear 'em. > > > Scott Little > EarthTech International, Inc. > 4030 Braker Lane West, Suite 300 > Austin TX 78759 > 512-342-2185 > 512-346-3017 (FAX) > http://www.earthtech.org > From vortex-l-request eskimo.com Tue Feb 20 23:11:36 2001 Received: (from smartlst localhost) by mx1.eskimo.com (8.9.1a/8.8.8) id XAA06887; Tue, 20 Feb 2001 23:10:54 -0800 Resent-Date: Tue, 20 Feb 2001 23:10:54 -0800 From: "xplorer" To: Cc: "Freenrg-L Eskimo. Com" Subject: Reiter-Peltier force: ?Graneau Date: Wed, 21 Feb 2001 13:43:18 +0700 Message-ID: MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-Priority: 3 (Normal) X-MSMail-Priority: Normal X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook IMO, Build 9.0.2416 (9.0.2910.0) X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V4.72.3110.3 In-Reply-To: Importance: Normal Resent-Message-ID: <"2VuEt2.0.Xh1.-dsaw" mx1> Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/40905 X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com Status: O X-Status: Correction - I got it backwards: the effect is stated to be a force exerted on a conductor by current through a medium gee. > -----Original Message----- > From: xplorer [mailto:xplorer indo.net.id] > Sent: 2001 February 21, Wednesday 13:28 > To: vortex-l eskimo.com > Subject: RE: Fwd: [FG]: Peltier Effect thermo-gravity experiments > > > > The Graneau effect was something about a force > exerted by: a current through a conductor > on: a conductive medium. > > See: > www.eskimo.com/~bilb/freenrgl/graneau.txt > ... A force is found to exist in a direction longitudinal to > current flow. > Graneau ran > a variety of types of experiments with a metal rod conductor immersed in a > ... > > > > -----Original Message----- > > From: Charles Ford [mailto:cjford1 yahoo.com] > > Sent: 2001 February 21, Wednesday 11:15 > > To: vortex-l eskimo.com > > Subject: RE: Fwd: [FG]: Peltier Effect thermo-gravity experiments > > > > > > At 12:28 AM 2/21/01 +0700, Xplorer wrote: > > > > apparently he > > > > can rearrange the leads pretty much at will and get the same > > > > effect AND he > > > > does not get the effect with a dummy resistive load! > > > > > > > > Does anybody have a hypothesis for a mundane explanation for this > > > > observation? > > > > > >The Graneau effect, perhaps ? > > > > Would you be so kind as to briefly explain this effect? I was unable to > > find any info. From vortex-l-request eskimo.com Tue Feb 20 23:18:25 2001 Received: (from smartlst localhost) by mx1.eskimo.com (8.9.1a/8.8.8) id XAA08781; Tue, 20 Feb 2001 23:17:10 -0800 Resent-Date: Tue, 20 Feb 2001 23:17:10 -0800 Message-ID: <024701c09bd6$f9a7bc40$c3c01d18 pestilence.ce.mediaone.net> From: "Scott Stephens" To: Subject: Re: Fwd: [FG]: Peltier Effect thermo-gravity experiments Date: Wed, 21 Feb 2001 01:21:56 -0600 MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-Priority: 3 X-MSMail-Priority: Normal X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook Express 4.72.3155.0 X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V4.72.3155.0 Resent-Message-ID: <"-jgsp.0.292.pjsaw" mx1> Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/40906 X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com Status: O X-Status: -----Original Message----- From: Scott Little Subject: Re: Fwd: [FG]: Peltier Effect thermo-gravity experiments >Does anybody have a hypothesis for a mundane explanation for this observation? Well, I see convection currents have been considered. But has thermal-pressure induced air density variations been investigated? I would want strong, hermetic pressure seals seperating both sides of the junction, with dry nitrogen, so water vapor doesn't migrate. Apart from that, reading Puthoff's paper "arXiv: physics/ 9807023 v2 22 Jul 1998 Advances in the Proposed Electromagnetic Zero-Point Field Theory of Inertia" (from LLNL e-print server) leads me to surmize that, according to Puthoff, acceleration and gravity in a ZPE field create thermal radiation (DAVIES-UNRUH EFFECT) and are responsible for inertia, a genuine method of producing thrust by reacting against the vacuum ZPF has been discovered! I would SWAG 7:1 odds its some artifact 8^( Scott **************************************************************************** Freedom is pursuing your carrot, not running from somebody's stick Does society make you enthusiastic, or fearful? The mob rules only what its members achieve. **************************************************************************** From vortex-l-request eskimo.com Tue Feb 20 23:55:11 2001 Received: (from smartlst localhost) by mx1.eskimo.com (8.9.1a/8.8.8) id XAA17577; Tue, 20 Feb 2001 23:53:23 -0800 Resent-Date: Tue, 20 Feb 2001 23:53:23 -0800 Message-ID: <3A9373DA.99DFAFFC verisoft.com.tr> Date: Wed, 21 Feb 2001 09:52:58 +0200 From: hamdi ucar X-Mailer: Mozilla 4.7 [en] (Win98; I) X-Accept-Language: en-US MIME-Version: 1.0 To: vortex-l eskimo.com, freenrg Subject: Re: replication of Peltier force xducer References: <5.0.2.1.0.20010220171027.038fa0e8 earthtech.org> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Resent-Message-ID: <"QYN371.0.PI4.oFtaw" mx1> Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/40907 X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com Status: O X-Status: Scott, this is great! I thought some models/clasifications for this interactions to additional to ones that already suggested. Vectorial (directional) nature of this effect is very distinctive. Some classifications are: a) Active interactions. A field is generated within the cell: 1) Near field interaction: This is an interaction which can be described like magnetic or electrical field interaction with surrounding materials. Interaction of this field cause cause forces. Interacting materials may have some kind of transparency, opacity w/o polarization. The field generated within cell have short range. If the effect is based to such a field, balance measurement would be sensitive to surrounding materials of the cell. Elevating the cell from the plate of balance (few inches) may cause deviation on balance reading. Better setup would be hanging the cell from a platform independent from balance and observe if cell push or pull the balance plate with distance (with air gap). (look them with fixed space fonts) H================= ... solid platform H | H | H | H xxx ... cell H ... air gap H \______/ ... plate H ____||____ H / \ H | 8888 | ... balance H | | HHHHH |__________| =========================== ...bench It would interesting to measure weight of samples above or below the cell as follow: oo ...... sample consists of various materials ------ H============xxx | ...... cell attached to solid platform H | ..... solid frame for carrying samples H \______|_/ ... plate H ____||____ H / \ H | 8888 | ... balance H | | HHHHH |__________| =========================== ...bench It would be interesting to hypothesis that ordinary materials have internal alignments with in earth gravitational field and the field produced by the cell interact with this alignment, similar to (ferro)magnetism. If this alignment (polarization) is a slow process, upside down the sample just before powering the cell may differ in measurement. As the measurement is in mg range, it would not be possible do measurements at Schnurer style, hanging the cell on a balance arm of bamboo stick and measure the counter balance. Sorry, the main classification procedure that I started above would not finish with this posting, anyway, without going too far it would be useful to test lateral capability of the cell, standing on it side on the balance or hanging on a arm of torsion balance. Scott Little wrote: > > Hello Nick, > > I got wind of your latest discovery on the Vortex-l discussion group and > today I tried the experiment myself. In short, it works! > [snip] > Needless to say, I am intrigued. I expect to find a mundane > explanation for this phenomenon but, right now, I have no idea what it > will be! > > ....back to the lab. Meanwhile, if any of you vorts have any ideas about > this experiment, let's hear 'em. > > Scott Little > EarthTech International, Inc. Regards, hamdi ucar From vortex-l-request eskimo.com Wed Feb 21 02:17:51 2001 Received: (from smartlst localhost) by mx1.eskimo.com (8.9.1a/8.8.8) id CAA20564; Wed, 21 Feb 2001 02:17:10 -0800 Resent-Date: Wed, 21 Feb 2001 02:17:10 -0800 Mime-Version: 1.0 X-Sender: rick mail.highsurf.com Message-Id: In-Reply-To: <5.0.2.1.0.20010220171027.038fa0e8 earthtech.org> References: <5.0.2.1.0.20010220171027.038fa0e8 earthtech.org> Date: Wed, 21 Feb 2001 00:17:00 -1000 To: vortex-l eskimo.com From: Rick Monteverde Subject: Re: replication of Peltier force xducer Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" ; format="flowed" Resent-Message-ID: <"wlT1d1.0.A15.cMvaw" mx1> Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/40908 X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com Status: O X-Status: Scott - At 10:22 PM -0600 2/20/01, Scott Little wrote: >Needless to say, I am intrigued. I expect to find a mundane >explanation for this phenomenon but, right now, I have no idea what >it will be! Congratulations on replicating an intriguing effect. Now - break it! (...and here's hoping against the odds that you CAN'T!) - Rick Monteverde Honolulu, HI From vortex-l-request eskimo.com Wed Feb 21 02:33:47 2001 Received: (from smartlst localhost) by mx1.eskimo.com (8.9.1a/8.8.8) id CAA25687; Wed, 21 Feb 2001 02:33:18 -0800 Resent-Date: Wed, 21 Feb 2001 02:33:18 -0800 Mime-Version: 1.0 X-Sender: rick mail.highsurf.com Message-Id: In-Reply-To: <5.0.2.1.0.20010220171027.038fa0e8 earthtech.org> References: <5.0.2.1.0.20010220171027.038fa0e8 earthtech.org> Date: Wed, 21 Feb 2001 00:33:09 -1000 To: vortex-l eskimo.com From: Rick Monteverde Subject: Re: replication of Peltier force xducer Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" ; format="flowed" Resent-Message-ID: <"JX-9e2.0.HH6.kbvaw" mx1> Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/40909 X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com Status: O X-Status: Just a thought - these peltier devices are typically bismuth-telluride, right? Bismuth - the perennial antigravity suspect. Layered bismuth with electricity passing through it. Where have I heard that one before? - Rick Monteverde Honolulu, HI From vortex-l-request eskimo.com Wed Feb 21 03:44:08 2001 Received: (from smartlst localhost) by mx1.eskimo.com (8.9.1a/8.8.8) id DAA10128; Wed, 21 Feb 2001 03:43:37 -0800 Resent-Date: Wed, 21 Feb 2001 03:43:37 -0800 Message-Id: Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Date: Wed, 21 Feb 2001 02:53:48 -0900 To: vortex-l eskimo.com, reit@ezworks.net From: hheffner mtaonline.net (Horace Heffner) Subject: Re: replication of Peltier force xducer Resent-Message-ID: <"XpWss1.0.AU2.fdwaw" mx1> Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/40910 X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com Status: O X-Status: At 10:22 PM 2/20/1, Scott Little wrote: >I then wrapped the device entirely in several layers of paper towel to >provide insulation so as to greatly reduce convection currents around the >device. The effect was undiminished by this treatment. When you did this the device could apply a force both up and (when polarity reversed) down? In other words, you would dexpect the device, when confined in insulation, to heat up and have an upward force due to air displacement, like a hot air ballon. If it could produce a net force downward when well wrapped in insulation, then that is very novel! A torsion pendulum or horizontal motor is of course an obvious thing to try, but, in this case may only be useful except to distinguish if the effect is gravitational (doesn't work on torsion pendulum or vertical shaft motor) or purely inirtial (works on torsion pendulum too.) A self contained battery power supply is obviously a good idea too. Something else to try might be Helmholtz coils, or for a quick test a big phi magnet, to change the orientation of the ambient magnetic field. Regards, Horace Heffner From vortex-l-request eskimo.com Wed Feb 21 04:09:42 2001 Received: (from smartlst localhost) by mx1.eskimo.com (8.9.1a/8.8.8) id EAA16606; Wed, 21 Feb 2001 04:08:58 -0800 Resent-Date: Wed, 21 Feb 2001 04:08:58 -0800 Message-ID: <002501c09bf6$c097ae40$fcdd323f computer> From: "Frederick Sparber" To: References: Subject: Re: replication of Peltier force xducer Date: Wed, 21 Feb 2001 05:09:16 -0600 MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-Priority: 3 X-MSMail-Priority: Normal X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook Express 5.00.2615.200 X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V5.00.2615.200 Resent-Message-ID: <"RxLFl3.0.O34.P_waw" mx1> Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/40911 X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com Status: O X-Status: Scott wrote: > >I then wrapped the device entirely in several layers of paper towel to >provide insulation so as to greatly reduce convection currents around the >device. The effect was undiminished by this treatment. > The acid test would be to use a close-coupled battery power source, with the thing set up hanging by a thread in a vacuum chamber surrounded by a set of Helmholtz coils. :-) Regards, Frederick From vortex-l-request eskimo.com Wed Feb 21 04:48:02 2001 Received: (from smartlst localhost) by mx1.eskimo.com (8.9.1a/8.8.8) id EAA23839; Wed, 21 Feb 2001 04:46:12 -0800 Resent-Date: Wed, 21 Feb 2001 04:46:12 -0800 Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" X-Sender: mjones pop.jump.net (Unverified) Message-Id: In-Reply-To: Date: Wed, 21 Feb 2001 06:44:06 -0600 To: vortex-l eskimo.com From: Mitchell Jones Subject: Re: Peltier Effect thermo-gravity experiments Resent-Message-ID: <"7a8Ci2.0.Lq5.KYxaw" mx1> Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/40912 X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com Status: RO X-Status: >Mitchell - > >At 10:58 AM -0600 2/20/01, Mitchell Jones wrote: > >>***{If the cold side was at the bottom, the moisture might drip off, >>whereas if it were on the top, it might not drip off. ***{Notice the use of the word "might" in the above sentence. --MJ}*** Result: the device >>would appear to be heavier when the cold side was on top, and lighter when >>it was on the bottom. That is exactly the situation in fig. A, in the >>writeup at > >You'd think Nick might have noticed a bunch of condensation adding to >the weight of the sample in all cases, and dripping off the bottom in >some making it weigh a bit less. ***{If it is happening, he obviously didn't notice, because he claims to be unable to explain the effect. The question, therefore, is not whether he *might* have noticed, but whether he might *not* have noticed. And, since he is probably looking down at the device from above, it seems likely to me that he cannot see what is going on underneath it. Result: condensation may form there, and drip off, without being noticed. That means this is a real possibility until we receive positive assurances from the experimenter that he has checked for such an artifact, and has demonstrated that it is not happening. --MJ}*** And when the thing is covered >completely in foil it makes this effect larger? ***{Yup: the water may not adhere to the foil as well as it adheres to the device itself. (Some surfaces are completely non-wetting: water droplets do not adhere at all.) --MJ}*** Even more area with >condensation dripping off that Nick still doesn't notice? Hmm... > >Do you *really* think Hamdi has found the artifact? ***{I refer you to the usage of "might" in the paragraph that you quoted, above. I also refer you to the word "may" in a sentence that you deleted--to wit: "I think Hamdi may have found the artifact that causes this result." In other words, it is *possible* that Hamdi has found the artifact, and it is also possible that he has not found it. We will not know until the experimenter explicitly addresses this possibility and reports back to us. --MJ}*** > >- Rick Monteverde >Honolulu, HI ________________ Quote of the month: "Law is what the authorities use to ride the country." --Anatoly Schransky From vortex-l-request eskimo.com Wed Feb 21 05:49:25 2001 Received: (from smartlst localhost) by mx1.eskimo.com (8.9.1a/8.8.8) id FAA19564; Wed, 21 Feb 2001 05:48:39 -0800 Resent-Date: Wed, 21 Feb 2001 05:48:39 -0800 Message-ID: <3A93C8F5.CD62B1BF bellsouth.net> Date: Wed, 21 Feb 2001 08:56:05 -0500 From: Terry Blanton X-Mailer: Mozilla 4.73 [en] (WinNT; U) X-Accept-Language: en MIME-Version: 1.0 To: vortex-l eskimo.com Subject: Re: replication of Peltier force xducer References: <5.0.2.1.0.20010220171027.038fa0e8 earthtech.org> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=iso-8859-1 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit Resent-Message-ID: <"f31YH.0.Zn4.sSyaw" mx1> Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/40913 X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com Status: RO X-Status: Rick Monteverde wrote: > > Just a thought - these peltier devices are typically > bismuth-telluride, right? Bismuth - the perennial antigravity > suspect. Layered bismuth with electricity passing through it. Where > have I heard that one before? Art's Parts!! See: http://anw.com/aliens/ArtsParts.htm Is pure Bi only $50/lb? And the original site: http://www.artbell.com/roscrash.html You don't think bismuth is the secret to Dean Kamen's flying carpet? Well, do ya? :) Terry P.S. Hey, have you read Jim Hougan's 'Kingdom Come'? Hougan has written a couple of exposé books on the CIA and this is his first "fiction". From vortex-l-request eskimo.com Wed Feb 21 06:02:25 2001 Received: (from smartlst localhost) by mx1.eskimo.com (8.9.1a/8.8.8) id GAA24663; Wed, 21 Feb 2001 06:00:35 -0800 Resent-Date: Wed, 21 Feb 2001 06:00:35 -0800 Message-ID: <3A93C9AE.4B9F4269 verisoft.com.tr> Date: Wed, 21 Feb 2001 15:59:10 +0200 From: hamdi ucar X-Mailer: Mozilla 4.7 [en] (Win98; I) X-Accept-Language: en-US MIME-Version: 1.0 To: vortex-l eskimo.com Subject: Re: replication of Peltier force xducer References: <002501c09bf6$c097ae40$fcdd323f@computer> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Resent-Message-ID: <"zsAXE2.0.D16.2eyaw" mx1> Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/40914 X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com Status: RO X-Status: A critical point on artifact removal: In general, in order to isolate an effect, test for artifacts and remove them, one can change conditions of the experiment apparently "should" not be related to the observed effect. But, a phenomenon may be related to such a condition in a different way that one assume. So changing such a condition may cause the effect disappears. This disappearance IS NOT THE PROOF of the effect was an artifact produced by this condition. Even this artifact hypothesis appears logical, one should carefully examine and confirm this condition is indeed responsible for the effect in a conventional way. For example, in this case, if the effect disappears by using Helmholtz coils, one should be sure by calculated the forces on the twisted pair by the Earth magnetic field are equal or close to the deviation. Alternatively, the phenomenon would be a novel magneto-gravitic effect which depends on existence of a magnetic field. Such incomplete artifact removal procedure, will bury a real phenomenon. For example, in the case of Pioneer-11 acceleration anomaly, many parameters are present, but careful calculations shows that they were not enough to produce the observed value. Frederick Sparber wrote: > > Scott wrote: > > > >I then wrapped the device entirely in several layers of paper towel to > >provide insulation so as to greatly reduce convection currents around the > >device. The effect was undiminished by this treatment. > > > The acid test would be to use a close-coupled battery power > source, with the thing set up hanging by a thread in a vacuum chamber > surrounded by a set of Helmholtz coils. :-) > > Regards, Frederick > Regards, hamdi ucar From vortex-l-request eskimo.com Wed Feb 21 06:17:09 2001 Received: (from smartlst localhost) by mx1.eskimo.com (8.9.1a/8.8.8) id GAA28529; Wed, 21 Feb 2001 06:12:02 -0800 Resent-Date: Wed, 21 Feb 2001 06:12:02 -0800 Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" X-Sender: mjones pop.jump.net Message-Id: In-Reply-To: References: Date: Wed, 21 Feb 2001 08:07:44 -0600 To: vortex-l eskimo.com From: Mitchell Jones Subject: Re: Neutrons from Electron Impact? Resent-Message-ID: <"tODbu2.0.fz6.moyaw" mx1> Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/40915 X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com Status: O X-Status: >In reply to Mitchell Jones's message of Mon, 19 Feb 2001 00:01:11 -0600: ***{Hi Robin. I notice that the word "ridiculous" crept into my last message. I try not to introduce such words into a discussion, but I slipped up. Normally, I make one or more additional passes through a post after the first one, for editing purposes, and it is at that time that I normally delete such words, if I find them. However, in that particular message it was late, I was sleepy, and I sent off my first draft. For the record: there was no inflammatory intent. I merely found some of your comments exceptionally implausible, shall we say? :-) --MJ}*** >[snip] >>What matters here is that rest >>masses do not include potential energy or the kinetic energy to which >>potential energies can be converted. How could they? After all, electrons >>exist in millions of distinct circumstances, and hence are capable of >>having millions of different potential and kinetic energies. How could one >>number for rest mass possibly reflect such an immensely variable mass of >>information? The answer is obvious: it cannot. --MJ}*** > >Actually, to all intents and purposes, all electrons exist in the same >circumstance. They are all infinitely far removed from their positive >charges (or nearly so, not quite so true for 1S orbital electrons in heavy >atoms). ***{All that "infinity" means in these sorts of discussions is "far enough away so that, to the desired accuracy, the potential energy is the same as it would be at infinity." By this standard, an electron is at "infinity" with respect to a proton, to two-digit accuracy, when it is a millionth of a centimeter away from it. In that case, P = -e^2/r = -(4.8x10^-10)^2/10^-6 = 2.304x10^-13 ergs, and, when we subtract the ground state energy of -2.8x10^-11 ergs from that, we get 2.777x10^-11 ergs, which to the desired accuracy is 2.8x10^-11 ergs. In other words, it is the same answer we would get if we subtracted -2.8x10^-11 from zero. --MJ}*** Furthermore, the potential energy available per proton is precisely >the energy from 1 electron approaching that proton, all other electrons are >irrelevant. This is easily seen if one considers that when the charge on a >proton is neutralised by combination with the electron, all potential energy >of that proton with respect to all other electrons in the universe >disappears. It therefore seems reasonable that the total field energy >available is a constant, and that it is the amount released by one electron. >As to kinetic energy, we were talking about rest mass, not relativistic >mass. Furthermore, every particle has an almost infinite number of different >relativistic masses concurrently, depending on the frame of reference used >to measure the mass, this takes care of your "millions of distinct >circumstances". >The rest mass is the lowest mass measurable ***{Yup, but it wouldn't be if potential energy had mass. For in that case, as we lifted an object up out of a potential well, its mass would increase. --MJ}*** , and is the mass measured when >in the special frame of reference in which the particle is at rest relative >to the measuring device. >(Auw! - how did that bullet get in my foot?) ***{In all the above, you never directly addressed my statement, so let me put it to you directly: does rest mass include potential energy, or not? I say it does not. One reason is that the rest mass of an object, m = F/a, is determined by measuring the acceleration of the mass in response to a known force, from a state of rest. Nothing in that procedure leads to the imputation of a value for potential energy. Result: the energy acquired by a body when it falls through a potential difference adds to the mass it had when it started. Potential energy is energy that might be, but has not yet been, acquired. To say it is part of the mass of a body at rest makes as much sense as saying that a man's weight includes the weight of the meal which he has not yet eaten. --MJ}*** >Now as to your statement: >>What matters here is that rest >>masses do not include potential energy or the kinetic energy to which >>potential energies can be converted. > >Consider the following thought experiment: > >We have a means of converting mass into energy and back again with 100% >efficiency. >We have a means of storing energy as potential energy in a device H (for >heavy) which is at ground level. >A separate mass s (for small) is converted totally into energy ***{It is a minor point, but, technically, no mass can be converted entirely into potential energy, because mass is required as part of the definition of force (F = ma), and force is required as part of the definition of potential energy (P = Fh, where h is the height above datum). Suppose, for example, that you take the mass s and, by some ingenious process, you convert its mass into a stream of pure energy, directed straight downward, thereby accelerating it straight up in the Earth's gravitational field. As you do that, you convert its rest mass, bit by bit, into potential energy until, finally, you are down to a last remaining particle of matter, of mass ss (for super small :-). At that point, P = Fh = ssgh, and we can say that we have converted all of the rest mass save the one tiny bit of matter denoted as ss, into potential energy. However, if we convert that last bit, no matter remains for gravity to act upon, and thus there is no force, hence no potential energy. --MJ}*** , and this >energy is stored as potential energy in H ***{The only way to store the energy of s in H as potential energy is to raise H relative to the original datum level (i.e., "to the top of Old Smokey" in your parlance), so that the potential energy of H increases by an amount equivalent to the mass s. --MJ}*** , where according to you it has no >mass. ***{Correct: if s > 0 and H is at rest with a potential energy of P = s, it has no more mass than it had when it was at rest with P = 0. And the proof is obvious: the object has a rest mass of E0 = mc^2, rather than a rest mass of E0 = mc^2 + P. Moreover, as I demonstrated in a message to Horace the other day, the object has a total energy E = mc^2 + K, where K is kinetic energy, rather than a total energy of E = mc^2 + K + P. Bottom line: Potential energy has no mass, and there aren't any ifs, ands, or buts about it. --MJ}*** >H is now taken to the top of Old Smokey. ***{You already took it to the top of Old Smokey, when you "stored [s] as potential energy in H." That means it is already there, and so you can't take it there again unless you move it somewhere else first. --MJ}*** >On top of Old Smokey, the potential energy stored in H is removed, and >converted once again into mass s. ***{If H is at the top of Old Smokey with a potential energy of s, the only way you can convert s into mass is to either drop or lower H back to the original datum level. If you drop it, it will have a kinetic energy of s when it reaches the original datum level, and that kinetic energy will be converted to heat when it slams to a stop. If you lower it--at the end of a rope, say--then s will be gradually converted to heat due to friction within the rope apparatus, as you lower it back to the datum level. --MJ}*** >Both H and s are allowed to fall back to the bottom of Old Smokey ***{Nope: letting H fall back to the bottom is how you are converting s into mass--i.e., into kinetic energy, either in the motion of H, or in the thermal motion of molecules that were set in motion when H was brought to rest. --MJ}*** , where >their kinetic energy is collected. The kinetic energy collected from H is >reused in the next cycle to lift the fully charged H back to the top of Old >Smokey, while the kinetic energy from s is siphoned off and sold to buy >lunch. >This process is repeated as rapidly as possible. >Who says there is no such thing as a "free lunch"? ;) ***{It doesn't work, Robin. Sorry. :-) --MJ}*** >>The kinetic >>>energy of the electron however is not something that you can add on to the >>>combined mass electron and proton "to get even more energy". It was already >>>included in the mass energy of the pair before this little jaunt took off. >> >>***{We are talking about an electron at "infinity," with an energy due to >>that position which could not possibly be part of the electron rest mass >>number given in textbooks. Indeed, such a notion is ridiculous: the rest >>mass of the electron is .00054854807 amu, which is .51 MeV. How can that >>number possibly include the 2.4 MeV of potential energy that an electron at >>infinity has with respect to a naked proton? It just doesn't compute, >>Robin! --MJ}*** > >It does if you choose the correct size for the proton, and furthermore, you >are assuming that all the mass comes from the electron, while in my previous >post I deliberately referred to the total mass of the pair, rather than just >that of either particle independently (IOW some portion may come from the >proton too). ***{Let me see if I've got this straight: you are now saying that potential energy has mass, but that the mass in question is *not* located in the object which has the potential energy? Wow! Talk about a blatant switch of position! Need I remind you that, just above, you said: "On top of Old Smokey, the potential energy stored in H is removed, and converted once again into mass s." How can the potential energy be "stored in H" if it isn't all in H? :-) Worse, as noted previously, if *any* of it--e.g., s--is "stored in H," then the rest mass E0 = mc^2 + s, which is false. This dog won't hunt, Robin! --Mitchell Jones}*** >[snip] > >Regards, > >Robin van Spaandonk > >A Future For Humanity see: http://users.bigpond.net.au/rvanspaa/ ________________ Quote of the month: "Law is what the authorities use to ride the country." --Anatoly Schransky From vortex-l-request eskimo.com Wed Feb 21 06:27:16 2001 Received: (from smartlst localhost) by mx1.eskimo.com (8.9.1a/8.8.8) id GAA02611; Wed, 21 Feb 2001 06:24:51 -0800 Resent-Date: Wed, 21 Feb 2001 06:24:51 -0800 Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" X-Sender: mjones pop.jump.net Message-Id: In-Reply-To: <5.0.2.1.0.20010220171027.038fa0e8 earthtech.org> Date: Wed, 21 Feb 2001 08:22:53 -0600 To: vortex-l eskimo.com From: Mitchell Jones Subject: Re: replication of Peltier force xducer Resent-Message-ID: <"NXRhJ1.0.he.o-yaw" mx1> Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/40916 X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com Status: RO X-Status: >Hello Nick, > >I got wind of your latest discovery on the Vortex-l discussion group and >today I tried the experiment myself. In short, it works! > >I used a larger Melcor Peltier device...about 1.5" square and fed it about >2.5 amps from a constant current supply. Initially I just set the bare >device on the pan of our old Mettler H6 analytical balance (0.1 milligram >readability) and arranged the leads, twisted tightly together so they ran >more-or-less horizontally out the door of the balance compartment to a >fixed mooring point then on to the power supply. > >Upon energizing the device I immediately observed the effect you >described...and in the same direction as you observed. It is as if the >flow of heat exerts a small force in the same direction as the heat is >flowing thru the Peltier device. The magnitude of my effect was 5-10 >milligrams, perhaps larger due to my larger device. Indeed the effect >reverses direction with reversed polarity. > >With no place for the heat to go, the device quickly becomes rather hot all >over...and probably doesn't pump heat very well anymore. When the device >was very hot, the effect was greatly reduced. When I cooled the device >back down to room temperature and tried again, the effect was back at full >strength! > >I tried a quick Cu sheet heat shunt around the device and didn't notice any >significant improvement...but it still worked. > >I then wrapped the device entirely in several layers of paper towel to >provide insulation so as to greatly reduce convection currents around the >device. The effect was undiminished by this treatment. > >I replaced the Peltier device with a 5 ohm resistor and put the same >current thru it. No discernible effect with either polarity!!! > >There was no sign of moisture condensing on the device. > >Needless to say, I am intrigued. I expect to find a mundane >explanation for this phenomenon but, right now, I have no idea what it >will be! > >....back to the lab. Meanwhile, if any of you vorts have any ideas about >this experiment, let's hear 'em. ***{OK, here's another try: when the cold side is up, there will be a down-draft pushing on the top of the device, and when the cold side is down, there will be a down-draft pulling on the bottom of the device. If the down-draft pushing from the top is more efficient than the one pulling from below, then the object will appear to be lighter when the cold side is on the bottom, as was in fact observed. Moreover, when the foil is added, the cross section that is being pushed or pulled will increase, and so too will the net effect. To eliminate this possibility, glue a sheet of styrofoam on one side of a flat iron plate, cool it in the freezer, and weigh it while suspended with the metal side up. Then replace it in the freezer, cool it again to the same temperature as before, then take it out and weigh it suspended with the metal side down. My prediction is that there will be an apparent weight difference, on a sensitive scale, due to the influence of the convection currents on the suspended object. --MJ}*** > > >Scott Little >EarthTech International, Inc. >4030 Braker Lane West, Suite 300 >Austin TX 78759 >512-342-2185 >512-346-3017 (FAX) >http://www.earthtech.org ________________ Quote of the month: "Law is what the authorities use to ride the country." --Anatoly Schransky From vortex-l-request eskimo.com Wed Feb 21 07:04:44 2001 Received: (from smartlst localhost) by mx1.eskimo.com (8.9.1a/8.8.8) id GAA21111; Wed, 21 Feb 2001 06:58:46 -0800 Resent-Date: Wed, 21 Feb 2001 06:58:46 -0800 Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" X-Sender: mjones pop.jump.net Message-Id: In-Reply-To: References: <5.0.2.1.0.20010220171027.038fa0e8 earthtech.org> Date: Wed, 21 Feb 2001 08:56:47 -0600 To: vortex-l eskimo.com From: Mitchell Jones Subject: Re: replication of Peltier force xducer Resent-Message-ID: <"9xYSD1.0.n95.bUzaw" mx1> Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/40917 X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com Status: RO X-Status: >>Hello Nick, [snip] >>....back to the lab. Meanwhile, if any of you vorts have any ideas about >>this experiment, let's hear 'em. > >***{OK, here's another try: when the cold side is up, there will be a >down-draft pushing on the top of the device, and when the cold side is >down, there will be a down-draft pulling on the bottom of the device. If >the down-draft pushing from the top is more efficient than the one pulling >from below, then the object will appear to be lighter when the cold side is >on the bottom, as was in fact observed. Moreover, when the foil is added, >the cross section that is being pushed or pulled will increase, and so too >will the net effect. To eliminate this possibility, glue a sheet of >styrofoam on one side of a flat iron plate, cool it in the freezer, and >weigh it while suspended with the metal side up. Then replace it in the >freezer, cool it again to the same temperature as before, then take it out >and weigh it suspended with the metal side down. My prediction is that >there will be an apparent weight difference, on a sensitive scale, due to >the influence of the convection currents on the suspended object. --MJ}*** ***{I would add that the room temperature needs to be the same when the two measurements are made. Also, there is a similar convection effect from the hot side of the device: when the hot side is on top, an up-draft will pull on it; and when it is on the bottom, an up draft will push on it. The only real way to eliminate such considerations would be to repeat the experiment in a vacuum, which I suspect will be too inconvenient and too costly. Hopefully, the effect will show up with the metal plate and styrofoam with sufficient clarity to render the point moot. --MJ}*** >>Scott Little >>EarthTech International, Inc. >>4030 Braker Lane West, Suite 300 >>Austin TX 78759 >>512-342-2185 >>512-346-3017 (FAX) >>http://www.earthtech.org > >________________ >Quote of the month: > >"Law is what the authorities use to ride the country." --Anatoly Schransky ________________ Quote of the month: "Law is what the authorities use to ride the country." --Anatoly Schransky From vortex-l-request eskimo.com Wed Feb 21 09:28:25 2001 Received: (from smartlst localhost) by mx1.eskimo.com (8.9.1a/8.8.8) id JAA00301; Wed, 21 Feb 2001 09:20:11 -0800 Resent-Date: Wed, 21 Feb 2001 09:20:11 -0800 Message-ID: <3A93FA86.B700B61C bellsouth.net> Date: Wed, 21 Feb 2001 12:27:34 -0500 From: Terry Blanton X-Mailer: Mozilla 4.73 [en] (WinNT; U) X-Accept-Language: en MIME-Version: 1.0 To: vortex-l eskimo.com Subject: Re: replication of Peltier force xducer References: <5.0.2.1.0.20010220171027.038fa0e8 earthtech.org> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Resent-Message-ID: <"qWhWD3.0.r_7.AZ_aw" mx1> Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/40918 X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com Status: RO X-Status: Rick Monteverde wrote: > > Just a thought - these peltier devices are typically > bismuth-telluride, right? Bismuth - the perennial antigravity > suspect. Layered bismuth with electricity passing through it. Where > have I heard that one before? In looking for an explanation of the Peltier force, I have come across a possible explanation at: http://www.geocities.com/CapeCanaveral/Lab/7919/seitest.htm and http://www.geocities.com/CapeCanaveral/Lab/7919/Seike.htm which uses P charge carriers to tap the negative energy in the earth's gravity field. The original paper is by Shinichi Seike and titled, "Transistorized G-Power Generator." Of course, most thermoelectric coolers use both N and P devices for simplification of construction. Opinions? Terry From vortex-l-request eskimo.com Wed Feb 21 09:49:37 2001 Received: (from smartlst localhost) by mx1.eskimo.com (8.9.1a/8.8.8) id JAA12128; Wed, 21 Feb 2001 09:42:53 -0800 Resent-Date: Wed, 21 Feb 2001 09:42:53 -0800 Message-ID: <000a01c09c25$6581c3e0$e4dd323f computer> From: "Frederick Sparber" To: Subject: Re; Peltier Force & Nonequilibrium Phonon Drag in Quantum Wires Date: Wed, 21 Feb 2001 10:42:47 -0600 MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: multipart/related; type="multipart/alternative"; boundary="----=_NextPart_000_0001_01C09BF3.081C3B40" X-Priority: 3 X-MSMail-Priority: Normal X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook Express 5.50.4133.2400 X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V5.50.4133.2400 Resent-Message-ID: <"3vZa53.0.Qz2.Tu_aw" mx1> Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/40919 X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com Status: O X-Status: This is a multi-part message in MIME format. ------=_NextPart_000_0001_01C09BF3.081C3B40 Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary="----=_NextPart_001_0002_01C09BF3.081C3B40" ------=_NextPart_001_0002_01C09BF3.081C3B40 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="Windows-1252" Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable Nonequilibrium Phonon Drag in Quantum Wires Previous abstract Next abstract=20 Session C17 - DCMP: QUANTUM WIRES II=20 Mixed session, Monday afternoon, March 20, 14:30=20 Room C3, San Jose Convention Center=20 [C17.02] Nonequilibrium Phonon Drag in Quantum Wires G. Paulavicius,R. Mickevicius,V. Mitin,V. Kochelap (Wayne State = University, Detroit),M. A. Stroscio,G. J. Iafrate (ARO)=20 Hot (nonequilibrium) phonon effects on electron transport in single and = coupled quantum wires have been investigated by the self-consistent = Monte Carlo simulation. Confinement and localization of optical phonons = have been taken into account. We have demonstrated that at room = temperature hot optical phonons lead to significant increase in electron = drift velocity. This hot phonon drag effect is due to strongly = assymmetric nonequilibrium phonon distribution. As a result, = phonon-absorption for forward transitions (electron gains momentum along = electric field) is enhanced, whereas absorption for backward transitions = (electron gains momentum against electric field) is suppressed. At low = temperatures diffusive heating of electrons dominates over hot phonon = drag and electron drift velocity decreases. For quantum wires coupled = through common phonon system, electron transport in one wire affects = considerably electron transport in another wire. In quantum wires with = substantially different electron concentrations and opposite electric = fields hot phonons cause the negative differential conductivity. = Possible electrical bistability due to hot phonon effects is discussed. = Acknowledgement This work was supported by the U.S. Army Research = Office.=20 Part C of program listing=20 ------=_NextPart_001_0002_01C09BF3.081C3B40 Content-Type: text/html; charset="Windows-1252" Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable Nonequilibrium Phonon Drag in Quantum Wires
 

Previous abstract Next = abstract=20

Session C17 - DCMP: QUANTUM WIRES II
Mixed session, = Monday=20 afternoon, March 20, 14:30
Room C3, San Jose Convention = Center=20

[C17.02] Nonequilibrium Phonon Drag in Quantum Wires

G.=20 Paulavicius,R. Mickevicius,V. Mitin,V. Kochelap (Wayne State University, = Detroit),M. A. Stroscio,G. J. Iafrate (ARO)=20

Hot (nonequilibrium) phonon effects on electron transport in single = and=20 coupled quantum wires have been investigated by the self-consistent = Monte Carlo=20 simulation. Confinement and localization of optical phonons have been = taken into=20 account. We have demonstrated that at room temperature hot optical = phonons lead=20 to significant increase in electron drift velocity. This hot phonon drag = effect=20 is due to strongly assymmetric nonequilibrium phonon distribution. As a = result,=20 phonon-absorption for forward transitions (electron gains momentum along = electric field) is enhanced, whereas absorption for backward transitions = (electron gains momentum against electric field) is suppressed. At low=20 temperatures diffusive heating of electrons dominates over hot phonon = drag and=20 electron drift velocity decreases. For quantum wires coupled through = common=20 phonon system, electron transport in one wire affects considerably = electron=20 transport in another wire. In quantum wires with substantially different = electron concentrations and opposite electric fields hot phonons cause = the=20 negative differential conductivity. Possible electrical bistability due = to hot=20 phonon effects is discussed. Acknowledgement This work was supported by = the U.S.=20 Army Research Office.=20

= Part C of program listing =

------=_NextPart_001_0002_01C09BF3.081C3B40-- ------=_NextPart_000_0001_01C09BF3.081C3B40 Content-Type: image/x-xbitmap; name="prev.xbm" Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable Content-Location: http://flux.aps.org/bitmaps/prev.xbm #define back_width 102=0A= #define back_height 21=0A= static char back_bits[] =3D {=0A= = 0x00,0x00,0x02,0x00,0x00,0x00,0x00,0x00,0x00,0x00,0x00,0x00,0xc0,0x00,0xc= 0,=0A= = 0x03,0x00,0x00,0x00,0x00,0x00,0x00,0x00,0x00,0x00,0xc0,0x00,0xf0,0x07,0x0= 0,=0A= = 0x00,0x00,0x00,0x00,0x00,0x00,0x00,0x00,0xc0,0x00,0xfc,0x03,0x00,0x00,0x0= 0,=0A= = 0x00,0x00,0x00,0x00,0x00,0x00,0xc0,0x00,0xff,0x03,0x00,0x00,0x00,0x00,0x0= 0,=0A= = 0x00,0x00,0x00,0x00,0xc0,0xe0,0xff,0x07,0x00,0x00,0x00,0x00,0x00,0x00,0x0= 0,=0A= = 0x00,0x00,0xc0,0xf8,0xff,0x03,0x00,0x00,0x00,0x00,0x00,0x00,0x00,0x00,0x0= 0,=0A= = 0xc0,0xfe,0xff,0xff,0xff,0xff,0xff,0xff,0xff,0xff,0xff,0xff,0xff,0xff,0xf= e,=0A= = 0xff,0xff,0xff,0xff,0xff,0xff,0xff,0xff,0xff,0xff,0xff,0xff,0xf8,0xff,0x0= 3,=0A= = 0x00,0x00,0x00,0x00,0x00,0x00,0x00,0x00,0x00,0xc0,0xc0,0xff,0x07,0x1a,0x5= a,=0A= = 0xa0,0x8d,0xc1,0x18,0x34,0x18,0x08,0xc7,0x00,0xff,0x03,0x64,0x88,0x61,0x8= 8,=0A= = 0x40,0x0c,0x42,0x18,0x88,0xd8,0x00,0xfc,0x03,0xc6,0x8c,0x61,0x80,0x41,0x0= 8,=0A= = 0x81,0x18,0x40,0xd0,0x00,0xe0,0x07,0xc4,0x08,0x41,0x00,0x01,0x88,0x81,0x1= 9,=0A= = 0xc8,0xc0,0x00,0x80,0x03,0xc4,0x88,0x61,0x00,0x23,0x8c,0x81,0x19,0x80,0xc= 1,=0A= = 0x00,0x00,0x02,0x66,0xec,0xe0,0x07,0x22,0x88,0x80,0x19,0x00,0xc7,0x00,0x0= 0,=0A= = 0x00,0x04,0x48,0x40,0x04,0x06,0x8c,0x80,0x19,0x08,0xce,0x00,0x00,0x00,0x0= 6,=0A= = 0xc8,0x60,0x00,0x16,0x88,0x81,0x19,0x00,0xd8,0x00,0x00,0x00,0x04,0x8c,0x4= 1,=0A= = 0x00,0x0c,0x8c,0x81,0x18,0x44,0xd0,0x00,0x00,0x00,0x04,0x08,0x61,0x10,0x0= c,=0A= = 0x08,0xc1,0x10,0x44,0xd0,0x00,0x00,0x00,0x0e,0x1c,0xe7,0x0e,0x08,0x1c,0x2= 6,=0A= 0xa0,0xc2,0xcd};=0A= ------=_NextPart_000_0001_01C09BF3.081C3B40 Content-Type: image/x-xbitmap; name="next.xbm" Content-Transfer-Encoding: base64 Content-Location: http://flux.aps.org/bitmaps/next.xbm R0lGODlhAQABAPcAAP///wAAAGvz/0CMLQAAAQAI1AAAAAAADAAAAEaBqGvzpGvzjACD/Gvz2AeA ARuDe/wEp6ynfKvwAAijSPeAKFZ/CAAAEVsN+FZwAAijSFZwHFZwAAijSPeAKFZwUAAAAPeSfVZw AAAAAFnoJAAAAFifQFifQFifPPeuHlZwAAAAAFifQPeuvlifQPfaxlifQFifQPcT4gABT/cSxQA+ fQijSPdkTlifQAAAAPfdNgACfQAAAQAAAPe9hWvz3AAAAEXDQPdy4QAABgAACWv0GwAAAWvz8AAC fQAAAAAAAPmA2AAACUBBDwAACWv8DEX76kXDQGv8PgAAAAAAAAEAAWv3bGv2gvfaN2v1Y1RQTGv3 bAAAAEB7MKeC5wAAAABkR94ADN4AAAAAAiyEciYL3k3FvgAGBwIBRIIGB2v3bGv20vfaN2v3bAgV hwAAGFhnEAAAIPeCx1ZwAFhnMAAAGAAAAFhnEFZwAAAAQAAAIFZwAAijSPeAKFZwUAAAQPeEmVZw AAAAQGv1DFifQAAAAgACf2v1HPetrFZwAAAAIAAAQPet5QAAHFnoJFhnFPdCd/dCd1ifQPe3Cfv5 4FnoJPe3MVnoJAAACVifQAAAI1ifQAAACQAACQijSGv2hPfQ9QAAgAAAAAAAAFw6Y1xwdGxpbWcu efcAZlifQPe3Cfv54FnoJPe3MVnoJAAACVifQAAAI1ifQAAACQAACQijSGv24PfQ9QAAAEXDQGv3 bFw6Y1xwdGxpbWcueQAAZgAAAAAAAAAAAKxQZAAATKvwAPuIcPuLYP///2v3QPc2YwAI1AAADwAA AAAAAEJZRwABV2v2JPcZIwAAAAAAAvko5fcaeQCGYmv8KPcZLkJZRwAAAPeWZvdCd/v54PeWgvdC d/v54PeXQgAAAQAAAGv2hPda5gAAAEX76gAAAGv3GPcBAVifQAAAAGv2vEUF8gAACW/YnAAQAGv2 rAAAAEX76kbj4Gv3GAAAI0TZFQAAI2v3LAAALAAAAgAAAgAAAAAQACH5BAEAAAAALAAAAAABAAEA QAgEAAEEBAA7 ------=_NextPart_000_0001_01C09BF3.081C3B40 Content-Type: image/x-xbitmap; name="up.xbm" Content-Transfer-Encoding: base64 Content-Location: http://flux.aps.org/bitmaps/up.xbm R0lGODlhAQABAPcAAP///wAAAGvz/0CMLQAAAQAI1AAAAAAADAAAAEaBqGvzpGvzjACD/Gvz2AeA ARuDe/wEp6ynfKvwAAijSPeAKFZ/CAAAEVsN+FZwAAijSFZwHFZwAAijSPeAKFZwUAAAAPeSfVZw AAAAAFnoJAAAAFifQFifQFifPPeuHlZwAAAAAFifQPeuvlifQPfaxlifQFifQPcT4gABT/cSxQA+ fQijSPdkTlifQAAAAPfdNgACfQAAAQAAAPe9hWvz3AAAAEXDQPdy4QAABgAACWv0GwAAAWvz8AAC fQAAAAAAAPmA2AAACUBBDwAACWv8DEX76kXDQGv8PgAAAAAAAAEAAWv3bGv2gvfaN2v1Y1RQTGv3 bAAAAEB7MKeC5wAAAABkR94ADN4AAAAAAiyEciYL3k3FvgAGBwIBRIIGB2v3bGv20vfaN2v3bAgV hwAAGFhnEAAAIPeCx1ZwAFhnMAAAGAAAAFhnEFZwAAAAQAAAIFZwAAijSPeAKFZwUAAAQPeEmVZw AAAAQGv1DFifQAAAAgACf2v1HPetrFZwAAAAIAAAQPet5QAAHFnoJFhnFPdCd/dCd1ifQPe3Cfv5 4FnoJPe3MVnoJAAACVifQAAAI1ifQAAACQAACQijSGv2hPfQ9QAAgAAAAAAAAFw6Y1xwdGxpbWcu efcAZlifQPe3Cfv54FnoJPe3MVnoJAAACVifQAAAI1ifQAAACQAACQijSGv24PfQ9QAAAEXDQGv3 bFw6Y1xwdGxpbWcueQAAZgAAAAAAAAAAAKxQZAAATKvwAPuIcPuLYP///2v3QPc2YwAI1AAADwAA AAAAAEJZRwABV2v2JPcZIwAAAAAAAvko5fcaeQCGYmv8KPcZLkJZRwAAAPeWZvdCd/v54PeWgvdC d/v54PeXQgAAAQAAAGv2hPda5gAAAEX76gAAAGv3GPcBAVifQAAAAGv2vEUF8gAACW/YnAAQAGv2 rAAAAEX76kbj4Gv3GAAAI0TZFQAAI2v3LAAALAAAAgAAAgAAAAAQACH5BAEAAAAALAAAAAABAAEA QAgEAAEEBAA7 ------=_NextPart_000_0001_01C09BF3.081C3B40-- From vortex-l-request eskimo.com Wed Feb 21 10:33:18 2001 Received: (from smartlst localhost) by mx1.eskimo.com (8.9.1a/8.8.8) id KAA01899; Wed, 21 Feb 2001 10:29:20 -0800 Resent-Date: Wed, 21 Feb 2001 10:29:20 -0800 Message-ID: <3A9400D8.B7AFEEA5 bellsouth.net> Date: Wed, 21 Feb 2001 12:54:32 -0500 From: Terry Blanton X-Mailer: Mozilla 4.73 [en] (WinNT; U) X-Accept-Language: en MIME-Version: 1.0 To: vortex-l eskimo.com Subject: Peltier Force Explained? References: <5.0.2.1.0.20010220171027.038fa0e8 earthtech.org> <3A93FA86.B700B61C@bellsouth.net> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Resent-Message-ID: <"GZnNV2.0.XT._Z0bw" mx1> Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/40920 X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com Status: RO X-Status: Terry Blanton wrote: > > Rick Monteverde wrote: > > > > Just a thought - these peltier devices are typically > > bismuth-telluride, right? Bismuth - the perennial antigravity > > suspect. Layered bismuth with electricity passing through it. Where > > have I heard that one before? > > In looking for an explanation of the Peltier force, I have come > across a possible explanation at: > > http://www.geocities.com/CapeCanaveral/Lab/7919/seitest.htm > > and > > http://www.geocities.com/CapeCanaveral/Lab/7919/Seike.htm > > which uses P charge carriers to tap the negative energy in the > earth's gravity field. The original paper is by Shinichi Seike > and titled, "Transistorized G-Power Generator." Of course, most > thermoelectric coolers use both N and P devices for > simplification of construction. > > Opinions? Jean-Louis Naudin has also tested this concept: http://jnaudin.free.fr/html/gseamnu.htm Terry From vortex-l-request eskimo.com Wed Feb 21 11:45:49 2001 Received: (from smartlst localhost) by mx1.eskimo.com (8.9.1a/8.8.8) id LAA29130; Wed, 21 Feb 2001 11:37:04 -0800 Resent-Date: Wed, 21 Feb 2001 11:37:04 -0800 Message-Id: <5.0.1.4.0.20010221132923.0430aec0 earthtech.org> X-Sender: little earthtech.org X-Mailer: QUALCOMM Windows Eudora Version 5.0.1 Date: Wed, 21 Feb 2001 13:35:35 -0600 To: "Nick Reiter" From: Scott Little Subject: Re: replication of Peltier force xducer Cc: "Bruce Reiter" , "Lori Lou Schillig" , vortex-l@eskimo.com In-Reply-To: <001b01c09bfb$d5bb6aa0$e23dee3f default> References: <5.0.2.1.0.20010220171027.038fa0e8 earthtech.org> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"; format=flowed Resent-Message-ID: <"nVArm3.0.W67.TZ1bw" mx1> Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/40921 X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com Status: O X-Status: Uh! oh!, Nick, I think I've found it. This AM, I cut the very stiff factory leads off very short, leaving only about 0.7 cm emerging from the device. I then soldered on 1 cm wide 0.0005" thick Cu foil strips to make new ultraflexible leads. Same current as before....but NO DISCERNIBLE EFFECT! The device now behaves just like the 5 ohm resistor. What I think is happening is a "bimetallic" flexure created right at the junction between the incoming lead and the ceramic subtrate. However, the only problem is that it seems to point in the wrong direction....ASSUMING the lead material is Cu, which has a larger thermal coefficient of expansion than almost all ceramics. So this isn't fully resolved yet but I was able to make the effect go away with the ultraflexible Cu foil leads. You mentioned trying Cu foil leads with your experiment. Perhaps you should visit that again using very thin foil.... Unfortunately, I'll be away for the next 4 days. Try to get this all figured out by the time I return....:) Good hunting... Scott Little, EarthTech Int'l, Inc. http://www.earthtech.org Suite 300, 4030 Braker Lane West, Austin TX 78759, USA 512-342-2185 (voice), 512-346-3017 (FAX), little earthtech.org (email) From vortex-l-request eskimo.com Wed Feb 21 12:11:19 2001 Received: (from smartlst localhost) by mx1.eskimo.com (8.9.1a/8.8.8) id MAA09207; Wed, 21 Feb 2001 12:05:57 -0800 Resent-Date: Wed, 21 Feb 2001 12:05:57 -0800 Mime-Version: 1.0 Message-Id: In-Reply-To: <200102201931.UAA21814 w2.euroseek.net> References: <200102201931.UAA21814 w2.euroseek.net> Date: Tue, 20 Feb 2001 14:05:26 -0600 To: vortex-l eskimo.com From: thomas malloy Subject: amateurs contribution to science Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" ; format="flowed" Resent-Message-ID: <"iAXyV1.0.fF2.b-1bw" mx1> Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/40923 X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com Status: RO X-Status: I find this story questionable so I am soliciting responses from my fellow vortexians BTW, the same poster also posted the following link which talks about the Wright brothers and their detractors, specifically the man, Mr. Newcomb who proved that heavier than air craft flight was impossible. This makes me laugh every time I think about it http://www.alternativescience.com/skeptics.htm >excerpted from > > http://www.alternativescience.com/flame-proof.htm > >- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - >Too hot to handle >- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - > >In April 1993, the defence magazine Jane's International Defence Review >announced the discovery by a British amateur inventor, Maurice Ward, of >a thin plastic coating able to withstand temperatures of 2,700 degrees >Centigrade > >The reason why it was a defence magazine who first published news of >This revolutionary invention is that the coating is so resistant to heat >that it can make tanks, ships and aircraft impervious to the effects of >nuclear weapons at quite close range -- and hence is of great interest to >the military mind. > >A little later that year the whole nation had an opportunity to see for >themselves the effectiveness of Maurice Ward's new paint on BBC >Television when it was featured on "Tomorrow's World". Presenter >Michael Rodd showed viewers an ordinary chicken's egg that had been >painted with the new coating. The paint was so thin it was not visible. >Rodd then dramatically donned welder's visor and gauntlets, lit up an >oxyacetylene torch, and played the flame directly onto the egg for >several minutes. > >When he removed the flame, and cracked the egg on the table top, >viewers were able to see that the coating was so heat resistant that the >egg was still raw and had not even begun to cook. > >This invention, a simple paint that can render anything impervious to >very high temperatures, has been the holy grail of chemical research for >more than fifty years. Teams of scientists in the world's greatest >industrial and defence laboratories have poured billions of pounds and >hundreds of man-years into the search for such a substance -- a quest >which made Ward's discovery even more extraordinary. > >Ward's invention is remarkable enough, but the story of how he came to >make it, and the resistance he encountered in getting anyone to believe >him, is even more remarkable. > >Maurice Ward comes from Blackburn and has no professional scientific >background. The closest he has come to the chemical industry was when, >as a young man, he drove a fork lift truck in the warehouse of ICI. For >the past two decades, he has earned a living as a ladies hairdresser. > >Part of his income was derived from selling his customers hair >preparations such as shampoo, conditioner and hairspray. To maximise >his income he rented a small workshop, bought standard chemicals and >mixed and bottled his own brand hair products. > >In the best traditions of Ealing Comedy, it was when playing around >mixing up chemicals in his 'skunk works' that Ward stumbled on the >formula that had eluded the finest minds in chemical research. > >Realising at once the value of his invention, Ward wrote to Britain's >major chemical companies, offering to demonstrate his material to them. >Every one sent him the standard brush-off letter they send to cranks and >crackpots. After the "Tomorrow's World" demonstration, Ward stopped >getting the brush-off and starting getting offers instead. > >One consequence of his contacts with chemical companies was that the >head of research of ICI's paint laboratory left the firm and went into >partnership with Ward to exploit the discovery commercially. > >One other interesting consequence is that the large corporations who >had rejected his initial approaches in such a knee-jerk fashion, conducted >internal inquests to find out what had gone wrong, both with their own >research and with their dealings with the outside world. > >On the face of it, it was perfectly understandable that Ward's claims >should be ignored since he was merely an amateur, with no scientific >training and no track record in research. > >ICI's own paints laboratory held an internal audit and what they found >puts this claim in an entirely different light. For the audit showed that >the most scientifically qualified of its research chemists had contributed >to the least number of patents, and the fewer scientific qualifications the >staff possessed, the greater the number of patents they had contributed >to. In the most striking case of all, the person who had contributed to >most ICI's patents had no scientific qualifications at all. > >It seems that Maurice Ward's greatest strength as a researcher was that >he had not been taught how to think. > >In the light of examples such as this, the phrase 'Alternative Science' >seems less a contradiction in terms and more a harbinger of something >that professional science is likely to see more and more of in future. >______________________________________________________ >Get Your Free Email at http://mail.euroseek.com > >Get your FREE SVP catalog of 300 books, pamphlets & videos. > >Email your snail mail address to info svpvril.com. From vortex-l-request eskimo.com Wed Feb 21 12:11:38 2001 Received: (from smartlst localhost) by mx1.eskimo.com (8.9.1a/8.8.8) id MAA09527; Wed, 21 Feb 2001 12:06:22 -0800 Resent-Date: Wed, 21 Feb 2001 12:06:22 -0800 Mime-Version: 1.0 Message-Id: In-Reply-To: References: Date: Tue, 20 Feb 2001 14:05:26 -0600 To: vortex-l eskimo.com From: thomas malloy Subject: Re: what did Joseph Newman do? Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" ; format="flowed" Resent-Message-ID: <"D41Am2.0.iK2.z-1bw" mx1> Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/40924 X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com Status: RO X-Status: >Frank Znidarsic wrote; > >I have heard of Joe Newman's machine. He should sent one to Scott Little for >testing >Yuri and I tested his machine at Los Alamos. No anomalous energy >was detected, however, I give Yuri a lot of credit for trying. EPRI tested >heavy water >cold fusion cells and reported anomalous energy. Thats a big difference. > I'm that Newman's machine didn't produce any O U output. OTOH, the cold fusion cells did. What is EPRI, and who is Yuri? BTW did you notice my posting on Peter Lindeman's books on Robert Adam's motor and Cold electricity? I'm pretty sure that the Adam's motor and similar designs are dead ends. Cold Electricity fascinates me however. does anyone know anything about it? Thomas From vortex-l-request eskimo.com Wed Feb 21 13:02:01 2001 Received: (from smartlst localhost) by mx1.eskimo.com (8.9.1a/8.8.8) id MAA28129; Wed, 21 Feb 2001 12:53:18 -0800 Resent-Date: Wed, 21 Feb 2001 12:53:18 -0800 Date: Wed, 21 Feb 2001 12:53:08 -0800 (PST) From: hank scudder To: vortex-l eskimo.com Subject: Re: replication of Peltier force xducer In-Reply-To: <5.0.2.1.0.20010220171027.038fa0e8 earthtech.org> Message-Id: Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: TEXT/PLAIN; charset=US-ASCII Resent-Message-ID: <"Mwl7f2.0.Rt6.zg2bw" mx1> Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/40925 X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com Status: O X-Status: Scott I suggest you try to magneticly sheild the device from the balance use a hi-mu metal sheild. I know a sheild in the form of a metal tape is commercialy available, but I can't think of the name. I suspect the relatively high current the Peltier device draws is moving the balance like a D'arsenval meter movement. You could also try a digital scale with no motion, such as available from several scientific houses. Hank On Tue, 20 Feb 2001, Scott Little wrote: > Hello Nick, > > I got wind of your latest discovery on the Vortex-l discussion group and > today I tried the experiment myself. In short, it works! > > I used a larger Melcor Peltier device...about 1.5" square and fed it about > 2.5 amps from a constant current supply. Initially I just set the bare > device on the pan of our old Mettler H6 analytical balance (0.1 milligram > readability) and arranged the leads, twisted tightly together so they ran > more-or-less horizontally out the door of the balance compartment to a > fixed mooring point then on to the power supply. > > Upon energizing the device I immediately observed the effect you > described...and in the same direction as you observed. It is as if the > flow of heat exerts a small force in the same direction as the heat is > flowing thru the Peltier device. The magnitude of my effect was 5-10 > milligrams, perhaps larger due to my larger device. Indeed the effect > reverses direction with reversed polarity. > > With no place for the heat to go, the device quickly becomes rather hot all > over...and probably doesn't pump heat very well anymore. When the device > was very hot, the effect was greatly reduced. When I cooled the device > back down to room temperature and tried again, the effect was back at full > strength! > > I tried a quick Cu sheet heat shunt around the device and didn't notice any > significant improvement...but it still worked. > > I then wrapped the device entirely in several layers of paper towel to > provide insulation so as to greatly reduce convection currents around the > device. The effect was undiminished by this treatment. > > I replaced the Peltier device with a 5 ohm resistor and put the same > current thru it. No discernible effect with either polarity!!! > > There was no sign of moisture condensing on the device. > > Needless to say, I am intrigued. I expect to find a mundane > explanation for this phenomenon but, right now, I have no idea what it > will be! > > ....back to the lab. Meanwhile, if any of you vorts have any ideas about > this experiment, let's hear 'em. > > > Scott Little > EarthTech International, Inc. > 4030 Braker Lane West, Suite 300 > Austin TX 78759 > 512-342-2185 > 512-346-3017 (FAX) > http://www.earthtech.org > > From vortex-l-request eskimo.com Wed Feb 21 13:36:22 2001 Received: (from smartlst localhost) by mx2.eskimo.com (8.9.1a/8.8.8) id NAA21168; Wed, 21 Feb 2001 13:12:30 -0800 (PST) Resent-Date: Wed, 21 Feb 2001 13:12:30 -0800 (PST) Message-Id: <5.0.1.4.0.20010221121039.04300940 earthtech.org> X-Sender: little earthtech.org X-Mailer: QUALCOMM Windows Eudora Version 5.0.1 Date: Wed, 21 Feb 2001 12:10:44 -0600 To: vortex-l eskimo.com From: Scott Little Subject: Re: replication of Peltier force xducer Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"; format=flowed Resent-Message-ID: <"HjwCY2.0.eA5.wy2bw" mx2> Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/40926 X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com Status: RO X-Status: Thanks for all the suggestions. I'm going to work on some of them today, hopefully. At 08:22 AM 2/21/01 -0600, Mitchell Jones wrote: ***{OK, here's another try: when the cold side is up, there will be a >down-draft pushing on the top of the device..... If that were indeed the mechanism behind the effect then surely it would be noticeably reduced by encasing the device in insulation, which would prevent the surrounding air from "seeing" the hot/cold surfaces. Reiter enclosed his device in a Styrofoam clamshell. I wrapped mine in several layers of paper towel. Neither of us observed any reduction in the effect. >Scott Little, EarthTech Int'l, Inc. http://www.earthtech.org Suite 300, 4030 Braker Lane West, Austin TX 78759, USA 512-342-2185 (voice), 512-346-3017 (FAX), little earthtech.org (email) From vortex-l-request eskimo.com Wed Feb 21 13:37:41 2001 Received: (from smartlst localhost) by mx1.eskimo.com (8.9.1a/8.8.8) id NAA12017; Wed, 21 Feb 2001 13:30:58 -0800 Resent-Date: Wed, 21 Feb 2001 13:30:58 -0800 X-Authentication-Warning: smtp4.ihug.co.nz: Host 203-173-204-192.akl.ihugultra.co.nz [203.173.204.192] claimed to be ihug.co.nz Message-ID: <3A94336E.1ECF3512 ihug.co.nz> Date: Thu, 22 Feb 2001 10:30:22 +1300 From: John Berry X-Mailer: Mozilla 4.75 [en] (Win98; U) X-Accept-Language: en MIME-Version: 1.0 To: vortex-l eskimo.com Subject: Re: replication of Peltier force xducer References: <5.0.2.1.0.20010220171027.038fa0e8 earthtech.org> <5.0.1.4.0.20010221132923.0430aec0@earthtech.org> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Resent-Message-ID: <"5mxgc3.0.ax2.HE3bw" mx1> Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/40927 X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com Status: O X-Status: Lets be sure that is the artifact. I think Hamdi made a few good points. Hamdi wrote: >A critical point on artifact removal: In general, in order to isolate an effect, test for artifacts and remove them, one can change conditions of the experiment apparently "should" not be related to the observed effect. But, a phenomenon may be related to such a condition in a different way that one assume. So changing such a condition may cause the effect disappears. This disappearance IS NOT THE PROOF of the effect was an artifact produced by this condition. Even this artifact hypothesis appears logical, one should carefully examine and confirm this condition is indeed responsible for the effect in a conventional way. For example, in this case, if the effect disappears by using Helmholtz coils, one should be sure by calculated the forces on the twisted pair by the Earth magnetic field are equal or close to the deviation. Alternatively, the phenomenon would be a novel magneto-gravitic effect which depends on existence of a magnetic field. Such incomplete artifact removal procedure, will bury a real phenomenon. For example, in the case of Pioneer-11 acceleration anomaly, many parameters are present, but careful calculations shows that they were not enough to produce the observed value. Scott Little wrote: > Uh! oh!, Nick, I think I've found it. > > This AM, I cut the very stiff factory leads off very short, leaving only > about 0.7 cm emerging from the device. I then soldered on 1 cm wide > 0.0005" thick Cu foil strips to make new ultraflexible leads. > > Same current as before....but NO DISCERNIBLE EFFECT! The device now > behaves just like the 5 ohm resistor. > > What I think is happening is a "bimetallic" flexure created right at the > junction between the incoming lead and the ceramic subtrate. However, the > only problem is that it seems to point in the wrong direction....ASSUMING > the lead material is Cu, which has a larger thermal coefficient of > expansion than almost all ceramics. > > So this isn't fully resolved yet but I was able to make the effect go away > with the ultraflexible Cu foil leads. You mentioned trying Cu foil leads > with your experiment. Perhaps you should visit that again using very thin > foil.... > > Unfortunately, I'll be away for the next 4 days. Try to get this all > figured out by the time I return....:) > > Good hunting... > > Scott Little, EarthTech Int'l, Inc. http://www.earthtech.org > Suite 300, 4030 Braker Lane West, Austin TX 78759, USA > 512-342-2185 (voice), 512-346-3017 (FAX), little earthtech.org (email) From vortex-l-request eskimo.com Wed Feb 21 14:23:12 2001 Received: (from smartlst localhost) by mx1.eskimo.com (8.9.1a/8.8.8) id OAA26247; Wed, 21 Feb 2001 14:12:29 -0800 Resent-Date: Wed, 21 Feb 2001 14:12:29 -0800 From: Robin van Spaandonk To: vortex-l eskimo.com Subject: Re: amateurs contribution to science Date: Thu, 22 Feb 2001 09:11:49 +1100 Organization: Improving Message-ID: References: <200102201931.UAA21814 w2.euroseek.net> In-Reply-To: X-Mailer: Forte Agent 1.8/32.548 MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit X-MIME-Autoconverted: from quoted-printable to 8bit by mx1.eskimo.com id OAA26163 Resent-Message-ID: <"ZMyDp.0.yP6.Cr3bw" mx1> Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/40928 X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com Status: RO X-Status: In reply to thomas malloy's message of Tue, 20 Feb 2001 14:05:26 -0600: [snip] >>ICI's own paints laboratory held an internal audit and what they found >>puts this claim in an entirely different light. For the audit showed that >>the most scientifically qualified of its research chemists had contributed >>to the least number of patents, and the fewer scientific qualifications the >>staff possessed, the greater the number of patents they had contributed >>to. In the most striking case of all, the person who had contributed to >>most ICI's patents had no scientific qualifications at all. >> >>It seems that Maurice Ward's greatest strength as a researcher was that >>he had not been taught how to think. [snip] I suspect rather that he didn't need to be taught how to think, and that his advantage lay in that he had not been mistaught loads of pure rubbish in the guise of scientific knowledge, which ensured that he wasn't afraid to try something that "couldn't work". Regards, Robin van Spaandonk A Future For Humanity see: http://users.bigpond.net.au/rvanspaa/ From vortex-l-request eskimo.com Wed Feb 21 17:43:49 2001 Received: (from smartlst localhost) by mx1.eskimo.com (8.9.1a/8.8.8) id RAA24776; Wed, 21 Feb 2001 17:36:00 -0800 Resent-Date: Wed, 21 Feb 2001 17:36:00 -0800 Mime-Version: 1.0 X-Sender: rick mail.highsurf.com Message-Id: In-Reply-To: <3A94336E.1ECF3512 ihug.co.nz> References: <5.0.2.1.0.20010220171027.038fa0e8 earthtech.org> <5.0.1.4.0.20010221132923.0430aec0 earthtech.org> <3A94336E.1ECF3512 ihug.co.nz> Date: Wed, 21 Feb 2001 15:35:48 -1000 To: vortex-l eskimo.com From: Rick Monteverde Subject: Re: replication of Peltier force xducer Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" ; format="flowed" Resent-Message-ID: <"_9d0T.0.236._p6bw" mx1> Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/40929 X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com Status: O X-Status: John - At 10:30 AM +1300 2/22/01, John Berry wrote: >Lets be sure that is the artifact. > >I think Hamdi made a few good points. I think he did too. Nick answers that he also clipped his stiff peltier leads close and used flexible stuff from there. And in stacking devices he got the 3x scaled effect from using three peltiers. Also, in one case he potted epoxy across the joint where the leads meet the device. I got fooled by wire flex on this kind of experiment once. It's hard, because at some-amps there's magnetic bucking in the wires as well as heating. Still a question. - Rick Monteverde Honolulu, HI From vortex-l-request eskimo.com Wed Feb 21 19:18:52 2001 Received: (from smartlst localhost) by mx1.eskimo.com (8.9.1a/8.8.8) id TAA22073; Wed, 21 Feb 2001 19:07:45 -0800 Resent-Date: Wed, 21 Feb 2001 19:07:45 -0800 From: Robin van Spaandonk To: vortex-l eskimo.com Subject: Re: Neutrons from Electron Impact? Date: Thu, 22 Feb 2001 14:07:07 +1100 Organization: Improving Message-ID: References: In-Reply-To: X-Mailer: Forte Agent 1.8/32.548 MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit X-MIME-Autoconverted: from quoted-printable to 8bit by mx1.eskimo.com id TAA22047 Resent-Message-ID: <"a4bUx3.0.nO5.0A8bw" mx1> Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/40931 X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com Status: O X-Status: In reply to Mitchell Jones's message of Wed, 21 Feb 2001 08:07:44 -0600: >>In reply to Mitchell Jones's message of Mon, 19 Feb 2001 00:01:11 -0600: > >***{Hi Robin. I notice that the word "ridiculous" crept into my last >message. I try not to introduce such words into a discussion, but I slipped >up. Normally, I make one or more additional passes through a post after the >first one, for editing purposes, and it is at that time that I normally >delete such words, if I find them. However, in that particular message it >was late, I was sleepy, and I sent off my first draft. For the record: >there was no inflammatory intent. I merely found some of your comments >exceptionally implausible, shall we say? :-) --MJ}*** That's OK Mitchell, I find some of your statements "exceptionally implausible" too ;). [snip] >***{All that "infinity" means in these sorts of discussions is "far enough >away so that, to the desired accuracy, the potential energy is the same as >it would be at infinity." Which is just what I was saying. [snip] >Furthermore, the potential energy available per proton is precisely >>the energy from 1 electron approaching that proton, all other electrons are >>irrelevant. This is easily seen if one considers that when the charge on a >>proton is neutralised by combination with the electron, all potential energy >>of that proton with respect to all other electrons in the universe >>disappears. It therefore seems reasonable that the total field energy >>available is a constant, and that it is the amount released by one electron. >>As to kinetic energy, we were talking about rest mass, not relativistic >>mass. Furthermore, every particle has an almost infinite number of different >>relativistic masses concurrently, depending on the frame of reference used >>to measure the mass, this takes care of your "millions of distinct >>circumstances". >>The rest mass is the lowest mass measurable > >***{Yup, but it wouldn't be if potential energy had mass. For in that case, >as we lifted an object up out of a potential well, its mass would increase. >--MJ}*** Or at least we can say that the combined mass of the objects attached to both ends of the force would increase. (All forces have on object on each end of the force, though in some cases one object is a photon, and *maybe* spacetime itself can be one of the objects). [snip] >***{In all the above, you never directly addressed my statement, so let me >put it to you directly: does rest mass include potential energy, or not? I >say it does not. If it does not, then mass/energy is not conserved. >One reason is that the rest mass of an object, m = F/a, >is determined by measuring the acceleration of the mass in response to a >known force, from a state of rest. Nothing in that procedure leads to the >imputation of a value for potential energy. Result: the energy acquired by >a body when it falls through a potential difference adds to the mass it had >when it started. Potential energy is energy that might be, but has not yet >been, acquired. This is just a matter of not considering a sufficiently large system frame. >To say it is part of the mass of a body at rest makes as >much sense as saying that a man's weight includes the weight of the meal >which he has not yet eaten. --MJ}*** No, the weight of the man plus the meal before he eats it is equal to the weight of the man after he eats it. That is what I meant when I said your system frame was too small. Put differently the hydrogen atom is a system chosen sufficiently large to include the mass represented by the potential energy inherent in the separation between proton and electron, yet has only the mass of proton and electron, hence the mass represented by that potential energy must be included in the measured mass of the particles. [snip]> >>Consider the following thought experiment: >> >>We have a means of converting mass into energy and back again with 100% >>efficiency. >>We have a means of storing energy as potential energy in a device H (for >>heavy) which is at ground level. >>A separate mass s (for small) is converted totally into energy > >***{It is a minor point, but, technically, no mass can be converted >entirely into potential energy, because mass is required as part of the >definition of force (F = ma), and force is required as part of the The standard argument here would be that force is more generally dp/dt, and where massless particles like photons play a role, force can exist without mass. However if I pursue this line, I'll shoot myself in the foot again, so I'll wait till you do it for me (you might miss ;). [snip] >definition of potential energy (P = Fh, where h is the height above datum). No, this is only a definition of gravitational potential energy. In the thought experiment previously posted, the potential energy of H that I used was of a chemical or nuclear nature (take your pick, for my part it can also be a big spring that gets wound up). In light of this misunderstanding, the rest of your arguments become irrelevant, so I will leave you to post a new rebuttal of the original thought experiment based upon this additional explanation. [snip] Regards, Robin van Spaandonk A Future For Humanity see: http://users.bigpond.net.au/rvanspaa/ From vortex-l-request eskimo.com Wed Feb 21 19:21:15 2001 Received: (from smartlst localhost) by mx2.eskimo.com (8.9.1a/8.8.8) id SAA04371; Wed, 21 Feb 2001 18:47:24 -0800 (PST) Resent-Date: Wed, 21 Feb 2001 18:47:24 -0800 (PST) From: Robin van Spaandonk To: vortex-l eskimo.com Subject: Re: replication of Peltier force xducer Date: Thu, 22 Feb 2001 13:32:45 +1100 Organization: Improving Message-ID: <5fu89tsos662ojou3i0tqn0eh0o9te3mgc 4ax.com> References: <5.0.2.1.0.20010220171027.038fa0e8 earthtech.org> <001b01c09bfb$d5bb6aa0$e23dee3f@default> <5.0.1.4.0.20010221132923.0430aec0@earthtech.org> In-Reply-To: <5.0.1.4.0.20010221132923.0430aec0 earthtech.org> X-Mailer: Forte Agent 1.8/32.548 MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit X-MIME-Autoconverted: from quoted-printable to 8bit by mx2.eskimo.com id SAA04320 Resent-Message-ID: <"jZDmP.0.C41.ws7bw" mx2> Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/40930 X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com Status: O X-Status: In reply to Scott Little's message of Wed, 21 Feb 2001 13:35:35 -0600: > > >Uh! oh!, Nick, I think I've found it. > >This AM, I cut the very stiff factory leads off very short, leaving only >about 0.7 cm emerging from the device. I then soldered on 1 cm wide >0.0005" thick Cu foil strips to make new ultraflexible leads. > >Same current as before....but NO DISCERNIBLE EFFECT! The device now >behaves just like the 5 ohm resistor. Hi Scott, When you changed the leads, you may have destroyed the ability of the device to manifest the effect. You might try reattaching the original leads, and see if the effect comes back again. Regards, Robin van Spaandonk A Future For Humanity see: http://users.bigpond.net.au/rvanspaa/ From vortex-l-request eskimo.com Wed Feb 21 21:29:07 2001 Received: (from smartlst localhost) by mx1.eskimo.com (8.9.1a/8.8.8) id UAA32706; Wed, 21 Feb 2001 20:59:54 -0800 Resent-Date: Wed, 21 Feb 2001 20:59:54 -0800 From: Robin van Spaandonk To: vortex-l eskimo.com Subject: Re: Photon in a cavity? Date: Thu, 22 Feb 2001 15:47:59 +1100 Organization: Improving Message-ID: References: <3A85F654.BADA2E94@ix.netcom.com> <3A86A219.9A713786@ix.netcom.com> <5ltr8t4nb00bqv8ck9fcmqq0peoqmj266b@4ax.com> <3A8E83E2.BF8FD42C@ix.netcom.com> In-Reply-To: <3A8E83E2.BF8FD42C ix.netcom.com> X-Mailer: Forte Agent 1.8/32.548 MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit X-MIME-Autoconverted: from quoted-printable to 8bit by mx1.eskimo.com id UAA32560 Resent-Message-ID: <"8SHgW1.0.J-7.9p9bw" mx1> Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/40932 X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com Status: O X-Status: In reply to Edmund Storms's message of Sat, 17 Feb 2001 08:00:06 -0600: [snip] >> What then distinguishes a cavity from the rest of the metal? > >The basis of the discussion is the scale of the cavity. If a cavity is defined >only by a few atoms (such as a dislocation), the situation is much different >compared to a big cavity defined by many atoms. In the first case, the cavity >is filled by the electron cloud that is associated with the surrounding atoms. This is an interesting point. According to Mills of course there is no such thing as an electron cloud. Electrons reside in little shells, so a cavity would be a real thing. >Consequently, no sharp boundary exists. A photon would not see a sufficient >change in properties to cause it to change direction. I was thinking that perhaps the photon might not even be emitted in the first place, under these conditions. >On the other hand, if >the cavity were large, the surface could act like the "outside" surface and a >photon could bounce around until it was absorbed. Such a cavity would contain >many D2 molecules whose properties would not differ from those applied to the >"outside" surface. This is not the situation you are describing in your model. I thought perhaps there might be something in between these two, where free D atoms could escape from the surface, but not really have a chance to form molecules. [snip] >> I think a "uniform discontinuity" is a contradiction in terms. > >A uniform discontinuity is one that has a sharp change in properties in the z >direction but uniform properties in the x-y direction. A flat mirror would be >an example. On the other hand, a sandblasted surface would not be an example. Comprendo. [snip] >A uniform structure does not exists, which is a condition for a >photon to be influenced (reflected). [snip] I think reflection is caused by free electrons, which is why metals reflect well, but insulators only poorly. IOW it isn't so much the uniform structure that is responsible for the actual reflection, but the electron sea that it contains. The only real consequence of the uniformity is that no distortion of the reflected image takes place. (Superconductors would by this hypothesis always be perfect reflectors when superconducting). In the case of cavities however, distortion is irrelevant. Regards, Robin van Spaandonk A Future For Humanity see: http://users.bigpond.net.au/rvanspaa/ From vortex-l-request eskimo.com Wed Feb 21 22:35:58 2001 Received: (from smartlst localhost) by mx1.eskimo.com (8.9.1a/8.8.8) id WAA04777; Wed, 21 Feb 2001 22:34:46 -0800 Resent-Date: Wed, 21 Feb 2001 22:34:46 -0800 Message-ID: <20010222063444.15620.qmail web2105.mail.yahoo.com> Date: Wed, 21 Feb 2001 22:34:44 -0800 (PST) From: Michael Schaffer Subject: Re: replication of Peltier force xducer To: vortex-l eskimo.com In-Reply-To: <5.0.2.1.0.20010220171027.038fa0e8 earthtech.org> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Resent-Message-ID: <"kLKdd.0.UA1.5CBbw" mx1> Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/40932 X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com Status: O X-Status: I know that Nick and Scott have already tested against magentic effects. Here I will just add a short calculation of the rough magnitude of the force one might expect from current flowing in a conductor across Earth's magnetic field. For a straight conductor of length L(m) carrying current I(A) across magnetic induction B(T) the force F(Nt) is F = IBL. For these experiments, choose I = 3 A B = (1/3)x10^-4 T L = 0.1 m. Then F = 10^-5 Nt. Most central North Americans are unfamiliar with the newton as a unit of force. Therefore, let us use F = mg to calculate the mass that would produce the same force in Earth's surface gravitational acceleration g = 10 m/s^2. The result is a mass of 10^-6 kg = 1 mg "weight." This is smaller than the reported measured forces. I probably made an optimistic choice of my value for uncancelled conductor length L. I also assumed that the cross product between the current direction and Earth's local B would be nearly all upward, which I think is unlikely in the experiments. Therefore, this rough calculation suggests that force from interaction between the current and Earth's magnetic field is unlikly to be a serious artifact. ===== Michael J. Schaffer __________________________________________________ Do You Yahoo!? Yahoo! Auctions - Buy the things you want at great prices! http://auctions.yahoo.com/ From vortex-l-request eskimo.com Wed Feb 21 22:50:25 2001 Received: (from smartlst localhost) by mx1.eskimo.com (8.9.1a/8.8.8) id WAA09220; Wed, 21 Feb 2001 22:49:03 -0800 Resent-Date: Wed, 21 Feb 2001 22:49:03 -0800 Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" X-Sender: mjones pop.jump.net Message-Id: In-Reply-To: <5.0.1.4.0.20010221121039.04300940 earthtech.org> Date: Wed, 21 Feb 2001 18:38:12 -0600 To: vortex-l eskimo.com From: Mitchell Jones Subject: Re: replication of Peltier force xducer Resent-Message-ID: <"JHRyE2.0.-F2.VPBbw" mx1> Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/40933 X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com Status: O X-Status: >Thanks for all the suggestions. I'm going to work on some of them today, >hopefully. > >At 08:22 AM 2/21/01 -0600, Mitchell Jones wrote: > >***{OK, here's another try: when the cold side is up, there will be a >>down-draft pushing on the top of the device..... > >If that were indeed the mechanism behind the effect then surely it would be >noticeably reduced by encasing the device in insulation, which would >prevent the surrounding air from "seeing" the hot/cold surfaces. Reiter >enclosed his device in a Styrofoam clamshell. ***{Correct. I must have missed the part about the styrofoam clamshell. This is getting interesting! --MJ}*** I wrapped mine in several >layers of paper towel. Neither of us observed any reduction in the effect. > > >>Scott Little, EarthTech Int'l, Inc. http://www.earthtech.org > >Suite 300, 4030 Braker Lane West, Austin TX 78759, USA >512-342-2185 (voice), 512-346-3017 (FAX), little earthtech.org (email) ________________ Quote of the month: "Law is what the authorities use to ride the country." --Anatoly Schransky From vortex-l-request eskimo.com Thu Feb 22 03:27:43 2001 Received: (from smartlst localhost) by mx1.eskimo.com (8.9.1a/8.8.8) id DAA13113; Thu, 22 Feb 2001 03:27:09 -0800 Resent-Date: Thu, 22 Feb 2001 03:27:09 -0800 Message-Id: Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Date: Thu, 22 Feb 2001 02:37:19 -0900 To: vortex-l eskimo.com From: hheffner mtaonline.net (Horace Heffner) Subject: Re: replication of Peltier force xducer Resent-Message-ID: <"JQpPk3.0.kC3.DUFbw" mx1> Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/40934 X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com Status: O X-Status: At 10:34 PM 2/21/1, Michael Schaffer wrote: [snip] >This is smaller than the reported measured forces. I probably made an >optimistic choice of my value for uncancelled conductor length L. I also >assumed that the cross product between the current direction and Earth's local >B would be nearly all upward, which I think is unlikely in the experiments. >Therefore, this rough calculation suggests that force from interaction between >the current and Earth's magnetic field is unlikly to be a serious artifact. This does not preclude the ambient magnetic field from being important, assuming for a moment some previously not understood process is involved. It could be that somehow a net force is generated by some process in the Peltier device that is a function of ExB, plus some variables relating to the material, in which case manipulating ambient B could either increase the force, decrease the force, or change the direction of the force. Another concern, since the leads to the Peltier device have nearly zero separation, not anywhere near 0.1 m (agreeing that uncancelled length L = 0.1 m is very optimistic, as you say) is that the total circuit on the scale is a magnetic dipole circuit, so will provide (only) torque. For this reason, if the ambient magnetic field is not controlled, then it might be a good idea to orient the scale north-south, and then do the experiment again with the scale oriented east-west as a control. However, the dipole moment is not likely to be significant either. Assuming the area of the current loop is small, due mainly to the size of the Peltier device, then it should be less than 10 cm^2. The magnetic moment M of the coil is: M = n*I*A where n=1, I = 3 amps is current, and A = 10 cm^2 is area of the current loop. Let's assume an orientation such that maximum force is exerted (M and B at right angles) so we have torque T given by: T = M x B but we can use the scalar calculation: T = M * B so if the ambient field is about 1 gauss we have: T = (3 amps)(5 cm^2)(1 gauss) = 3x10^-7 N-m and if the scale has an l = 10 cm arm then the force applied is: F = T/l = T/0.1 = 3x10^-6 N = 3.06x10^-7 kgf = 3.06x10^-4 gf so we can estimate a maximum force on the balance of about 0.3 millgrams. However, if the power supply leads are allowed to form a rediculously large area, say 10 cm by 10 cm, then the force could creep up into the very significant range. Either careful numbers should be used, including estimates of ambient field orientation, magnitude, and dip being provided, or else the effect controlled by changing scale orientations or eliminating ambient fields through use of Helmholtz coils. Regards, Horace Heffner From vortex-l-request eskimo.com Thu Feb 22 03:44:03 2001 Received: (from smartlst localhost) by mx1.eskimo.com (8.9.1a/8.8.8) id DAA15114; Thu, 22 Feb 2001 03:42:11 -0800 Resent-Date: Thu, 22 Feb 2001 03:42:11 -0800 Message-Id: Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Date: Thu, 22 Feb 2001 02:52:25 -0900 To: vortex-l eskimo.com From: hheffner mtaonline.net (Horace Heffner) Subject: Re: Neutrons from Electron Impact? Resent-Message-ID: <"lQa1A1.0.4i3.JiFbw" mx1> Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/40935 X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com Status: O X-Status: At 2:07 PM 2/22/1, Robin van Spaandonk wrote: >>***{In all the above, you never directly addressed my statement, so let me >>put it to you directly: does rest mass include potential energy, or not? I >>say it does not. > >If it does not, then mass/energy is not conserved. For what it is worth, I am pretty sure I have seen arguments that increased gravitational potential is balanced by a corresponding increase in mass, according to the ration E_pot = m c^2. I am sorry I don't have time at the moment to track that down. However,there is a simple qualitative argument that this is so. If gravity is a quantum effect, mediated by a particle (graviton) sporadically emitted with some half life, then it follows that mass must increase with increased potential energy, and decrease as the gravitational field increases with proximity and the corresponding loss of potential energy. The reason for this is that time slows down in an increased gravitational field. The half-life for graviton emission decreases with increased local gravitational field. This would imply that the percieved mass of a black hole would less than the sum of the masses from which it was formed. This may be provide an inconsistency between quantum gravity and general relativity (GR)? In (GR) mass is assumed invariant, at least by some authors (see *Scouting Black Holes* by Edwin F Taylor and John A. Wheeler.) Regards, Horace Heffner From vortex-l-request eskimo.com Thu Feb 22 10:30:34 2001 Received: (from smartlst localhost) by mx1.eskimo.com (8.9.1a/8.8.8) id KAA23720; Thu, 22 Feb 2001 10:17:50 -0800 Resent-Date: Thu, 22 Feb 2001 10:17:50 -0800 Message-Id: Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Date: Thu, 22 Feb 2001 09:28:04 -0900 To: vortex-l eskimo.com From: hheffner mtaonline.net (Horace Heffner) Subject: Re: Neutrons from Electron Impact? Resent-Message-ID: <"z4Xfn.0.Yo5.EVLbw" mx1> Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/40936 X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com Status: O X-Status: Slight correction: For what it is worth, I am pretty sure I have seen arguments that increased gravitational potential is balanced by a corresponding increase in mass, according to the ratio (delta E_pot) = (delta m) c^2. This makes some sense from yet another perspective. Suppose the mass of a "real" object is, as might be assumed with the electron, completely embodied in its (entire gravitational) field. The energy required to place a new real mass into the universe is m c^2, thus this is the new potential energy embodied in its gravitational field, and thus it is the net gravitational potential energy added to the universe if we are located in the reference frame of that mass. It is the additional kinetic energy acquired if the entire mass of the universe goes through a big crunch back to a point. Regards, Horace Heffner From vortex-l-request eskimo.com Thu Feb 22 11:27:00 2001 Received: (from smartlst localhost) by mx1.eskimo.com (8.9.1a/8.8.8) id LAA27321; Thu, 22 Feb 2001 11:24:32 -0800 Resent-Date: Thu, 22 Feb 2001 11:24:32 -0800 Message-ID: <001401c09d06$13da6ba0$0c6cd626 varisys.com> From: "George Holz" To: References: <5.0.1.4.0.20010221121039.04300940 earthtech.org> Subject: Re: replication of Peltier force xducer Date: Thu, 22 Feb 2001 14:31:37 -0500 MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-Priority: 3 X-MSMail-Priority: Normal X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook Express 5.00.2314.1300 X-MIMEOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V5.00.2314.1300 Resent-Message-ID: <"y8q7o1.0.pg6.mTMbw" mx1> Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/40937 X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com Status: O X-Status: I first sent this email yesterday, since it appears to have disappeared into internet ether limbo here it is again before it becomes totally obsolete. - Scott Little wrote: > > I replaced the Peltier device with a 5 ohm resistor and put the same > current thru it. No discernible effect with either polarity!!! > Scott, what type of resistor were you using? What was the orientation of the resistor with respect to the balance? Perhaps the momentum transfer of the electric field accelerated electrons to the fixed metal atoms should be considered. The force from this would be concentrated in the regions of maximum voltage drop and would be polarity dependent but probably too small. Based on my experiments, longitudinal forces within the circuit can only reach the 400 mg level in the presence of 1000+ gauss gradients at 20 amps and could not be causing the effects you are finding. Lorentz forces at bends in the supply wires could be significant at 2 amps, but should not be polarity dependent. - My longitudinal force experiments show that the leads can easily cause forces in this range due to heat induced relaxation of wire strain. This does not explain the polarity dependence of the effect but can confuse measurements at higher currents. I have found that litz wire works well and can be strain relieved by prerunning it at a high current in its final configuration. - I have also discovered that high currents can be supplied to a force measurement experiment by going through the Al/strain gauge active elements in certain inexpensive milligram electronic scales. Because of the nature of the LF experiments I only needed one connection, but two connections can be provided by using two scales. Twenty amps through the mechanism would cause the scale reading to change about 3 mg after 10 seconds. Fortunately, unlike with the wires, the change was quite repeatable. At 2 amps this technique should give less than 1 mg changes for at least a minute of current flow. At 100 volts this technique could provide thousands of watts and still give mg level measurements. The problem with on board batteries, is that the batteries themselves may also have weight changes in this range at high currents. Regards, George Holz george varisys.com Varitronics Systems 1924 US Hwy 22 East Bound Brook, NJ 08805 From vortex-l-request eskimo.com Thu Feb 22 15:08:32 2001 Received: (from smartlst localhost) by mx1.eskimo.com (8.9.1a/8.8.8) id OAA21527; Thu, 22 Feb 2001 14:59:37 -0800 Resent-Date: Thu, 22 Feb 2001 14:59:37 -0800 Message-Id: Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Date: Thu, 22 Feb 2001 14:09:38 -0900 To: vortex-l eskimo.com From: hheffner mtaonline.net (Horace Heffner) Subject: Re: replication of Peltier force xducer Resent-Message-ID: <"OBejz1.0.5G5.OdPbw" mx1> Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/40938 X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com Status: O X-Status: At 2:31 PM 2/22/1, George Holz wrote: [snip] >The problem with on board batteries, is that the batteries >themselves may also have weight changes in this range >at high currents. Are you talking about weight changes due to gas emission or displacement? If so this is controlled by the fact that the force reverses with current direction through the Peltier. Gas emisssion etc. would cause a uni-directional change. Any supposed directional weight (force) changes of the batteries due to anti-gravity or inirtial effects of currents can be controlled by flipping the battery orientation (without changing current direction through the Peltier device.) Regards, Horace Heffner From vortex-l-request eskimo.com Thu Feb 22 16:07:14 2001 Received: (from smartlst localhost) by mx1.eskimo.com (8.9.1a/8.8.8) id QAA04640; Thu, 22 Feb 2001 16:00:40 -0800 Resent-Date: Thu, 22 Feb 2001 16:00:40 -0800 Message-ID: <3A95A70A.DC3F95F0 enter.net> Date: Thu, 22 Feb 2001 18:55:54 -0500 From: David Rosignoli X-Mailer: Mozilla 4.73 [en] (Win98; I) X-Accept-Language: en MIME-Version: 1.0 To: vortex-l eskimo.com CC: Nick Reiter Subject: Re: replication of Peltier force xducer References: Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Resent-Message-ID: <"umYnQ.0.P81.eWQbw" mx1> Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/40939 X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com Status: RO X-Status: The assumption here is that the only external magnetic field is the Earth's. What if an another magnetic field closeby was also acting in the vertical direction. (Although I don't see how both Scott and Nick could get the same results if this were true.) Nick, your resistor replacement experiment doesn't demonstrate that the peltier device might be affected by magnetic fields. Can you apply an external field (helmoholtz coils, neodymium magnets,...) to see what happens? DR Horace Heffner wrote: > > At 10:34 PM 2/21/1, Michael Schaffer wrote: > [snip] > >This is smaller than the reported measured forces. I probably made an > >optimistic choice of my value for uncancelled conductor length L. I also > >assumed that the cross product between the current direction and Earth's local > >B would be nearly all upward, which I think is unlikely in the experiments. > >Therefore, this rough calculation suggests that force from interaction between > >the current and Earth's magnetic field is unlikly to be a serious artifact. > > This does not preclude the ambient magnetic field from being important, > assuming for a moment some previously not understood process is involved. > It could be that somehow a net force is generated by some process in the > Peltier device that is a function of ExB, plus some variables relating to > the material, in which case manipulating ambient B could either increase > the force, decrease the force, or change the direction of the force. > > Another concern, since the leads to the Peltier device have nearly zero > separation, not anywhere near 0.1 m (agreeing that uncancelled length L = > 0.1 m is very optimistic, as you say) is that the total circuit on the > scale is a magnetic dipole circuit, so will provide (only) torque. For > this reason, if the ambient magnetic field is not controlled, then it might > be a good idea to orient the scale north-south, and then do the experiment > again with the scale oriented east-west as a control. However, the dipole > moment is not likely to be significant either. Assuming the area of the > current loop is small, due mainly to the size of the Peltier device, then > it should be less than 10 cm^2. The magnetic moment M of the coil is: > > M = n*I*A > > where n=1, I = 3 amps is current, and A = 10 cm^2 is area of the current > loop. Let's assume an orientation such that maximum force is exerted (M > and B at right angles) so we have torque T given by: > > T = M x B > > but we can use the scalar calculation: > > T = M * B > > so if the ambient field is about 1 gauss we have: > > T = (3 amps)(5 cm^2)(1 gauss) = 3x10^-7 N-m > > and if the scale has an l = 10 cm arm then the force applied is: > > F = T/l = T/0.1 = 3x10^-6 N = 3.06x10^-7 kgf = 3.06x10^-4 gf > > so we can estimate a maximum force on the balance of about 0.3 millgrams. > However, if the power supply leads are allowed to form a rediculously large > area, say 10 cm by 10 cm, then the force could creep up into the very > significant range. Either careful numbers should be used, including > estimates of ambient field orientation, magnitude, and dip being provided, > or else the effect controlled by changing scale orientations or > eliminating ambient fields through use of Helmholtz coils. > > Regards, > > Horace Heffner From vortex-l-request eskimo.com Thu Feb 22 18:44:59 2001 Received: (from smartlst localhost) by mx1.eskimo.com (8.9.1a/8.8.8) id SAA05534; Thu, 22 Feb 2001 18:41:54 -0800 Resent-Date: Thu, 22 Feb 2001 18:41:54 -0800 Date: Thu, 22 Feb 2001 21:47:58 -0500 (EST) From: John Schnurer To: vortex-l eskimo.com Subject: Re: ICI... Maurice Ward HT Test File (fwd) Message-ID: MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: TEXT/PLAIN; charset=US-ASCII Resent-Message-ID: <"4sp9_1.0.HM1.ntSbw" mx1> Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/40940 X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com Status: O X-Status: ---------- Forwarded message ---------- Date: Thu, 22 Feb 2001 18:21:01 -0800 From: vortex-l-request eskimo.com To: herman antioch-college.edu Subject: Re: ICI... Maurice Ward HT Test File This is an automated reply. Sorry, you cannot post to vortex-L if you are not a subscriber. Your See http://www.eskimo.com/~billb/weird/wvort.html for more info. ========== sent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com In reply to thomas malloy's message of Tue, 20 Feb 2001 14:05:26 -0600: [snip] >>ICI's own paints laboratory held an internal audit and what they found >>puts this claim in an entirely different light. For the audit showed that >>the most scientifically qualified of its research chemists had contributed >>to the least number of patents, and the fewer scientific qualifications the >>staff possessed, the greater the number of patents they had contributed >>to. In the most striking case of all, the person who had contributed to >>most ICI's patents had no scientific qualifications at all. >> >>It seems that Maurice Ward's greatest strength as a researcher was that >>he had not been taught how to think. [snip] I suspect rather that he didn't need to be taught how to think, and that his advantage lay in that he had not been mistaught loads of pure rubbish in the guise of scientific knowledge, which ensured that he wasn't afraid to try something that "couldn't work". May be posted. High Temperature material tests update: a) A sample about 1" by 1" by 0.85mm was subjected to laser irradiation. The sample was tested if free air. No air or assist gas was used with the laser. The laser was a carbon dioxide laser capable of maximum power of 1 KW and was peaked for emission at 10.6 microns. Beam power: 600 watts. Spot size: 3mm The sample was translated at a rate of 1mm per second. The total irradiated area was 3mm by 20mm with this translation. The material is black on one face and grey on the reverse side and is not specular. The black side was irradiated and the sample went to incandescence. Material loss on the exposed side was less than 10%. The material remained substantially black after exposure. The reverse side showed some slight change in color. The material did not crack or "punch through". The sample remained flat. The test was conducted at the Hardened Materials Branch at Wright Laboratories at Wright Patterson US Air Force Base, to whom we are indebted. b) An oxygen acatylene torch test was performed. This was a light cutting and brazing torch. This was an uninstrumented test. The flame diameter was 4mm and adjusted to a fine point. The material cut through at a rate of about 1mm per minute. No conclusions drawn. c) proprietary d) A very thin specimen of the material less than 0.25mm thick was heated to medium cherry red in a gas flame and then removed. It could be handled and was cool to the touch in less than 1 second. The specimen was about 3/4" by 3/4". e) A piece of hard, not wool type asbestos 2.5mm thick and a piece of the material 3.1mm thick were placed in a laboratory gas flame with an estimated temperature of more than 600 C. The two samples were side by side and exposed to roughly equal flame. Both pieces were placed so as to have their corners in the flame and near the center of the flame, the flame mean diameter being 1 1/4 ". After 3 or 4 minutes the asbestos corner had gone to incandescence and was exhibiting signs of fiberous break up. The material did not exhibit break up and retained sharp corners. Both materials did go to white heat at the corners in the middle of the flame, the new material less so. f) Most forms of the material will show some initial signs of slight darkening on first heating and no subsequent changes in color or general mechanical properties after initial heating. The laser exposed material seemed to be slightly harder after exposure. Very thin sections will exhibit slumping in extreme heat. Please feel free to repost and we will attempt to answer such questions as we can and perform any suggested tests, to the best of our ability and the equipment available to us. The material is non toxic, exhibits no outgassing and is environmentally inert. We will post more heavily instrumented tests as the results become available to us. Thank you, John Herman Addendum: Material was heated to incandescence in air a Mach 0.9 by means of IR laser. Specimen was app. 3/16" thick. Ablation began after one second and the material was destroyed in four seconds. IR camera indicated a peak temperature of about 1,400 C. "Knowledgeable is a word that should have been clubbed to deat years ago when it started crawling about like the late Lon Cheney" Thurber From vortex-l-request eskimo.com Thu Feb 22 18:49:12 2001 Received: (from smartlst localhost) by mx1.eskimo.com (8.9.1a/8.8.8) id SAA08394; Thu, 22 Feb 2001 18:46:27 -0800 Resent-Date: Thu, 22 Feb 2001 18:46:27 -0800 From: Robin van Spaandonk To: vortex-l eskimo.com Subject: Re: ICI... Maurice Ward HT Test File Date: Fri, 23 Feb 2001 13:45:50 +1100 Organization: Improving Message-ID: <5fjb9tsjoe5vcqu546tb97saemk2uiis6d 4ax.com> References: In-Reply-To: X-Mailer: Forte Agent 1.8/32.548 MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit X-MIME-Autoconverted: from quoted-printable to 8bit by mx1.eskimo.com id SAA08367 Resent-Message-ID: <"ME2Nu1.0.432.3ySbw" mx1> Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/40941 X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com Status: O X-Status: In reply to John Schnurer's message of Thu, 22 Feb 2001 21:26:59 -0500 (EST): [snip] > Addendum: Material was heated to incandescence in air a Mach 0.9 by >means of IR laser. Specimen was app. 3/16" thick. Ablation began after >one second and the material was destroyed in four seconds. IR camera >indicated a peak temperature of about 1,400 C. [snip] My guess about this material is that the molecules resonate at thermal frequencies, and consequently reradiate heat very rapidly, as well as being an excellent IR mirror. Hot gasses OTOH can erode the material rapidly, if the average molecular energy of the gas is high enough. Regards, Robin van Spaandonk A Future For Humanity see: http://users.bigpond.net.au/rvanspaa/ From vortex-l-request eskimo.com Thu Feb 22 19:16:15 2001 Received: (from smartlst localhost) by mx1.eskimo.com (8.9.1a/8.8.8) id TAA22289; Thu, 22 Feb 2001 19:15:06 -0800 Resent-Date: Thu, 22 Feb 2001 19:15:06 -0800 Message-Id: Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Date: Thu, 22 Feb 2001 18:25:10 -0900 To: vortex-l eskimo.com From: hheffner mtaonline.net (Horace Heffner) Subject: Re: replication of Peltier force xducer Cc: Nick Reiter Resent-Message-ID: <"uWnfG3.0.0S5.vMTbw" mx1> Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/40942 X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com Status: O X-Status: At 6:55 PM 2/22/1, David Rosignoli wrote: >The assumption here is that the only external magnetic field is the >Earth's. What if an another magnetic field closeby was also acting in >the vertical direction. (Although I don't see how both Scott and Nick >could get the same results if this were true.) [snip] >Horace Heffner wrote: [snip] >> so if the ambient field is about 1 gauss we have: >> >> T = (3 amps)(5 cm^2)(1 gauss) = 3x10^-7 N-m [snip] Actually, I allowed about 1/2 gauss local field and 1/2 gauss geomagnetic field. This is of course just a wild guess. The geomagnetic field does not have to be a wild guess, however. It can be computed for your location and date at the NOAA site: Using 30 deg 18 min N, 97 deg 45 min W for Austin Texas, today, on that page I obtained: X=24819, Y=2513, Z=42423, F=49150 which are the magnetic vectors in nanotesla. This means the total magnetic field strength there today is 0.4915 gauss, but the dip is 49 deg 40 min, a pretty vertical angle. There is a .42 gauss vertical component to the geomagnetic field there. The local magnetic field could of course be anything, but since magnetic field lines are circular, the orientation might be anything. However, if magnets are stored in shelves at tabletop height, those facing upward would tend to project a wider stronger field than those pointing directly at the test apparatus, so the vertical component would tend to be stronger than the horizontal for a bunch of magnets stored in random orientations. The up or down orientation is a 50-50 toss-up for two different labs. Hope I got all that right. 8^) Regards, Horace Heffner From vortex-l-request eskimo.com Thu Feb 22 21:20:07 2001 Received: (from smartlst localhost) by mx1.eskimo.com (8.9.1a/8.8.8) id VAA08680; Thu, 22 Feb 2001 21:16:00 -0800 Resent-Date: Thu, 22 Feb 2001 21:16:00 -0800 Message-ID: <011101c09d58$636c51e0$c3c01d18 pestilence.ce.mediaone.net> From: "Scott Stephens" To: Subject: Re; Peltier Force - A test - ZPE thrust, or mechanical reaction? Date: Thu, 22 Feb 2001 23:20:51 -0600 MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary="----=_NextPart_000_010E_01C09D26.187DF580" X-Priority: 3 X-MSMail-Priority: Normal X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook Express 4.72.3155.0 X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V4.72.3155.0 Resent-Message-ID: <"NCxK11.0.Y72.G8Vbw" mx1> Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/40943 X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com Status: O X-Status: This is a multi-part message in MIME format. ------=_NextPart_000_010E_01C09D26.187DF580 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="Windows-1252" Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable Isn't thermal energy vibrational momentum? So by whatever mechanism, if = thermal energy is transported, then isn't momentum too?=20 How about a test to see if the Peltier force is pushing against the ZPF? = Put a sensitive piezo disk with charge amp, an accelerometer, above the = Peltier Junction. Be sure to shield it thermally acoustically, and from = radiant IR. Maybe in a small aluminized vial. Now pulse the Peltier = junction. See if the accelerometer measures thrust transmitted through = the vacuum.=20 The weight (force) being measured with the scale may simply be the = momentum of the thermal energy being pumped across the junction. This = would also mean no more weight differential would be measured once the = junction is temperature stabilized, that is, once all the heat that can = be pumped has been pumped. This would mean it is no good for UFO - like = propulsion :-(=20 But if the thrust is a fluctuation of the ZPF, then it may make (once we = conjure an energy source!) a fine way to propel UFO's and blow warp = bubbles in the ZPF 8^)=20 Scott=20 *************************************************************************= *** Freedom is pursuing your carrot, not running from somebody's stick Does society make you enthusiastic, or fearful?=20 The mob rules only what its members achieve.=20 *************************************************************************= *** ------=_NextPart_000_010E_01C09D26.187DF580 Content-Type: text/html; charset="Windows-1252" Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable Nonequilibrium Phonon Drag in Quantum = Wires

Isn't thermal energy vibrational momentum? So by whatever mechanism, = if=20 thermal energy is transported, then isn't momentum too?

How about a test to see if the Peltier force is pushing against the=20 ZPF?

Put a sensitive piezo disk with charge amp, an accelerometer, above = the=20 Peltier Junction. Be sure to shield it thermally acoustically, and from = radiant=20 IR. Maybe in a small aluminized vial. Now pulse the Peltier junction. = See if the=20 accelerometer measures thrust transmitted through the vacuum. =

The weight (force) being measured with the scale may simply be the = momentum=20 of the thermal energy being pumped across the junction. This would also = mean no=20 more weight differential would be measured once the junction is = temperature=20 stabilized, that is, once all the heat that can be pumped has been = pumped. This=20 would mean it is no good for UFO - like propulsion :-(

But if the thrust is a fluctuation of the ZPF, then it may make (once = we=20 conjure an energy source!) a fine way to propel UFO's and blow warp = bubbles in=20 the ZPF 8^)

Scott

**********************************************************************= ******
Freedom=20 is pursuing your carrot, not running from somebody's stick
Does = society make=20 you enthusiastic, or fearful?

The mob rules only what its members achieve.

**********************************************************************= ******

------=_NextPart_000_010E_01C09D26.187DF580-- From vortex-l-request eskimo.com Fri Feb 23 01:40:50 2001 Received: (from smartlst localhost) by mx1.eskimo.com (8.9.1a/8.8.8) id BAA08179; Fri, 23 Feb 2001 01:39:57 -0800 Resent-Date: Fri, 23 Feb 2001 01:39:57 -0800 Message-ID: <007101c09d43$00f379e0$af8f209a nikspentium> From: "Nick Palmer" To: Subject: test - please ignore Date: Fri, 23 Feb 2001 02:47:28 -0000 MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary="----=_NextPart_000_006E_01C09D42.F61445E0" X-Priority: 3 X-MSMail-Priority: Normal X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook Express 5.50.4133.2400 X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V5.50.4133.2400 Resent-Message-ID: <"BPqfo.0.e_1.j_Ybw" mx1> Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/40944 X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com Status: O X-Status: This is a multi-part message in MIME format. ------=_NextPart_000_006E_01C09D42.F61445E0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1" Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable Test ------=_NextPart_000_006E_01C09D42.F61445E0 Content-Type: text/html; charset="iso-8859-1" Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
Test
------=_NextPart_000_006E_01C09D42.F61445E0-- From vortex-l-request eskimo.com Fri Feb 23 06:11:16 2001 Received: (from smartlst localhost) by mx1.eskimo.com (8.9.1a/8.8.8) id GAA08462; Fri, 23 Feb 2001 06:10:17 -0800 Resent-Date: Fri, 23 Feb 2001 06:10:17 -0800 Message-ID: <001201c09d96$68e70640$e4d4323f computer> From: "Frederick Sparber" To: Subject: Re: Light Lepton Pair Propulsion System Date: Fri, 23 Feb 2001 06:40:09 -0600 MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-Priority: 3 X-MSMail-Priority: Normal X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook Express 5.50.4133.2400 X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V5.50.4133.2400 Resent-Message-ID: <"u064G1.0.742.9zcbw" mx1> Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/40945 X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com Status: O X-Status: Since it is firmly believed that Light Lepton (+/-) Pairs are created from photons of 54.4 eV (or less) ie., each with a rest mass/energy of 27.2 eV (or less) an on-board photon-to-mass -charge generator could make the LL Pairs (as is believed that natural "static electricity" is actually LL (+/-)Pairs formed by Solar Insolation such as the 54.4 ev He II radiation on the Earth's Atmosphere-Ozone Layer) one might exploit the use of the LL Pairs to generate thrust in space. The Relativistic Mass Mrel = Mo[(E'/Eo) + 1] = Mo/[1 - (v^2/c^2)]^1/2 indicates that a 27.2 eV (or less) Lepton is moving at 0.87*c when it's kinetic energy E' is equal to it's rest energy Eo, thus at 0.511 MeV (the rest energy of the electron) an LL will be moving at a velocity very close to c with a relativistic mass equal to the rest mass of an electron or positron. To get a relativistic momentum Mrel*c = 1.0 kg-meters/second: 1/(9.1E-31*3.0E8) = 3.66E21 LLs or 1.83E21 LL Pairs. would represent an accelerator current of 879 Amperes and a power requirement of 5.11E5 volts*879 amperes = 449 Megawatts. Think NASA would go for it? :-) Regards, Frederick From vortex-l-request eskimo.com Fri Feb 23 10:14:37 2001 Received: (from smartlst localhost) by mx2.eskimo.com (8.9.1a/8.8.8) id KAA11170; Fri, 23 Feb 2001 10:00:33 -0800 (PST) Resent-Date: Fri, 23 Feb 2001 10:00:33 -0800 (PST) Message-ID: <3A96A5C0.A2578793 bellsouth.net> Date: Fri, 23 Feb 2001 13:02:40 -0500 From: Terry Blanton X-Mailer: Mozilla 4.73 [en] (WinNT; U) X-Accept-Language: en MIME-Version: 1.0 To: vortex-l eskimo.com Subject: Pure Fusion Bomb? Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Resent-Message-ID: <"pVKaj.0.Rk2.-Kgbw" mx2> Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/40946 X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com Status: O X-Status: How do you trigger a pure fusion bomb? From: http://in.news.yahoo.com/010221/20/kpxi.html <><><><><><><><><><><> Wednesday February 21, 3:00 PM US, Russia jointly building fusion bomb Washington, Feb 21 (PTI) The US and Russia are jointly working on building a pure fusion bomb hundred times more powerful than hydrogen bombs. Experiments are being jointly conducted at American Sandia National Laboratory in New Mexico and Russian Los Alamos National Laboratory, Hisham Zerriffi, Project Scientist at Institute for Energy and Environmental Research (IEER) and Arjun Makhijani, President of IEER, said. "Hydrogen bomb is set off by a fission trigger whereas for a pure fusion bomb, there is no such trigger and no minimum critical mass is needed. Pure fusion weapons could be made with very low yields and would not produce fallout, blurring distinction between conventional and nuclear explosives. Yet lethality of such weapons would still be great," the two scientists said. "Though the scientific feasibility of pure fusion weapons has yet to be proven, research on pure fusion explosions sends a dangerous signal about the intent of nuclear weapon powers," they said. Referring to India, they said, "India's refusal to sign CTBT was, in part, a reaction to this type of research by nuclear weapon states. In turn, its decision to conduct underground nuclear tests was partly related to its conclusion that CTBT had changed from a non-discriminatory instrument designed to promote both non-proliferation and disarmament into a tool for non-proliferation alone. Furthermore, some fusion research appears to violate CTBT." PTI TVP KM SNS JW PTI NNNN ZCZC .WASH From vortex-l-request eskimo.com Fri Feb 23 10:19:05 2001 Received: (from smartlst localhost) by mx1.eskimo.com (8.9.1a/8.8.8) id KAA01569; Fri, 23 Feb 2001 10:09:42 -0800 Resent-Date: Fri, 23 Feb 2001 10:09:42 -0800 Message-Id: Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Date: Fri, 23 Feb 2001 09:19:47 -0900 To: vortex-l eskimo.com From: hheffner mtaonline.net (Horace Heffner) Subject: Re: Light Lepton Pair Propulsion System Resent-Message-ID: <"D041V1.0.IO.bTgbw" mx1> Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/40947 X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com Status: O X-Status: At 6:40 AM 2/23/1, Frederick Sparber wrote: >To get a relativistic momentum Mrel*c = 1.0 kg-meters/second: > >1/(9.1E-31*3.0E8) = 3.66E21 LLs or 1.83E21 LL Pairs. > >would represent an accelerator current of 879 Amperes and a power I get 586 amps using 1.60217733x10^-19 coul/charge. >requirement >of 5.11E5 volts*879 amperes = 449 Megawatts. I get 299 megawatts/N. > > >Think NASA would go for it? :-) That is (449x10^6 watts/newton)(newton/.10197 kgf) = 4.4x10^9 W/kgf. A laser would produce photonic thrust at a power requirement of 2.94x10^9 watts/kg-f thrust. Using 299 megawatts/N you get 2.93x10^9 watts/kgf - which can be proved to be exactly the same number if computed to extreme precision. You get exactly the same momentum from adding relativistic mass to particles by accelerating them as you do from creating photons. Regards, Horace Heffner From vortex-l-request eskimo.com Fri Feb 23 10:28:19 2001 Received: (from smartlst localhost) by mx1.eskimo.com (8.9.1a/8.8.8) id KAA06579; Fri, 23 Feb 2001 10:16:16 -0800 Resent-Date: Fri, 23 Feb 2001 10:16:16 -0800 Message-Id: Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Date: Fri, 23 Feb 2001 09:26:27 -0900 To: vortex-l eskimo.com From: hheffner mtaonline.net (Horace Heffner) Subject: Re: Pure Fusion Bomb? Resent-Message-ID: <"38WfW3.0.ac1.lZgbw" mx1> Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/40948 X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com Status: O X-Status: At 1:02 PM 2/23/1, Terry Blanton wrote: >How do you trigger a pure fusion bomb? I think the answer to that question is practically self-evident, but there is no way it should be discussed. Regards, Horace Heffner From vortex-l-request eskimo.com Fri Feb 23 11:24:35 2001 Received: (from smartlst localhost) by mx2.eskimo.com (8.9.1a/8.8.8) id KAA16484; Fri, 23 Feb 2001 10:25:48 -0800 (PST) Resent-Date: Fri, 23 Feb 2001 10:25:48 -0800 (PST) Message-ID: <000c01c09dc6$b0c28f40$c3c01d18 pestilence.ce.mediaone.net> From: "Scott Stephens" To: Subject: Calculating the thrust from a heat pump Date: Fri, 23 Feb 2001 12:28:12 -0600 MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-Priority: 3 X-MSMail-Priority: Normal X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook Express 4.72.3155.0 X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V4.72.3155.0 Resent-Message-ID: <"GYuO81.0.S14.eigbw" mx2> Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/40949 X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com Status: O X-Status: Since F= d(mv)/dt Newtons 2nd law and KE=1/2 (mv^2) Kinetic Energy then KE= 1/2 (mv)(mv)/m Solving for Force in terms of kinetic energy and mass (m) (mv)= (2m KE)^1/2 so F= d (2m KE)^1/2 / dt Therefore, it seems a 15 Joule, (watt/second) 1 gram perfect Peltier should produce 173mN or 17 grams of thrust, as long as it can pump those calories from a source to a sink. I assumed the 2.3 x 2.3 x.3 cm Peltier has the heat capacity and density of water (which I know it doesn't). If the efficiency is 1%, my figure of 170 milligrams is still 30 times more than the measured 5 mg. I'll bet tens of orders of magnitude more than the Davies - Unruh effect would predict. If someone corrects my math, maybe I'll attempt it. Scott **************************************************************************** Freedom is pursuing your carrot, not running from somebody's stick Does society make you enthusiastic, or fearful? The mob rules only what its members achieve. **************************************************************************** From vortex-l-request eskimo.com Fri Feb 23 11:26:28 2001 Received: (from smartlst localhost) by mx1.eskimo.com (8.9.1a/8.8.8) id LAA09424; Fri, 23 Feb 2001 11:10:48 -0800 Resent-Date: Fri, 23 Feb 2001 11:10:48 -0800 Message-Id: <5.0.2.1.2.20010223140941.028013a0 pop.mindspring.com> X-Sender: jedrothwell pop.mindspring.com X-Mailer: QUALCOMM Windows Eudora Version 5.0.2 Date: Fri, 23 Feb 2001 14:10:43 -0500 To: vortex-l eskimo.com From: Jed Rothwell Subject: Re: Pure Fusion Bomb? In-Reply-To: Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"; format=flowed Resent-Message-ID: <"ruVfv1.0.AJ2.uMhbw" mx1> Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/40950 X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com Status: O X-Status: Horace Heffner wrote: >At 1:02 PM 2/23/1, Terry Blanton wrote: > >How do you trigger a pure fusion bomb? > >I think the answer to that question is practically self-evident, but there >is no way it should be discussed. I don't want to know!!! - Jed From vortex-l-request eskimo.com Fri Feb 23 11:33:23 2001 Received: (from smartlst localhost) by mx1.eskimo.com (8.9.1a/8.8.8) id LAA12523; Fri, 23 Feb 2001 11:18:21 -0800 Resent-Date: Fri, 23 Feb 2001 11:18:21 -0800 Message-Id: From: "LaJoie, Stephen A" To: "'vortex-l eskimo.com'" Subject: RE: Calculating the thrust from a heat pump Date: Fri, 23 Feb 2001 11:23:49 -0800 MIME-Version: 1.0 X-Mailer: Internet Mail Service (5.5.2650.21) Content-Type: text/plain Resent-Message-ID: <"tGAYP2.0.a33.zThbw" mx1> Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/40951 X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com Status: O X-Status: > ---------- > From: Scott Stephens[SMTP:Scott2 Mediaone.net] > Reply To: vortex-l eskimo.com > Sent: Friday, February 23, 2001 10:28 AM > To: vortex-l eskimo.com > Subject: Calculating the thrust from a heat pump > > Since F= d(mv)/dt Newtons 2nd law > F= d(v)/dt*m + v*d(m)/dt = m*a+v*d(m)/dt > and KE=1/2 (mv^2) Kinetic Energy > > then KE= 1/2 (mv)(mv)/m Solving for Force in terms of kinetic energy and > mass (m) > (m*v)^2/m is not equal to m*a + v*d(m)/dt From vortex-l-request eskimo.com Fri Feb 23 11:50:17 2001 Received: (from smartlst localhost) by mx1.eskimo.com (8.9.1a/8.8.8) id LAA26039; Fri, 23 Feb 2001 11:41:13 -0800 Resent-Date: Fri, 23 Feb 2001 11:41:13 -0800 Message-ID: <3A96BE8E.708F2E6E bellsouth.net> Date: Fri, 23 Feb 2001 14:48:30 -0500 From: Terry Blanton X-Mailer: Mozilla 4.73 [en] (WinNT; U) X-Accept-Language: en MIME-Version: 1.0 To: vortex-l eskimo.com Subject: Re: Pure Fusion Bomb? References: Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Resent-Message-ID: <"-0rCs1.0.gM6.Ophbw" mx1> Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/40952 X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com Status: O X-Status: Horace Heffner wrote: > > At 1:02 PM 2/23/1, Terry Blanton wrote: > >How do you trigger a pure fusion bomb? > > I think the answer to that question is practically self-evident, but there > is no way it should be discussed. I just thought this might relate to a previous article which many here poo-pooed which talked about a Russian system which used nukes for power generation. Terry From vortex-l-request eskimo.com Fri Feb 23 12:12:16 2001 Received: (from smartlst localhost) by mx1.eskimo.com (8.9.1a/8.8.8) id LAA04623; Fri, 23 Feb 2001 11:56:12 -0800 Resent-Date: Fri, 23 Feb 2001 11:56:12 -0800 X-Sender: hheffner mtaonline.net (Unverified) Message-Id: Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Date: Fri, 23 Feb 2001 11:06:24 -0900 To: vortex-l eskimo.com From: hheffner mtaonline.net (Horace Heffner) Subject: Re: Calculating the thrust from a heat pump Resent-Message-ID: <"riY5c1.0.981.S1ibw" mx1> Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/40953 X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com Status: O X-Status: At 12:28 PM 2/23/1, Scott Stephens wrote: >Since F= d(mv)/dt Newtons 2nd law > >and KE=1/2 (mv^2) Kinetic Energy > >then KE= 1/2 (mv)(mv)/m Solving for Force in terms of kinetic energy and >mass (m) The next step appears to invalid. You have to keep in mind that F and v are vectors. It appears that you are trying to obtain a vector, the momentum mv, from a scalar (KE). There is no net direction to the momentum in heat. To show existence of a force, using Newton's laws, a mass must be accelerated. Since no mass changes location, on average, i.e. the center of mass remains constant, there is no net momentum applied to the system. If there is a net momentum applied by a Peltier, or any other device which does not eject mass or energy, then the reason lies outside Newton's laws. > >(mv)= (2m KE)^1/2 > >so F= d (2m KE)^1/2 / dt > Regards, Horace Heffner From vortex-l-request eskimo.com Fri Feb 23 12:48:00 2001 Received: (from smartlst localhost) by mx1.eskimo.com (8.9.1a/8.8.8) id MAA24653; Fri, 23 Feb 2001 12:37:59 -0800 Resent-Date: Fri, 23 Feb 2001 12:37:59 -0800 Message-ID: <00d601c09dd0$2a651580$e4d4323f computer> From: "Frederick Sparber" To: Subject: Re: Light Lepton Pair Propulsion System Date: Fri, 23 Feb 2001 13:37:21 -0600 MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-Priority: 3 X-MSMail-Priority: Normal X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook Express 5.50.4133.2400 X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V5.50.4133.2400 Resent-Message-ID: <"S8rJp3.0.m06.ceibw" mx1> Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/40954 X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com Status: O X-Status: Since Horace shot me down with a Laser Photon Drive. :-) Mod I : Electron Bombardment of a Tungsten "Plate" to an incandescent temperature (in front of a reflector/electron source) should give a momentum mc = E/c = 1.0 kg-meters/sec (300 Megawatts) much more conveniently than a state-of-the-art laser. Since you're operating in space, the T^4 cooling of the plate and reflector should be no problem. The Hardware is simple, but the compact 300 Megawatt power supply might be down the road a ways. OTOH, a flashlight will work for smaller craft. :-) Regards, Frederick From vortex-l-request eskimo.com Fri Feb 23 13:13:43 2001 Received: (from smartlst localhost) by mx1.eskimo.com (8.9.1a/8.8.8) id MAA01865; Fri, 23 Feb 2001 12:55:56 -0800 Resent-Date: Fri, 23 Feb 2001 12:55:56 -0800 Message-ID: <3A96CCC9.F65F4D34 ix.netcom.com> Date: Fri, 23 Feb 2001 12:49:13 -0800 From: Akira Kawasaki X-Mailer: Mozilla 4.72 [en]C-CCK-MCD NSCPCD472 (Win95; U) X-Accept-Language: en MIME-Version: 1.0 To: Vortex Subject: [Fwd: What's New for Feb 23, 2001] Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Resent-Message-ID: <"ML5KX1.0.uS.Qvibw" mx1> Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/40955 X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com Status: RO X-Status: -------- Original Message -------- Subject: What's New for Feb 23, 2001 Date: Fri, 23 Feb 2001 15:41:25 -0500 (EST) From: "What's New" To: aki ix.netcom.com WHAT'S NEW Robert L. Park Friday, 23 Feb 01 Washington, DC 1. TIME WARP. A western governor comes to town vowing to cut taxes, pump up defense, slash basic research and build a missile defense system. That was Ronald Reagan's agenda twenty years ago, and it appears to be George W's today. Agency heads are still haggling with OMB, but here's the latest word on science budgets: DOE down 5%, NASA science down 5%, DOD 6.1-6.3 flat, ATP eliminated and NIST core programs flat. The big physical science winner would be NSF, up all of 0-1%. A lone exception, NIH would rise 15%. WN readers take note: "balanced portfolio" is no longer in the White House lexicon. To save money, one policy maker has suggested closing the NIST Boulder lab and moving the staff to Gaithersburg. WN is taking bets on how many would move. 2. COLD FUSION? SUPREME COURT GIVES IT THE COLD SHOULDER. Last fall, the US Patent Office denied a "cold-fusion" patent to Mitchell Swartz, on the grounds that it lacked "operability" (WN 10 Nov 00). Despite testimony by cold-fusion gurus, a federal appeals court upheld the Commissioner of Patents, ruling that the patent failed to convince sensible people that the idea could work. Undeterred, Swartz appealed to the US Supreme Court. The highest court in the land is unlikely to review the case, which has the effect of upholding the appeal court ruling. After twelve years, cold fusion still has trouble being taken seriously. 3. SPACE: NEAR LANDS, MIR HANGS OUT AND DESTINY GETS A WINDOW. OK, so there's not a lot of science here, but if you're a space junkie, you should know that the robotic Near Earth Asteroid Rendevous probe amazed even its handlers by soft landing on asteroid Eros. Nobody had even thought to equip NEAR with feet. Meanwhile, the ISS Destiny Lab has been fitted with a 20-inch picture window. Such things are no doubt important in efforts to attract more dot.com millionaire tourists (WN 9 Feb 01). Meanwhile, MIR refuses to go gently. MIR was expected to hard land in late February, but because solar activity is unusually low, the final plunge is now expected about March 10. Efforts to save the rickety spacecraft, however, have never ceased, and on Wednesday, the Duma voted 298-3-1 to urge President Putin to save MIR. This was strictly for public consumption. The Duma action provided no funds to keep the venerable spacecraft alive. 4. ARMS RACE 2001: THE REACTION TO BUSH'S MISSILE-DEFENSE PLANS. Russia seeks to exploit Western skepticism of the US anti-missile plan by offering to develop an alternative mobile missile defense for Europe. It could be quickly relocated to respond to changing threats from rogue states. This addresses the very concern that the U.S. has raised. Meanwhile, one of those rogue states, North Korea, is vowing to return to long-range missile testing, which was suspended at the request of the U.S. North Korea says the US did not kept its promise to help with nuclear power plants. THE AMERICAN PHYSICAL SOCIETY (Note: Opinions are the author's and are not necessarily shared by the APS, but they should be.) From vortex-l-request eskimo.com Fri Feb 23 14:12:44 2001 Received: (from smartlst localhost) by mx1.eskimo.com (8.9.1a/8.8.8) id OAA02342; Fri, 23 Feb 2001 14:01:10 -0800 Resent-Date: Fri, 23 Feb 2001 14:01:10 -0800 Message-ID: <006901c09de5$23c57a70$0c6cd626 varisys.com> From: "George Holz" To: References: Subject: Re: replication of Peltier force xducer Date: Fri, 23 Feb 2001 17:08:23 -0500 MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-Priority: 3 X-MSMail-Priority: Normal X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook Express 5.00.2314.1300 X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V5.00.2314.1300 Resent-Message-ID: <"Aa_TL2.0.Wa.bsjbw" mx1> Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/40956 X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com Status: O X-Status: Horace Heffner wrote > Are you talking about weight changes due to gas emission or displacement? - Yes, gas emission and/or heating causing the metal case to expand and displace more air. > If so this is controlled by the fact that the force reverses with current > direction through the Peltier. Gas emission etc. would cause a > uni-directional change. - Agreed. - Regards, George Holz From vortex-l-request eskimo.com Fri Feb 23 15:26:56 2001 Received: (from smartlst localhost) by mx1.eskimo.com (8.9.1a/8.8.8) id PAA02189; Fri, 23 Feb 2001 15:17:09 -0800 Resent-Date: Fri, 23 Feb 2001 15:17:09 -0800 Message-ID: <011c01c09de6$65986920$e4d4323f computer> From: "Frederick Sparber" To: Subject: Re: Fission Hotplate-Photon Space Drive Date: Fri, 23 Feb 2001 16:16:02 -0600 MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-Priority: 3 X-MSMail-Priority: Normal X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook Express 5.50.4133.2400 X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V5.50.4133.2400 Resent-Message-ID: <"RC1Cp1.0.2Y.rzkbw" mx1> Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/40957 X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com Status: O X-Status: Try this one, Horace, It takes 300 Megawatts Thermal to get 1.0 Kg-Meters/Sec from a photon space drive irrespective of the photon wavelength. Three Hundred Megawatts Thermal only burns less than a kilogram of plutonium per year. With a Photon "Fission Hotplate" at 3,000 Kelvin you can radiate ~ 5 Megawatts/meter^2. Thus with a reflector-radiation shield about 60 square meters of "Fission Hotplates", with integral fuel/control rods will give you a passive system. Can you beat that? :-) Regards, Frederick From vortex-l-request eskimo.com Fri Feb 23 15:34:54 2001 Received: (from smartlst localhost) by mx1.eskimo.com (8.9.1a/8.8.8) id PAA05620; Fri, 23 Feb 2001 15:23:08 -0800 Resent-Date: Fri, 23 Feb 2001 15:23:08 -0800 From: Robin van Spaandonk To: vortex-l eskimo.com Subject: Re: Calculating the thrust from a heat pump Date: Sat, 24 Feb 2001 10:22:27 +1100 Organization: Improving Message-ID: References: In-Reply-To: X-Mailer: Forte Agent 1.8/32.548 MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit X-MIME-Autoconverted: from quoted-printable to 8bit by mx1.eskimo.com id PAA05559 Resent-Message-ID: <"dX3P91.0.fN1.R3lbw" mx1> Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/40958 X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com Status: O X-Status: In reply to Horace Heffner's message of Fri, 23 Feb 2001 11:06:24 -0900: [snip] >accelerated. Since no mass changes location, on average, i.e. the center >of mass remains constant, there is no net momentum applied to the system. >If there is a net momentum applied by a Peltier, or any other device which >does not eject mass or energy, then the reason lies outside Newton's laws. OTOH heat radiated from the hot side will be greater than heat radiated from the cold side, so there would be a net momentum transfer, but I suspect this would be too small to be of interest. [snip] Regards, Robin van Spaandonk A Future For Humanity see: http://users.bigpond.net.au/rvanspaa/ From vortex-l-request eskimo.com Fri Feb 23 16:51:02 2001 Received: (from smartlst localhost) by mx1.eskimo.com (8.9.1a/8.8.8) id QAA10057; Fri, 23 Feb 2001 16:33:50 -0800 Resent-Date: Fri, 23 Feb 2001 16:33:50 -0800 Date: Fri, 23 Feb 2001 16:06:26 -0800 From: Jones Beene Subject: H/D magnetic and anapole moment To: vortex-l eskimo.com Message-id: <3A96FB02.1050302 pacbell.net> MIME-version: 1.0 Content-type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii; format=flowed Content-transfer-encoding: 7bit User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (Windows; U; Win98; en-US; m18) Gecko/20001108 Netscape6/6.0 X-Accept-Language: en Resent-Message-ID: <"vx9z92.0.rS2.j5mbw" mx1> Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/40959 X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com Status: O X-Status: Here is some information that may be relevant to the previous thread: "neutrons from electron impact," as well as some of the ongoing speculation regarding neutron "stripping," (which should probably be called something else by this forum). Some of the following on "anapole moment" was posted on: http://www.superstringtheory.com/stringboard/ by Don Seidman. Thanks to him and Science 2000 for this info, but to really appreciate its relevance, one needs to extend its implications to the limit - as by considering the markedly different magnetic properties of the proton, neutron and deuteron in the context of an anapole moment - and whether those factors could lead to an induced splitting of the D nucleus by NMR techniques, and if so at what field strengths. For an related "vortex" theory of magnetic moments: http://www.chalidze.com/vortex.htm There is also a connection here to Bose condensates and the theory of Frank Znidarsic. To most physicists, stripping refers almost exclusively to relatively high energy photonic "spallation" reactions in the 2 Mev energy range resulting in a high energy neutron. Here on vortex, we have used the term broadly for any nonfusion D reaction that yields a neutron. This can only lead to confusion. I propose that we use something different like the "D2P reaction" or "NMR stripping" to refer to those reactions that result in a lower energy neutron D(p,n) + neutrino (the neutrino and remanent kinetic energy of the proton and neutron balance the lost excess mass, so there is no 2nd law violation). In many cases the stripped neutron appears at near thermal energy. Many armchair physicists and garage tinkerers (aka vortexians) are fascinated by the possibility that there is a "back door" route to freeing the neutron from the D atom - requiring far less energy, perhaps as little as a few ev rather than a few million. If such an easy route is discovered, then it practically goes without saying that the energy crisis will be solved (in a myriad of ways). One rationale for this belief/hope that there does exist a back door is the extreme asymmetry of the D nucleus, i.e. it is often called "barbell shaped" and together with the anomalously large magnetism of the bare proton, and wide difference in NMR frequencies between the the proton and neutron - it offers tantalizing prospects to free energy speculators. More on this below. Unfortunately, most of the actual devices that hint at nearly "free" neutrons from D are not reproducible - or are subject to alternative explanation. The Farnswoth fusor is an example of neutrons from collisions in the tens of Kev, but that is supposedly the "tail" of the D+D fusion cross section. If anyone could show a convincing alternative mechanism (electron-deuteron interactions or NMR) for supplying some of these Fusor neutrons, it could be a first step towards finding the way to improve that device or push it towards OU (from just its neutron output alone the fusor is maybe 5-6 orders of magnitude away from OU). But just the fact of having a cross section tail of this magnitude should tell us a LOT about the (unappreciated) instability of the D nucleus. Many observers are unaware that D is known to undergo spontaneous decay. There is far too little research available on all of these curiosities - despite seemingly huge implications. As to the possibility of a NMR stripped neutron being relevant to explaining some CF results, there are just too many unanswered questions and varied results to speculate. Perhaps a missing ingredient that would both optimize (and prove) CF - as well as bring the Fusor nearer to OU is an intense polarizing mechanism.... Why? From metaphorical standpoint, let's say that it's easier to hit a stationary target than a moving one - but that is an over simplification. To backtrack a bit, some explanations for CF phenomena point at the possibility of high temperature superconductivity being a major factor (and HTSC would indeed provide a self polarizing mechanism!). Some of the studies also relate to the necessity for surface defects or impurities in CF electrode - and this too might also relate to HTSC, as these kinds of defects play a role in SC "pinning" which can also be described as another variety of self polarization. Perhaps one reason CF is so hard to duplicate is that the window for achieving HTSC at these temperatures is extremely narrow and no experimenter has thought to try to pinpoint the restrictive parameters down to say millivolts and fractional degrees of temperature, etc. However, adding intense magnetic polarization (above 2 t.) might serve to widen the parameters considerably. I would love to see a P&F cell, or a fusor, operated in an intense magnetic field of 2-4 tesla in order to gauge the relevance of polarization. Of course, doing this would require a major budgetary commitment. Back to anapole moment. There is a violation of mirror symmetry in the weak force due to the internal structure of the proton and the role of quarks in generating nuclear magnetism. The measurements reported in the following study provides an unambiguous constraint on strange quark contributions to the proton's magnetic moment through the electron-proton weak interaction. It also reports evidence for the existence of a parity-violating electromagnetic effect known as the "anapole moment" of the proton. "Strange Magnetism and the Anapole Structure of the Proton" Science Volume 290, Number 5499, Issue of 15 Dec 2000, pp. 2117-2119. Copyright 2000 by The American Association for the Advancement of Science. Authors: R. Hasty,1 A. M. Hawthorne-Allen,5 T. Averett,9 D. Barkhuff,4 D. H. Beck,1 E. J. Beise,3* A. Blake,2 H. Breuer,3 R. Carr,2 S. Covrig,2 A. Danagoulian,1 G. Dodson,4 K. Dow,4 M. Farkhondeh,4 B. W. Filippone,2 J. Gao,2 M. C. Herda,3 T. M. Ito,2 C. E. Jones,2 W. Korsch,6 K. Kramer,9 S. Kowalski,4 P. Lee,2 R. D. McKeown,2 B. Mueller,7 M. Pitt,5 J. Ritter,5 J. Roche,9 V. Savu,2 D. T. Spayde,3 R. Tieulent,3 E. Tsentalovich,4 S. P. Wells,8 B. Yang,4 T. Zwart4 1 Department of Physics, University of Illinois at Urbana-Champaign, Urbana, IL 61801, USA. 2 Kellogg Radiation Laboratory, California Institute of Technology, Pasadena, CA 91125, USA. 3 Department of Physics, University of Maryland, College Park, MD 20742, USA. 4 Bates Linear Accelerator Center, Laboratory for Nuclear Science and Department of Physics, Massachusetts Institute of Technology, Cambridge, MA 02139, USA. 5 Department of Physics, Virginia Polytechnic Institute and State University, Blacksburg, VA 24061-0435, USA. 6 Department of Physics and Astronomy, University of Kentucky, Lexington, KY 40506, USA. 7 Physics Division, Argonne National Laboratory, Argonne, IL 60439, USA. 8 Department of Physics, Louisiana Tech University, Ruston, LA 71272, USA. 9 Department of Physics, College of William and Mary, Williamsburg, VA 23187, USA. * To whom correspondence should be addressed. E-mail: beise physics.umd.edu They report evidence for the existence of a parity-violating electromagnetic effect known as the anapole moment of the proton. The proton's anapole moment is not yet well understood theoretically, but it could have important implications for many weak interaction studies. -------------------------------------------------------------------------------- preface: In 1933, the German physicist Otto Stern discovered that the magnetism of the proton was anomalously large, a factor of three larger than expected from the basic theory of quantum mechanics. This experiment turned out to be the first glimpse of the internal structure of the constituents of the atomic nucleus and a tantalizing hint at the existence of quarks. Widespread applications of the proton's magnetic properties, such as the magnetic resonance imaging (MRI) techniques used in biology and medicine, have been developed despite a lack of fundamental understanding of the basic dynamics that generates this magnetism.... Like a few others, I have tried to find evidence for D2P - i.e. low energy neutron stripping - by using NMR techniques. I built a small permanent magnet NMR reactor using neodymium magnets and a rf stimulation but found nothing. After recently reading some of this anapole research with an open mind as to ultimate implications, it now seems like the experiment could have shown results at much higher field strengths and/or using polarized rf stimulation. But intense fields are not do-able with PMs, so lets hope a major lab picks up on the idea sooner or later. ------------------------------------------------------------- More info from "Strange Magnetism..." from Science After the key discovery of internal structure in the proton in a high-energy electron scattering experiment at the Stanford Linear Accelerator Center in the late 1960s (1), the theory of Quantum Chromodynamics (QCD), which describes the interaction between quarks and the gluons that bind the quarks into the atomic nuclei observed in the periodic table, was developed. Despite almost 30 years of intense theoretical effort, QCD has been unable to produce numerical predictions for the basic properties of nucleons such as their degree of magnetism. In 1988, Kaplan and Manohar (2) proposed that the study of the weak magnetic force (analogous to the usual magnetic force associated with electromagnetism) would allow a separation of the proton's magnetism into the three contributing flavors of quarks: up, down, and strange. Measuring the contribution from strange quark-antiquark pairs is of special interest because it relates directly to the "sea" of virtual quark-antiquark pairs in the proton , a phenomenon predicted by QCD. In 1989, it was noted that the weak magnetic force could be isolated using its unique property of lack of mirror symmetry, or parity violation The basic idea was to study the preference for the proton's interaction with electrons that have spin counterclockwise, over those with clockwise spin, relative to their direction of travel. We report data obtained using this method that, when combined with our previously published results (4, 5), allow the first unambiguous determination of the proton's weak magnetism. We also report a measurement of a parity-violating, time-reversal-even electromagnetic contribution to proton structure, referred to in the literature as the proton's anapole moment. [snip] Whereas the weak magnetism discussed above is a vector e-N interaction, an axial vector e-N coupling also exists, which is related to the proton's intrinsic spin. The parity-violating e-p interaction depends on both of these quantities, and it is essential to determine the axial vector e-N form factor GAe in order to reliably extract GMs. In general, GAe may be written as GAe = GAZ + FA + Re, where GAZ is the contribution from a single Z-exchange as would be measured in neutrino-proton elastic scattering (Fig. 1A), FA is the nucleon anapole moment (7), and Re is a radiative correction (Fig. 1C). The constant is = 3.45, where is the fine-structure constant. The anapole moment FA is identified as the parity-violating coupling of a photon to the nucleon (Fig. 1B) and is expected to be the largest of a class of higher order interactions, or radiative corrections (8). It can arise as a result of, for example, a weak interaction between two quarks inside the nucleon. It is analogous to the nuclear anapole moment recently measured in atomic cesium (9), which is enhanced by parity-violating interactions between nucleons in the cesium nucleus (10). Technically, the theoretical separation of the anapole moment from other radiative corrections Re is gauge dependent, so the terminology associated with these amplitudes varies in the literature, and FA itself is not cleanly defined theoretically. However, because the anapole moment is an electromagnetic interaction, it does not contribute to neutrino scattering and is unique to parity-violating interactions with charged particles like electrons. Here we identify the observed difference as due to the anapole contribution (11). -------------------------------------------------------------------------------- Fig. 1. Feynman diagrams representing three contributions to the axial e-N coupling. (A) single Z-exchange; (B) parity-violating photon exchange, which contributes to the nucleon's anapole moment; and (C) a -Z box diagram typical of radiative corrections. [View Larger Version of this Image (8K GIF file)] -------------------------------------------------------------------------------- We performed a measurement of the parity-violating asymmetry in the scattering of longitudinally polarized electrons from neutrons and protons (nucleons) in deuterium using the SAMPLE apparatus at the MIT/Bates Linear Accelerator Center. The apparatus was that used in our previously reported measurement on hydrogen (4, 5). In the deuterium experiment, the hydrogen target was replaced with deuterium, and borated polyethylene shielding was installed around the target to reduce background from low-energy neutrons knocked out of the deuterium. Combining this measurement with the previously reported results allows an unambiguous determination of both the axial e-N form factor GAe and the contribution of strange quarks to the proton's magnetic form factor GMs. When presented in the context of the electron-quark couplings predicted by the standard model for electroweak interactions, our result also places new limits on the electron-quark axial couplings C2u and C2d. Parity-violating electron scattering generally involves scattering of a longitudinally polarized electron beam from an unpolarized target. The change in the count rate resulting from reversal of the beam polarization indicates a parity nonconserving effect. For elastic electron scattering from a proton, the asymmetry in the count rate can be written as (2) The three terms in APV reflect the fact that it arises as a result of an interference between the electromagnetic and weak interactions, where GE,Mp are the ordinary form factors associated with the proton's charge and magnetic moment. An equivalent expression can be written for electron-neutron scattering. The kinematic factors can be adjusted to enhance the relative sensitivity of the experiment to the three contributions to APV. ------------------------------------------------------------- Well, as you can see it is a long tedious article that requires a lot of study and it is not too easy to pick out just the parts that one might want to use in a "pet theory" - which of course is what I am trying to do. But I hope eventually the full implications will become clearer and perhaps lead directly to implemetation of NMR techniques in various low energy devices. A curious semantic sidenote: If this idea does pan out, we would have to change the name of some of these devices from "cold fusion" to "cold fission" Regards, Jones From vortex-l-request eskimo.com Fri Feb 23 17:29:03 2001 Received: (from smartlst localhost) by mx1.eskimo.com (8.9.1a/8.8.8) id RAA05854; Fri, 23 Feb 2001 17:27:41 -0800 Resent-Date: Fri, 23 Feb 2001 17:27:41 -0800 Message-ID: <3A9738AC.363E bellsouth.net> Date: Fri, 23 Feb 2001 20:29:32 -0800 From: Terry Blanton X-Mailer: Mozilla 3.01C-BLS20 (Win16; U) MIME-Version: 1.0 To: vortex-l eskimo.com Subject: Re: Calculating the thrust from a heat pump References: Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Resent-Message-ID: <"Nn4WN.0.OR1.Cumbw" mx1> Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/40960 X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com Status: O X-Status: Robin van Spaandonk wrote: > > In reply to Horace Heffner's message of Fri, 23 Feb 2001 11:06:24 -0900: > [snip] > >accelerated. Since no mass changes location, on average, i.e. the center > >of mass remains constant, there is no net momentum applied to the system. > >If there is a net momentum applied by a Peltier, or any other device which > >does not eject mass or energy, then the reason lies outside Newton's laws. > OTOH heat radiated from the hot side will be greater than heat radiated from > the cold side, so there would be a net momentum transfer, but I suspect this > would be too small to be of interest. It would be twice what you're thinking since heat from the environment would impact the cold side. Terry From vortex-l-request eskimo.com Fri Feb 23 18:03:51 2001 Received: (from smartlst localhost) by mx1.eskimo.com (8.9.1a/8.8.8) id SAA19744; Fri, 23 Feb 2001 18:01:30 -0800 Resent-Date: Fri, 23 Feb 2001 18:01:30 -0800 Message-ID: <3A974089.53C4 bellsouth.net> Date: Fri, 23 Feb 2001 21:03:05 -0800 From: Terry Blanton X-Mailer: Mozilla 3.01C-BLS20 (Win16; U) MIME-Version: 1.0 To: vortex-l eskimo.com Subject: Is C Frequency Dependent? - New Quantum Gravity Theory Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Resent-Message-ID: <"suH0N1.0.Gp4.sNnbw" mx1> Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/40961 X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com Status: O X-Status: From: http://www.spacedaily.com/news/physics-01c.html <><><><><><><><><><> SPACE SCIENCE Texas Physicist Makes New Advance For Theory Of Quantum Gravity College Station Feb. 21, 2001 In 1905, Einstein made major changes to laws of physics when he established his theory of relativity. Now Einstein's laws might also undergo significant changes. Dimitri Nanopoulos, who holds the rank of Distinguished Professor of Physics at Texas A&M University and heads the Houston Advanced Research Center's Group for Astroparticle Physics, established, along with other physicists, that the speed of light, instead of being the constant value of 186,282 miles per second, might change. In 1905, Einstein established that light was the only object to have a constant speed in all reference frames. This idea was the cornerstone to his theory of relativity, and later to laws of physics. "If the speed of light proves not to be constant any more, even by a very small changeable amount, laws of physics -- the theory of relativity included -- will have to undergo significant changes," says Nanopoulos. Nanopoulos, who chairs the Theoretical Physics Division of the Academy of Athens, is among the many physicists who are trying to establish the basis of quantum gravity, a theory that has been dreamed of by physicists since the 1920s. While they were doing mathematical calculations, Nanopoulos and physicists Nikolaos Mavromatos of King's College in London and John Ellis of the European Center for Particle Physics (CERN) in Geneva, discovered a new expression for the speed of light, which depends on its frequency. "Through our calculations, we found that the speed of light is frequency- dependent," says Nanopoulos. "But a change in the usual speed of light value of 186,282 miles per second is noticeable only for light coming from astronomical objects situated very far from Earth, which is why this frequency dependence has not been noticed so far." From vortex-l-request eskimo.com Fri Feb 23 18:46:52 2001 Received: (from smartlst localhost) by mx1.eskimo.com (8.9.1a/8.8.8) id SAA01744; Fri, 23 Feb 2001 18:43:50 -0800 Resent-Date: Fri, 23 Feb 2001 18:43:50 -0800 From: Robin van Spaandonk To: vortex-l eskimo.com Subject: Re: Calculating the thrust from a heat pump Date: Sat, 24 Feb 2001 13:43:13 +1100 Organization: Improving Message-ID: <5r7e9tgrluvj3klvcp8pnbi20et53nsd6h 4ax.com> References: <3A9738AC.363E@bellsouth.net> In-Reply-To: <3A9738AC.363E bellsouth.net> X-Mailer: Forte Agent 1.8/32.548 MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit X-MIME-Autoconverted: from quoted-printable to 8bit by mx1.eskimo.com id SAA01674 Resent-Message-ID: <"aAJi43.0.5R.c_nbw" mx1> Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/40962 X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com Status: O X-Status: In reply to Terry Blanton's message of Fri, 23 Feb 2001 20:29:32 -0800: [snip] >It would be twice what you're thinking since heat from the environment >would impact the cold side. [snip] Just as much heat from the environment hits the hot side, as hits the cold side (more perhaps, if some of the hot side heat is reflected back from an external object). Regards, Robin van Spaandonk A Future For Humanity see: http://users.bigpond.net.au/rvanspaa/ From vortex-l-request eskimo.com Fri Feb 23 18:59:50 2001 Received: (from smartlst localhost) by mx1.eskimo.com (8.9.1a/8.8.8) id SAA06602; Fri, 23 Feb 2001 18:58:02 -0800 Resent-Date: Fri, 23 Feb 2001 18:58:02 -0800 Message-Id: Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Date: Fri, 23 Feb 2001 18:08:12 -0900 To: vortex-l eskimo.com From: hheffner mtaonline.net (Horace Heffner) Subject: Re: Light Lepton Pair Propulsion System Resent-Message-ID: <"cBQWs.0._c1.vCobw" mx1> Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/40964 X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com Status: O X-Status: At 1:37 PM 2/23/1, Frederick Sparber wrote: >The Hardware is simple, but the compact 300 Megawatt power supply might be >down the road a ways. If a large portion of the ship could be made of negative mass particles then the 300 megawatt power supply can be made a lot smaller and the approach still be effective. Believe it or not, Paul R, Hill gives some consideration to this approach on page 306 of his book, *Unconventional Flying Objects.* He discusses an approach suggested by Winterberg, whereby negative mass antiquarks can be used to replace large portion of electrons in a lattice, and thereby create a zero mass object, as close to zero as desired. The notion that the antiquarks in protrons have negative mass may be outdated however. Even if so, it is interesting to contemplate the nature of such a ship. Since we have positive mass, the ship should have a corresponding net negative mass. This implies that the ship, when pushed on, should push back, accelerating in the "wrong" direction. This tells me that no motor is required at all. If you accidentally touch a ships wall or floor you migth be flattened on it, because it will accelerate at you, increasing the pressure, and thus the acceleation, and thus the pressure. Whew! A new version of flatland! Regards, Horace Heffner From vortex-l-request eskimo.com Fri Feb 23 19:00:07 2001 Received: (from smartlst localhost) by mx1.eskimo.com (8.9.1a/8.8.8) id SAA06585; Fri, 23 Feb 2001 18:58:01 -0800 Resent-Date: Fri, 23 Feb 2001 18:58:01 -0800 Message-Id: Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Date: Fri, 23 Feb 2001 18:08:16 -0900 To: vortex-l eskimo.com From: hheffner mtaonline.net (Horace Heffner) Subject: Re: Fission Hotplate-Photon Space Drive Resent-Message-ID: <"Sl7lk1.0.pc1.vCobw" mx1> Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/40963 X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com Status: O X-Status: At 4:16 PM 2/23/1, Frederick Sparber wrote: >Try this one, Horace, > >It takes 300 Megawatts Thermal to get 1.0 Kg-Meters/Sec from a photon >space drive irrespective of the photon wavelength. > >Three Hundred Megawatts Thermal only burns less than a kilogram of plutonium >per year. > >With a Photon "Fission Hotplate" at 3,000 Kelvin you can radiate ~ 5 >Megawatts/meter^2. > >Thus with a reflector-radiation shield about 60 square meters of "Fission >Hotplates", with >integral fuel/control rods will give you a passive system. > >Can you beat that? :-) Say, that's pretty darn good Fred! I'll check the numbers. Starting with Stefan's Law: P_e = epsilon rho A T_e^4 (emission) where Pe is rate at which heat energy is radiated from an object of area A at absolute temperature T_e (Kelvin.) Epsilon is emissivity, a dimensionles indicator of absorbtivity, with 1 indicating a black body, and 0 a perfect reflector. Rho is the Stefan-Boltzman constant: rho = 5.67 x10^-8 W/(m^2 K^4) Just guessing at an epsilon ~= 0.5, we have: P_e = 4.59x10^6 W so you are right on there. Looking at the power for a year, we have energy 3x10^8 W * 365.25 * 24 Z8 60 * 60 s = 9.47X10^16 J. To obtain mass, m = 9.47X10^16 J/c^2 = 0.105 kg. I think less than 1% of the mass of Pu is released from the binding energy by the fission, so that would be about 10 kg consumed - still very good. Maybe I am thinking about a bomb there and not a power plant? It is only about 3 oz of thrust, but that is a lot applied 24 hours a day. There would be more thrust from radiated particles too. If a ship weighed 10^4 kg, a = F/m = (1 N)/(10^4 kg) = 10^-4 m/s^2, so the ship would accelerate to (30*24*60*60 s)(10^-4 m/s^2) = 25.9 m/s in a month. That's a bit surprising and disappointing. The reactor would have to be sized a lot bigger than 60 m^2. It might be better to carry along the reactant mass for the reactor to accelerate - which has been thoroughly looked at before. Regards, Horace Heffner From vortex-l-request eskimo.com Fri Feb 23 19:26:07 2001 Received: (from smartlst localhost) by mx1.eskimo.com (8.9.1a/8.8.8) id TAA16575; Fri, 23 Feb 2001 19:22:18 -0800 Resent-Date: Fri, 23 Feb 2001 19:22:18 -0800 From: Robin van Spaandonk To: vortex-l eskimo.com Subject: Re: Neutrons from Electron Impact? Date: Sat, 24 Feb 2001 14:22:14 +1100 Organization: Improving Message-ID: <0q9e9tc5m4itc236qeqmtndok3ucah8idd 4ax.com> References: In-Reply-To: X-Mailer: Forte Agent 1.8/32.548 MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit X-MIME-Autoconverted: from quoted-printable to 8bit by mx1.eskimo.com id TAA16548 Resent-Message-ID: <"gePco.0.v24.fZobw" mx1> Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/40965 X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com Status: O X-Status: In reply to Horace Heffner's message of Thu, 22 Feb 2001 09:28:04 -0900: >Slight correction: > >For what it is worth, I am pretty sure I have seen arguments that increased >gravitational potential is balanced by a corresponding increase in mass, >according to the ratio (delta E_pot) = (delta m) c^2. This makes some >sense from yet another perspective. Suppose the mass of a "real" object >is, as might be assumed with the electron, completely embodied in its >(entire gravitational) field. The energy required to place a new real mass >into the universe is m c^2, thus this is the new potential energy embodied >in its gravitational field, and thus it is the net gravitational potential >energy added to the universe if we are located in the reference frame of >that mass. It is the additional kinetic energy acquired if the entire mass >of the universe goes through a big crunch back to a point. If I'm not mistaken this means that the mass of a particle depends on its distance from the centre of the universe, because mass at a greater distance than one's own doesn't have any effect (e.g. the Earth exerts no net gravitational force on an object at its centre). Consequently red shift might be partly explained by differences in particle masses leading to different radiation frequencies for the same element, depending on the distance of the particular star from the centre of the universe. Regards, Robin van Spaandonk A Future For Humanity see: http://users.bigpond.net.au/rvanspaa/ From vortex-l-request eskimo.com Fri Feb 23 20:54:31 2001 Received: (from smartlst localhost) by mx1.eskimo.com (8.9.1a/8.8.8) id UAA29791; Fri, 23 Feb 2001 20:50:41 -0800 Resent-Date: Fri, 23 Feb 2001 20:50:41 -0800 Message-ID: <001601c09e1e$06533de0$c3c01d18 pestilence.ce.mediaone.net> From: "Scott Stephens" To: Subject: Re: Pure Fusion Bomb? Date: Fri, 23 Feb 2001 22:55:35 -0600 MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-Priority: 3 X-MSMail-Priority: Normal X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook Express 4.72.3155.0 X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V4.72.3155.0 Resent-Message-ID: <"AH0uk1.0.OH7.Wspbw" mx1> Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/40966 X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com Status: O X-Status: -----Original Message----- From: Terry Blanton >How do you trigger a pure fusion bomb? From: > >http://in.news.yahoo.com/010221/20/kpxi.html > > <><><><><><><><><><><> > >Wednesday February 21, 3:00 PM > >US, Russia jointly building fusion bomb This must be a joke, a troll to entrap foreign spys, then turn or disinform them. I suspect the real weapon focus is on the human genome, where in the near future when gas and oil will be the focus of conflict between China, Europe and America. When the baby-boomers retire, dragging down our economy, and our corporations enslave much of the corrupt third world with credit debt to support them, there will be a strong incentive to kill off our aged worthless-eater baby-boomers by the rest of the world, especially China. We Americans may even do it ourselves! Look at how (Governor) Clinton sold aids tainted vaccine from Arkansas prisons to the Canadians for profit! Look how profitable abortions and euthanasia are, and the lobby for it. Good liberal green's feel humanity is a disease, a blight on the planet. Why don't they blame the management, that constantly complains it hasn't stolen (taxed!) us enough to 'save' us from ourselves! "I'm from the government, and I'm here to help!? No, I'm from the Government and I'm here like a fox to devour you like a sheep!". As soon as it is profitable and practical, I'm certain there will be economicaly-motivated genocide. Because the liberal and fascist business elite alike see the public they entrap, degrade and enslave as useful idiots to be devoured. Using combinations of stealth virus's and vaccines would be an ideal way to accomplish selective genocide. It has the benefit of reducing ecological and collateral damage, relative to nuclear weapons. Unless of course, the nation under assault cannot put out the inevitable fires that will start, because near everyone is sick, dying or has fled. But I wouldn't think nuclear reactors would be susceptible to damage in fire storms, but the isotope and chemical sources in hospitals and chemical plants and oil refinerys would. But that type of fallout isn't likely to affect the Chinese or the Europeans, just us. I have read that the Nile Virus, now infiltrating the east coast, was evaluated for weapons potential by the Iraqis and Cubans. We see how plausible deniability works, with the latest pardon business. In a world where convenient, profitable, 'coincidences' happen, more sinister 'coincidences' happen too! Who will know the difference between a natural or engineered virus? Strangely, nuclear power could save us from this fate by enabling cheap energy to allow development of the vast areas of the planet and colonization of space. I'm I the only one that is appalled and outraged that NASA wastes billions of dollars on budget excuses like the space station, when the single research priority should be a nuclear energy source for propulsion? Scott **************************************************************************** Freedom is pursuing your carrot, not running from somebody's stick Does society make you enthusiastic, or fearful? The mob rules only what its members achieve. **************************************************************************** From vortex-l-request eskimo.com Fri Feb 23 21:25:12 2001 Received: (from smartlst localhost) by mx1.eskimo.com (8.9.1a/8.8.8) id VAA13638; Fri, 23 Feb 2001 21:21:12 -0800 Resent-Date: Fri, 23 Feb 2001 21:21:12 -0800 Reply-To: "Vortexb-L Eskimo. Com" From: "xplorer" To: Subject: [VxB]: Pure Fusion Bomb? Date: Sat, 24 Feb 2001 12:20:44 +0700 Message-ID: MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-Priority: 3 (Normal) X-MSMail-Priority: Normal X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook IMO, Build 9.0.2416 (9.0.2910.0) X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V4.72.3110.3 In-Reply-To: <001601c09e1e$06533de0$c3c01d18 pestilence.ce.mediaone.net> Importance: Normal Resent-Message-ID: <"uFf_U.0._K3.8Jqbw" mx1> Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/40967 X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com Status: O X-Status: Actually, our very own CIA is quietly developing a 'plug-in' for the NMD project (which is only a cloaking device for MicroSoft) which will use a FTL particle-beam generators to develop Cerenkov radiation modulated by X-Ray lasers focused at selected human targets to trigger Spontaneous Human Combustion, a much more efficient and effective technique than the neutron bomb for removing undesirables from distant points on the globe. Thank the liberal caucus for developing this vastly more 'green' method of 'asset liquidation', since they discreetly pointed out the need for environmentally friendly weapons. {Sponsored by EarthWatch infiltrators into the military-industrial complex}. Collateral damage is, of course, inevitable, because pinpointing a single human from orbit seems to remain a bit of an obstacle, but at least the shrubbery should survive intact and without significant irradiation. By fear-mingering tactics in the pinko-liberal-socialist controlled media, they are effectively diverting attention from this new toy, which would draw the attention of foreign spies which lurk in every corner of good old American society. (where's mcarthy when you need him, anyway?) cheers from the safe house, CTBT." PTI TVP KM SNS JW PTI NNNN ZCZC .WASH > -----Original Message----- > From: Scott Stephens [mailto:Scott2 Mediaone.net] > Sent: 2001 February 24, Saturday 11:56 > Subject: Re: Pure Fusion Bomb? > > -----Original Message----- > From: Terry Blanton > > >How do you trigger a pure fusion bomb? From: >x< > This must be a joke, a troll to entrap foreign spys, then turn or > disinform > them. I suspect the real weapon focus is on the human genome, where in the From vortex-l-request eskimo.com Fri Feb 23 21:32:19 2001 Received: (from smartlst localhost) by mx1.eskimo.com (8.9.1a/8.8.8) id VAA17818; Fri, 23 Feb 2001 21:30:34 -0800 Resent-Date: Fri, 23 Feb 2001 21:30:34 -0800 X-Apparently-From: Message-Id: <4.2.0.58.20010223233637.00bfaa10 postoffice.swbell.net> X-Sender: cjford1 pop.mail.yahoo.com X-Mailer: QUALCOMM Windows Eudora Pro Version 4.2.0.58 Date: Fri, 23 Feb 2001 23:41:35 -0600 To: vortex-l eskimo.com From: Charles Ford Subject: Re: Pure Fusion Bomb? In-Reply-To: <001601c09e1e$06533de0$c3c01d18 pestilence.ce.mediaone.net> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"; format=flowed Resent-Message-ID: <"S4_nv.0.GM4.vRqbw" mx1> Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/40968 X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com Status: O X-Status: It is not hard to spot unverified or inaccurate reports... Just look for blatant errors in content. For example Those of us who read the article may have noticed that the Los Alamos National Laboratory is called out as a Russian facility. http://www.lanl.gov/worldview/ Check for yourself At 10:55 PM 2/23/01 -0600, you wrote: >-----Original Message----- >From: Terry Blanton > > >How do you trigger a pure fusion bomb? From: > > > >http://in.news.yahoo.com/010221/20/kpxi.html > > > > <><><><><><><><><><><> > > > >Wednesday February 21, 3:00 PM > > > >US, Russia jointly building fusion bomb > >This must be a joke, a troll to entrap foreign spys, then turn or disinform >them. I suspect the real weapon focus is on the human genome, where in the >near future when gas and oil will be the focus of conflict between China, >Europe and America. When the baby-boomers retire, dragging down our economy, >and our corporations enslave much of the corrupt third world with credit >debt to support them, there will be a strong incentive to kill off our aged >worthless-eater baby-boomers by the rest of the world, especially China. > >We Americans may even do it ourselves! Look at how (Governor) Clinton sold >aids tainted vaccine from Arkansas prisons to the Canadians for profit! Look >how profitable abortions and euthanasia are, and the lobby for it. Good >liberal green's feel humanity is a disease, a blight on the planet. Why >don't they blame the management, that constantly complains it hasn't stolen >(taxed!) us enough to 'save' us from ourselves! "I'm from the government, >and I'm here to help!? No, I'm from the Government and I'm here like a fox >to devour you like a sheep!". As soon as it is profitable and practical, I'm >certain there will be economicaly-motivated genocide. Because the liberal >and fascist business elite alike see the public they entrap, degrade and >enslave as useful idiots to be devoured. > >Using combinations of stealth virus's and vaccines would be an ideal way to >accomplish selective genocide. It has the benefit of reducing ecological and >collateral damage, relative to nuclear weapons. Unless of course, the nation >under assault cannot put out the inevitable fires that will start, because >near everyone is sick, dying or has fled. But I wouldn't think nuclear >reactors would be susceptible to damage in fire storms, but the isotope and >chemical sources in hospitals and chemical plants and oil refinerys would. >But that type of fallout isn't likely to affect the Chinese or the >Europeans, just us. I have read that the Nile Virus, now infiltrating the >east coast, was evaluated for weapons potential by the Iraqis and Cubans. We >see how plausible deniability works, with the latest pardon business. > >In a world where convenient, profitable, 'coincidences' happen, more >sinister 'coincidences' happen too! Who will know the difference between a >natural or engineered virus? > >Strangely, nuclear power could save us from this fate by enabling cheap >energy to allow development of the vast areas of the planet and colonization >of space. I'm I the only one that is appalled and outraged that NASA wastes >billions of dollars on budget excuses like the space station, when the >single research priority should be a nuclear energy source for propulsion? > >Scott > >**************************************************************************** >Freedom is pursuing your carrot, not running from somebody's stick >Does society make you enthusiastic, or fearful? > >The mob rules only what its members achieve. > >**************************************************************************** _________________________________________________________ Do You Yahoo!? Get your free yahoo.com address at http://mail.yahoo.com From vortex-l-request eskimo.com Fri Feb 23 23:26:47 2001 Received: (from smartlst localhost) by mx1.eskimo.com (8.9.1a/8.8.8) id XAA32439; Fri, 23 Feb 2001 23:26:07 -0800 Resent-Date: Fri, 23 Feb 2001 23:26:07 -0800 Message-Id: Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Date: Fri, 23 Feb 2001 22:36:14 -0900 To: vortex-l eskimo.com From: hheffner mtaonline.net (Horace Heffner) Subject: Re: Neutrons from Electron Impact? Resent-Message-ID: <"D26Jm1.0.nw7.E8sbw" mx1> Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/40969 X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com Status: O X-Status: At 2:22 PM 2/24/1, Robin van Spaandonk wrote: >In reply to Horace Heffner's message of Thu, 22 Feb 2001 09:28:04 -0900: > >>Slight correction: >> >>For what it is worth, I am pretty sure I have seen arguments that increased >>gravitational potential is balanced by a corresponding increase in mass, >>according to the ratio (delta E_pot) = (delta m) c^2. This makes some >>sense from yet another perspective. Suppose the mass of a "real" object >>is, as might be assumed with the electron, completely embodied in its >>(entire gravitational) field. The energy required to place a new real mass >>into the universe is m c^2, thus this is the new potential energy embodied >>in its gravitational field, and thus it is the net gravitational potential >>energy added to the universe if we are located in the reference frame of >>that mass. It is the additional kinetic energy acquired if the entire mass >>of the universe goes through a big crunch back to a point. > >If I'm not mistaken this means that the mass of a particle depends on its >distance from the centre of the universe, This astronomy stuff is all way out of my league, but I'll babble some responses anyway. That's a lot better than off topic political diatribe. First, let me say that my orientation above was in regard to the energy of the universe. The potential energy of the universe is increased when a mass is added into the center of the universe, even though that mass has no net force applied to it by the rest of the universe - because it exerts a net force on every other object in the universe, which therefore translates into a potential energy increase for the universe. Placing a mass anywhere in the universe adds the corresponding potential energy to the universe. My response to your statement immediately above is yes, qualitatively, that seems to me to be true also. However, it must be considered that gravitational time dilation is also affected by distance, and thus by the distribution of mass with respect to radius, or matter density rho. Taylor and Wheeler (applying the Swartzchild metric) on page 2-30 of the January 1, 1999 preprint of their book *Scouting Black Holes* provide the gravitational red shift, the relation of time between events at differing shells: dt_shell = (1 - (2M/r))^(1/2) dt where dt is the time between events that occur at the same place on a shell (dr = d theta = 0) as observed by a distant observer and dt_shell is the time observed on a shell clock. You can see that if the ratio 2M/r is preserved over a wide interval of shells, that the gravitational red shift does not change with distance from the center of the universe in that (radius) interval. Therefore, I think knowing the density of matter throughout the universe is critical to knowing the gravitational portion of the red shift. >because mass at a greater distance >than one's own doesn't have any effect (e.g. the Earth exerts no net >gravitational force on an object at its centre). Yes, NO FORCE effect is felt that is, assuming the mass distribution is spherically symmetrical, or rougly so, in the universe, a reasonable assumption if a big bang occurred. However, it could be that a gravitational BLUE SHIFT effect is occuring locally, with gravitational red shift occuring at distant locations (its all relative). It seems to me that if gravtational red shift is to explain everything, then objects located closer to the center of the universe than we are should exhibit a blue shift, not a red shift. This is not the case. It could be that we are miraculously located on a shell of a spherical universe where d rho/d r changes abruptly, but I think not! Another thing to consider: it may be that almost the entire mass of the universe is located in the outermost boundary, or ... maybe not. >Consequently red shift >might be partly explained by differences in particle masses leading to >different radiation frequencies for the same element, depending on the >distance of the particular star from the centre of the universe. Red shift at close quarters could only be fully explained by gravitational red shift if there were a strange unobserved distribution of matter, which would also have gravitational (kinetic) consequences which I think have not been detected. However, it is interesting that the Hubble constant was determined by using an independent means - the periods of Cephid variables, which might also in fact be subject to gravitational red shift. However, the huge amount of unseeen mass that could make this gravitational red shift happen should also be dramatically affecting the motions of galaxies nearby, and it still seems that blue shifting would be seen toward the center of the universe (to one side of the earth,) not red. Regards, Horace Heffner From vortex-l-request eskimo.com Sat Feb 24 03:53:15 2001 Received: (from smartlst localhost) by mx1.eskimo.com (8.9.1a/8.8.8) id DAA15776; Sat, 24 Feb 2001 03:52:25 -0800 Resent-Date: Sat, 24 Feb 2001 03:52:25 -0800 Message-ID: <018e01c09e4f$eeae9e00$e4d4323f computer> From: "Frederick Sparber" To: Cc: Subject: Re: Quartz Plate Thruster? Date: Sat, 24 Feb 2001 04:51:53 -0600 MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-Priority: 3 X-MSMail-Priority: Normal X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook Express 5.50.4133.2400 X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V5.50.4133.2400 Resent-Message-ID: <"nW_hf1.0.Ps3.v1wbw" mx1> Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/40970 X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com Status: O X-Status: Another iteration, Colin. Put a ~ 1.0 ohm coating of Nichrome on one side of a 10 cm square by 0.3 cm thick quartz plate and a coating of carbon black/graphite on the opposite side. Then take another quartz reflector plate of the same size and put a coating of silver (or aluminum) on it and lay it over the Nichrome side of the first plate with the reflective coating facing out. With a 12 volt 12 ampere power supply connected to the Nichrome layer you should develop ~ 144 watts, thus ~ 14,400 watts/meter^2. Then the blackened surface should radiate the most of the 144 watts when at a temperature of ~ 710 deg Kelvin (~ 437 deg C). Assuming a delta T of 100 degrees, the Carnot efficiency (Th - Tc)/Th (810 - 710)/810 = 12%. If some of the heat energy exerts a thrust on the device (in vacuum) it becomes a passive heat engine that can exert a push on a payload. How much, or how little? My crude experiments (years back) with a similar approach in air, indicated about 25 Kw/kg thrust. Regards, Frederick From vortex-l-request eskimo.com Sat Feb 24 06:01:26 2001 Received: (from smartlst localhost) by mx1.eskimo.com (8.9.1a/8.8.8) id GAA09747; Sat, 24 Feb 2001 06:00:12 -0800 Resent-Date: Sat, 24 Feb 2001 06:00:12 -0800 From: ConexTom aol.com Message-ID: <52.7a895e6.27c91844 aol.com> Date: Sat, 24 Feb 2001 08:59:32 EST Subject: Quaternons & 4D Wave Equations To: vortex-l eskimo.com CC: ConexTom aol.com MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary="part1_52.7a895e6.27c91844_boundary" Content-Disposition: Inline X-Mailer: 6.0 sub 10501 Resent-Message-ID: <"JyONI1.0.DO2.ivxbw" mx1> Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/40971 X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com Status: O X-Status: --part1_52.7a895e6.27c91844_boundary Content-Type: text/plain; charset="ISO-8859-1" Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable Quaternons & 4D Wave Equations I was reading about the equations of Quaternons (4 dimensional (x,y,z,q) waves in a math book, and I figured out how to produce and block out 4th dimensional energy waves. =A0I also discovered how an individual or group ma= y ascend, descend into a universe of one's own choice.=20 All energy waves in the 3rd dimension(x,y,z) follow the basic wave equations of 3D(x,y,z)=3D2*3D(x,y,z)sin kx cos wt where k =3D force constant of ideal spring, and w =3D the angular frequency , t =3D time, x,y,z are the special=20 scalars or vectors. The properties of the variables of the wave equation must be set= =20 to match the properties of the 3rd dimensional universe of interest for each individual and group of individuals. One simply needs to come up with a simple axiomatic system with a an axiom of choice mapping the properties of the desired universe onto itself. One can then encode the=20 axiomatic system and the axiom of choice into the 3d wave equation. The tailored made 3d =A0wave equation can be encoded into a wave generator chip,= a molecule or a gene by the use of an infrared spectrometer and a infrared las= er or by using one's own mind/soul energy to generate waves. The 3d dimensional wave equation only allows one to change the properties of the 3rd dimension within a certain range. =A0In order to significantly change th= e=20 3rd dimension into a new universe of the 5th dimension or a new universe of the 3rd dimension which is radically different from the previous third dimension= , one may use the equation of the quaternon to generate 4 dimensonal waves. The standard transformational rotation equation for the quaternon of the 4th dimension is the Rodigues formula x' =3D xcos w+ d(x*d)(1-cos w)+ (d X x)sin w. This formula can be translated into a wave equation to generate, and deflect 4th dimensional waves. 4th dimensional waves may be used to skew, warp, or make weird the properties of the 3rd dimension, so as to allow for time trav= el and major redefinitions of genes, memes(beliefs), and other properties of th= e environment of the 3rd dimension. One simply needs to again define an axiomatic system and the axioms of choice and feed the logic of the system into the 4th dimensional wave equation above. One may simply use an infrared laser to encode the waves into a molecule, gene, or chip. One may also use positron and tacheyon waves directed at a metal dish to create time travel.=20 Since every person has a set of wave equations in their genes and memes (beliefs),then =A0the 3rd and 4th dimensions may coexist within different gr= oups of people intermingling. If enough people from a group are in a 4th dimensional state and agree on the same beliefs, then that group of people may change their local, environment, bodies(genes, memes) or teleport to another dimension, planet, or universe. While in the 4th dimension some people can choose to experience great extremes (cognitive dissonance) which can create a great deal of change but in a very quick and potentially painfu= l manner. =A0Some people could choose to experience only moderate changes or extremes over a longer period of time. This may parallel the prophesies of t= he bible and other religions. Different groups of people in the 4th dimension m= ay choose different religious beliefs, futures, and new universes of being and follow different paths in the 4th dimensional energies of the new age.=20 In our present world, we may have differing political systems struggling ove= r the properties of the new age. One political system may favor a new world order; whereby, there are global structures which encourage one government, one religion, one economy, and so on, and which may only allow for two bipolar extreme realities for the peoples of those governments; namely, the extreme right(global corporations)= , and the extreme left(global governments). =A0This system leads to the divide= and conquer strategy, which eventually divides everything into 2 bipolar options= , which in turn divides into two bipolar options and eventually leads into nothing (no choice at all) and leads into eventual collapse. Another political system may favor more central democratic or republican (local banks, religions, economies, etc.) forms of government, which allow not just for 2 realties, but for an unlimited number of realities for their citizens to follow. The system follows the divide into many possible options strategy, which divides into many more possible options and may lead to freedom and happiness. Depending on which political system a country or the world adopts, may significantly affect the properties of the energies from the 4th dimension. The hierarchy of all dimensions may be as follows: Physical Dimensions: Dimensions 1, 2, & 3 : Space (Length, Width, Height) Dimension 4 : Time, Curved Geometrical Relations, Relations =A0=A0=A0 =A0 =A0=A0of Geometrical Objects, Total System Angula= r =A0=A0=A0 =A0=A0=A0Momentum (Object & Satellites) =A0=A0=A0 =A0=A0=A0Parallel Universes, Time Waves. =A0=A0=A0 =A0=A0=A0The curved spiral of time, Love, Gravity, An= ti Gravity,=20 Dark =A0=A0=A0 =A0=A0=A0Matter, Human Mind, Dark Energy, Quintessenc= e Energy =A0=A0=A0 =A0=A0=A0Interspacial 4th dimensions: =A0=A0=A0 =A0=A0=A05th - radius of one loop of time of the spir= al =A0=A0=A0 =A0=A0=A06th - distance between spirals of time =A0=A0=A0 =A0=A0=A07,8,9 - =A03 special dimensions of interspac= e dimension=20 allows =A0=A0=A0 =A0=A0=A0one to make imaginary dimensions and then ma= y allow one to =A0=A0=A0 =A0=A0=A0settle into a new universe of the 5th dimens= ion or a new=20 =A0=A0=A0 =A0=A0=A0 =A0=A0=A0version of the 3rd dimension.=20 =A0=A0=A0 =A0=A0=A0E=3D MC^2 =A0in 3rd Dimension >DeBroglie Pro= bability =A0=A0=A0 =A0=A0=A0 =A0=A0=A0 =A0=A0=A0Wave/Gravity =A0=A0=A0 =A0=A0=A0E =3D L=3Dmr^2 =3D total system angular mome= ntum (object plus=20 all =A0=A0=A0 =A0=A0=A0 =A0=A0=A0 =A0 =A0=A0satellites) in 4thDimensi= on =A0=A0=A0 =A0=A0=A0 Belief+Memories+Geometry+Dreams+Imagination= in =A0=A0=A0 =A0=A0=A0 =A0=A0=A0 =A0=A0=A0ExtraDimensions Dark Matter, Anti-= Gravity, Anti- =A0=A0=A0 =A0=A0=A0 =A0=A0=A0 =A0=A0=A0Matter) =A0=A0=A0 =A0=A0=A0According to General Relativity a clock slows down= during =A0=A0=A0 =A0=A0=A0 =A0=A0=A0acceleration: =A0=A0=A0 =A0=A0=A0 =A0=A0=A0T' =3D T (1 - v^2/c^2)^1/2 * v^2/r Spiritual Dimensions: 12 - Unity, Duality, Whole, Beyond all infinities 11 - Creator, Great Yang/Yin - smaller (Yin/Yan), Black Whole, Big Bang- =A0=A0=A0Growth of Universe, Void 10 - Truth, A Universe but not of form, the outer shell of the universe, =A0=A0=A0something and nothing, =A0=A0=A0Holy Spirit Consciousness, Christ Consciousness one of billi= ons, 12 =A0=A0=A0DNA- =A0=A0=A0Diving Plane 09- =A0From formless to form, Hierarchies, Planetary, stellar, galactic,=20 universal, =A0=A0=A0and dimensional consciousness. The life force which translat= es to=20 the =A0=A0=A03rd dimension gravity force. Hierarchy: Man may need, Earth=20= may not =A0=A0=A0need Man, Earth may need the Sun, the sun may not need earth= ... =A0=A0=A0 08- =A0Group Souls of specific vibrations, =A0=A0=A0 07- =A0Living Vortexes - nonplanetary? 06- =A0Sacred Geometry, The Plane of knowledge/Teaching, Provide =A0=A0=A0information and the means to convey it in various vibrationa= l forms. =A0=A0=A0Archetypes, Languages, Symbols, Astrological, and Genetic Co= des, =A0=A0=A0Akashic Records(Files on everyone and everything). Infinite =A0=A0=A0dimensions within Dimensions. 05 - Heaven, the plane of light, Incarnation as stellar beings, No physical =A0=A0=A0suffering or pain, Light Body, teleportation travel, Soft no= t hot=20 and =A0=A0=A0iery, A Star or Sun. 04 - Truth, The Astral Plane, Forces of Light and Darkness? (Grey?), The =A0=A0=A0attle between good and evil?, Bodily forms can morph into ot= her =A0=A0=A0orms, Will, Ego, Self, Mind, Body, Spirit aligned with Divin= e Will=20 in =A0=A0=A0armony and balance, Astral Travel, =A0=A0=A0Magic, Time Trav= el, Karma, =A0=A0=A0eincarnation, =A0Shamans ascend here to get knowledge for th= e 3rd =A0=A0=A0dimension, Mind Reading, etc. Dimensions of Limitations, fly= ing =A0=A0=A0travel. 03 - Dense reality of thought and mind.=20 02 - Plant and animal kingdom.=20 01- =A0Atoms and molecules, minerals, rocks. Geomancy and energy flow to =A0=A0=A0store knowledge in stones of temples etc.=20 Respectively,=20 President, Thomas Clark=20 Radiation Health Foundation Inc.=20 Web site at: http://www.rhfweb.com/ a= nd at=20 http://hometown.aol.com/rhfweb=20 Email: rhf@rhfweb.com and Conextom@aol.com=20 --part1_52.7a895e6.27c91844_boundary Content-Type: text/html; charset="ISO-8859-1" Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable Quaternons & 4D Wave=20= Equations

I was reading about the equations of Quaternons (4 dimensional (x,y,z,q)
waves in a math book, and I figured out how to produce and block out 4th
dimensional energy waves. =A0I also discovered how an individual or grou= p may
ascend, descend into a universe of one's own choice.=20

All energy waves in the 3rd dimension(x,y,z) follow the basic wave equat= ions
of 3D(x,y,z)=3D2*3D(x,y,z)sin kx cos wt where k =3D force constant of id= eal
spring, and w =3D the angular frequency , t =3D time, x,y,z are the spec= ial=20
scalars
or vectors. The properties of the variables of the wave equation must be= set=20
to
match the properties of the 3rd dimensional universe of interest for eac= h
individual and group of individuals. One simply needs to come up with a
simple axiomatic system with a an axiom of choice mapping the properties= of
the desired universe onto itself. One can then encode the=20
axiomatic system and the axiom of choice into the 3d wave equation. The
tailored made 3d =A0wave equation can be encoded into a wave generator c= hip, a
molecule or a gene by the use of an infrared spectrometer and a infrared= laser
or by using one's own mind/soul energy to generate waves. The 3d
dimensional wave equation only allows one to change the properties of th= e
3rd dimension within a certain range. =A0In order to significantly chang= e the=20
3rd
dimension into a new universe of the 5th dimension or a new universe of=20= the
3rd dimension which is radically different from the previous third dimen= sion,
one may use the equation of the quaternon to generate 4 dimensonal waves= .
The standard transformational rotation equation for the quaternon of the= 4th
dimension is the Rodigues formula x' =3D xcos w+ d(x*d)(1-cos w)+ (d X x= )sin
w.

This formula can be translated into a wave equation to generate, and def= lect
4th dimensional waves. 4th dimensional waves may be used to skew, warp,=20= or
make weird the properties of the 3rd dimension, so as to allow for time=20= travel
and major redefinitions of genes, memes(beliefs), and other properties o= f the
environment of the 3rd dimension. One simply needs to again define an
axiomatic system and the axioms of choice and feed the logic of the syst= em
into the 4th dimensional wave equation above. One may simply use an
infrared laser to encode the waves into a molecule, gene, or chip. One m= ay
also use positron and tacheyon waves directed at a metal dish to create=20= time
travel.=20

Since every person has a set of wave equations in their genes and memes
(beliefs),then =A0the 3rd and 4th dimensions may coexist within differen= t groups
of people intermingling. If enough people from a group are in a 4th
dimensional state and agree on the same beliefs, then that group of peop= le
may change their local, environment, bodies(genes, memes) or teleport to
another dimension, planet, or universe. While in the 4th dimension some
people can choose to experience great extremes (cognitive dissonance) wh= ich
can create a great deal of change but in a very quick and potentially pa= inful
manner. =A0Some people could choose to experience only moderate changes=20= or
extremes over a longer period of time. This may parallel the prophesies=20= of the
bible and other religions. Different groups of people in the 4th dimensi= on may
choose different religious beliefs, futures, and new universes of being=20= and
follow different paths in the 4th dimensional energies of the new age.=20

In our present world, we may have differing political systems struggling= over
the properties of the new age.

One political system may favor a new world order; whereby, there are glo= bal
structures which encourage one government, one religion, one economy, an= d
so on, and which may only allow for two bipolar extreme realities for th= e
peoples of those governments; namely, the extreme right(global corporati= ons),
and the extreme left(global governments). =A0This system leads to the di= vide and
conquer strategy, which eventually divides everything into 2 bipolar opt= ions,
which in turn divides into two bipolar options and eventually leads into
nothing (no choice at all) and leads into eventual collapse.

Another political system may favor more central democratic or republican
(local banks, religions, economies, etc.) forms of government, which all= ow
not just for 2 realties, but for an unlimited number of realities for th= eir
citizens to follow. The system follows the divide into many possible opt= ions
strategy, which divides into many more possible options and may lead to
freedom and happiness.

Depending on which political system a country or the world adopts, may
significantly affect the properties of the energies from the 4th dimensi= on.

The hierarchy of all dimensions may be as follows:

Physical Dimensions:

Dimensions 1, 2, & 3 : Space (Length, Width, Height)
Dimension 4 : Time, Curved Geometrical Relations, Relations
=A0=A0=A0 =A0          &nbs= p;   =A0=A0of Geometrical Objects, Total System Angular
            = ;=A0=A0=A0 =A0=A0=A0Momentum (Object & Satellites)
            = ;=A0=A0=A0 =A0=A0=A0Parallel Universes, Time Waves.
            = ;=A0=A0=A0 =A0=A0=A0The curved spiral of time, Love, Gravity, Anti Gravity,=20
Dark
            = ;=A0=A0=A0 =A0=A0=A0Matter, Human Mind, Dark Energy, Quintessence Energy

            = ;=A0=A0=A0 =A0=A0=A0Interspacial 4th dimensions:
            = ;=A0=A0=A0 =A0=A0=A05th - radius of one loop of time of the spiral
            = ;=A0=A0=A0 =A0=A0=A06th - distance between spirals of time
            = ;=A0=A0=A0 =A0=A0=A07,8,9 - =A03 special dimensions of interspace dimension=20
allows
            = ;=A0=A0=A0 =A0=A0=A0one to make imaginary dimensions and then may allow one=20= to
            = ;=A0=A0=A0 =A0=A0=A0settle into a new universe of the 5th dimension or a new= =20
=A0=A0=A0
            = ;=A0=A0=A0 =A0=A0=A0version of the 3rd dimension.=20
            = ;=A0=A0=A0 =A0=A0=A0E=3D MC^2 =A0in 3rd Dimension >DeBroglie Probability=20= =A0=A0=A0
            = ;=A0=A0=A0 =A0=A0=A0 =A0=A0=A0Wave/Gravity
            = ;=A0=A0=A0 =A0=A0=A0E =3D L=3Dmr^2 =3D total system angular momentum (object= plus=20
all
=A0=A0=A0 =A0=A0=A0 =A0=A0=A0 =A0       &n= bsp;    =A0=A0satellites) in 4thDimension
            = ;=A0=A0=A0 =A0=A0=A0 Belief+Memories+Geometry+Dreams+Imagination in =A0=A0= =A0
            = ;=A0=A0=A0 =A0=A0=A0 =A0=A0=A0ExtraDimensions Dark Matter, Anti-Gravity, Ant= i- =A0=A0=A0
            = ;=A0=A0=A0 =A0=A0=A0 =A0=A0=A0Matter)
      =A0=A0=A0 =A0=A0=A0According to Gen= eral Relativity a clock slows down during
=A0=A0=A0 =A0=A0=A0       =A0=A0=A0acceler= ation:
      =A0=A0=A0 =A0=A0=A0 =A0=A0=A0T'=20= =3D T (1 - v^2/c^2)^1/2 * v^2/r

Spiritual Dimensions:

12 - Unity, Duality, Whole, Beyond all infinities
11 - Creator, Great Yang/Yin - smaller (Yin/Yan), Black Whole, Big Bang-
      =A0=A0=A0Growth of Universe, Void
10 - Truth, A Universe but not of form, the outer shell of the universe,
      =A0=A0=A0something and nothing,
      =A0=A0=A0Holy Spirit Consciousness,= Christ Consciousness one of billions, 12
      =A0=A0=A0DNA- =A0=A0=A0Diving Plane
09- =A0From formless to form, Hierarchies, Planetary, stellar, galactic,= =20
universal,
      =A0=A0=A0and dimensional consciousn= ess. The life force which translates to=20
the
      =A0=A0=A03rd dimension gravity forc= e. Hierarchy: Man may need, Earth may not
      =A0=A0=A0need Man, Earth may need t= he Sun, the sun may not need earth... =A0=A0=A0
08- =A0Group Souls of specific vibrations, =A0=A0=A0
07- =A0Living Vortexes - nonplanetary?
06- =A0Sacred Geometry, The Plane of knowledge/Teaching, Provide
      =A0=A0=A0information and the means=20= to convey it in various vibrational forms.
      =A0=A0=A0Archetypes, Languages, Sym= bols, Astrological, and Genetic Codes,
      =A0=A0=A0Akashic Records(Files on e= veryone and everything). Infinite
      =A0=A0=A0dimensions within Dimensio= ns.
05 - Heaven, the plane of light, Incarnation as stellar beings, No physi= cal
      =A0=A0=A0suffering or pain, Light B= ody, teleportation travel, Soft not hot=20
and
      =A0=A0=A0iery, A Star or Sun.
04 - Truth, The Astral Plane, Forces of Light and Darkness? (Grey?), The
      =A0=A0=A0attle between good and evi= l?, Bodily forms can morph into other
      =A0=A0=A0orms, Will, Ego, Self, Min= d, Body, Spirit aligned with Divine Will=20
in
      =A0=A0=A0armony and balance, Astral= Travel, =A0=A0=A0Magic, Time Travel, Karma,
      =A0=A0=A0eincarnation, =A0Shamans a= scend here to get knowledge for the 3rd
      =A0=A0=A0dimension, Mind Reading, e= tc. Dimensions of Limitations, flying
      =A0=A0=A0travel.
03 - Dense reality of thought and mind.=20
02 - Plant and animal kingdom.=20
01- =A0Atoms and molecules, minerals, rocks. Geomancy and energy flow to
      =A0=A0=A0store knowledge in stones=20= of temples etc.=20

Respectively,=20

President, Thomas Clark=20
Radiation Health Foundation Inc.=20
Web site at: http://www.rhfweb.com/ and at=20
http://hometown.aol.com/rhfwe= b=20
Email: rhf@rhfweb.com and Conextom@aol.com=20
--part1_52.7a895e6.27c91844_boundary-- From vortex-l-request eskimo.com Sat Feb 24 07:13:51 2001 Received: (from smartlst localhost) by mx1.eskimo.com (8.9.1a/8.8.8) id HAA05592; Sat, 24 Feb 2001 07:12:23 -0800 Resent-Date: Sat, 24 Feb 2001 07:12:23 -0800 Message-ID: <005c01c09e73$b640c6a0$62584118 mtwh1.on.wave.home.com> From: "Colin Quinney" To: "Frederick Sparber" Cc: References: <003c01c0915c$c0fb7e60$718f85ce fjsparber> Subject: Re: Woody Allen's "Orgasmatron" has arrived! Date: Sat, 24 Feb 2001 10:08:57 -0500 MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-Priority: 3 X-MSMail-Priority: Normal X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook Express 5.50.4522.1200 X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V5.50.4522.1200 Resent-Message-ID: <"q-cHL1.0.GN1.Mzybw" mx1> Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/40972 X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com Status: O X-Status: Hi Fred, What is to stop them from continuously pushing the button and refusing to eat? ;-)) Colin ----- Original Message ----- From: "Frederick Sparber" To: Cc: Sent: Wednesday, February 07, 2001 6:21 PM Subject: Re: Woody Allen's "Orgasmatron" has arrived! > > > http://www.cnn.com/2001/HEALTH/02/07/orgasm.device/index.html > From vortex-l-request eskimo.com Sat Feb 24 07:33:33 2001 Received: (from smartlst localhost) by mx1.eskimo.com (8.9.1a/8.8.8) id HAA17031; Sat, 24 Feb 2001 07:32:47 -0800 Resent-Date: Sat, 24 Feb 2001 07:32:47 -0800 Message-ID: <3A97FE66.3BBE bellsouth.net> Date: Sat, 24 Feb 2001 10:33:10 -0800 From: Terry Blanton X-Mailer: Mozilla 3.01C-BLS20 (Win16; U) MIME-Version: 1.0 To: vortex-l eskimo.com Subject: Re: Calculating the thrust from a heat pump References: <3A9738AC.363E@bellsouth.net> <5r7e9tgrluvj3klvcp8pnbi20et53nsd6h@4ax.com> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Resent-Message-ID: <"up1BK3.0.1A4.VGzbw" mx1> Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/40973 X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com Status: O X-Status: Robin van Spaandonk wrote: > > In reply to Terry Blanton's message of Fri, 23 Feb 2001 20:29:32 -0800: > [snip] > >It would be twice what you're thinking since heat from the environment > >would impact the cold side. > [snip] > Just as much heat from the environment hits the hot side, as hits the cold > side (more perhaps, if some of the hot side heat is reflected back from an > external object). Yes, but does not the thrust of which you speak come from the heat gradient? Terry From vortex-l-request eskimo.com Sat Feb 24 07:33:56 2001 Received: (from smartlst localhost) by mx1.eskimo.com (8.9.1a/8.8.8) id HAA17566; Sat, 24 Feb 2001 07:33:26 -0800 Resent-Date: Sat, 24 Feb 2001 07:33:26 -0800 Message-ID: <3A97D44C.FF609024 groupz.net> Date: Sat, 24 Feb 2001 10:33:32 -0500 From: sno X-Mailer: Mozilla 4.76 [en] (Win98; U) X-Accept-Language: en,x-ns1siWpfcUINhQ,x-ns2r2d09OnmPe2 MIME-Version: 1.0 To: vortex-l eskimo.com Subject: Re: Woody Allen's "Orgasmatron" has arrived! References: <003c01c0915c$c0fb7e60$718f85ce fjsparber> <005c01c09e73$b640c6a0$62584118@mtwh1.on.wave.home.com> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Resent-Message-ID: <"8CXF42.0.cH4.5Hzbw" mx1> Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/40974 X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com Status: O X-Status: Serious interview with the discoverer of this effect.... windows media player....02/13/01, 1st hour.... http://artbell.com/topics.html steve Colin Quinney wrote: > > Hi Fred, > > What is to stop them from continuously pushing the button and refusing to > eat? ;-)) > > Colin > > ----- Original Message ----- > From: "Frederick Sparber" > To: > Cc: > Sent: Wednesday, February 07, 2001 6:21 PM > Subject: Re: Woody Allen's "Orgasmatron" has arrived! > > > > > > > http://www.cnn.com/2001/HEALTH/02/07/orgasm.device/index.html > > From vortex-l-request eskimo.com Sat Feb 24 07:38:45 2001 Received: (from smartlst localhost) by mx1.eskimo.com (8.9.1a/8.8.8) id HAA21631; Sat, 24 Feb 2001 07:37:53 -0800 Resent-Date: Sat, 24 Feb 2001 07:37:53 -0800 Message-ID: <3A97FFF3.1B6D bellsouth.net> Date: Sat, 24 Feb 2001 10:39:47 -0800 From: Terry Blanton X-Mailer: Mozilla 3.01C-BLS20 (Win16; U) MIME-Version: 1.0 To: vortex-l eskimo.com Subject: Re: Pure Fusion Bomb? References: <001601c09e1e$06533de0$c3c01d18 pestilence.ce.mediaone.net> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=iso-8859-1 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit Resent-Message-ID: <"tjN1n3.0.tH5.GLzbw" mx1> Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/40975 X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com Status: O X-Status: Scott Stephens wrote: > > -----Original Message----- > From: Terry Blanton > > >How do you trigger a pure fusion bomb? From: > > > >http://in.news.yahoo.com/010221/20/kpxi.html > > > > <><><><><><><><><><><> > > > >Wednesday February 21, 3:00 PM > > > >US, Russia jointly building fusion bomb > > This must be a joke, a troll to entrap foreign spys, then turn or disinform > them. Scott, You'd really enjoy Jim Hougan's book 'Kingdom Come'. Jim used to write exposé books on the CIA. Now he has written the ultimate conspiracy "fiction" in this work. Terry From vortex-l-request eskimo.com Sat Feb 24 07:51:57 2001 Received: (from smartlst localhost) by mx1.eskimo.com (8.9.1a/8.8.8) id HAA29285; Sat, 24 Feb 2001 07:51:09 -0800 Resent-Date: Sat, 24 Feb 2001 07:51:09 -0800 Message-ID: <3A97D6DD.B933F17B ix.netcom.com> Date: Sat, 24 Feb 2001 07:44:29 -0800 From: Akira Kawasaki X-Mailer: Mozilla 4.72 [en]C-CCK-MCD NSCPCD472 (Win95; U) X-Accept-Language: en MIME-Version: 1.0 To: Vortex Subject: Re: What's New for Feb 23, 2001 References: <200102232041.PAA23618 tron.aps.org> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Resent-Message-ID: <"Zs51t.0.U97.jXzbw" mx1> Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/40976 X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com Status: O X-Status: Feb. 23, 2001 Vortex, It seems Robert Park's bias is showing all over the place, once again, in writing about M .Swartz's Supreme Court Appeal on his CF patent application. He titles his comment as if a negative decision by the Supreme Court already has been made. The way the article reads, the Court has yet to pick up on the appeal, much less make any decision. I think this is a very cheap shot way for him to be 'editorializing', persuading, influencing whatever 'powers that be' against Swartz's case. And Park, for all his years of writing, surely knows his past, present, and future tenses in english grammer. -AK- Robert L. Park wrote: > > 2. COLD FUSION? SUPREME COURT GIVES IT THE COLD SHOULDER. Last > fall, the US Patent Office denied a "cold-fusion" patent to > Mitchell Swartz, on the grounds that it lacked "operability" (WN > 10 Nov 00). Despite testimony by cold-fusion gurus, a federal > appeals court upheld the Commissioner of Patents, ruling that the > patent failed to convince sensible people that the idea could > work. Undeterred, Swartz appealed to the US Supreme Court. The > highest court in the land is unlikely to review the case, which > has the effect of upholding the appeal court ruling. After twelve > years, cold fusion still has trouble being taken seriously. From vortex-l-request eskimo.com Sat Feb 24 09:40:53 2001 Received: (from smartlst localhost) by mx1.eskimo.com (8.9.1a/8.8.8) id JAA00581; Sat, 24 Feb 2001 09:39:36 -0800 Resent-Date: Sat, 24 Feb 2001 09:39:36 -0800 Message-Id: Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Date: Sat, 24 Feb 2001 08:49:49 -0900 To: vortex-l eskimo.com From: hheffner mtaonline.net (Horace Heffner) Subject: Re: Neutrons from Electron Impact? Resent-Message-ID: <"bJ8th2.0._8.O7_bw" mx1> Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/40977 X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com Status: O X-Status: >From the Swartzchild metric the gravitational red shift, the relation of time between events at differing shells can be boiled down to: dt_shell = (1 - (2M/r))^(1/2) dt where dt is the time between events that occur at the same place on a shell (dr = d theta = 0) as observed by a distant observer and dt_shell is the time observed on a shell clock. M here is the mass in meters typically used in GR calcualtions, and is given in terms of gravitational mass m: M = (G/c^2) m = ((7.425x10^-28 m/kg)/c^2) m If the universe is spheicallly symmetrical, and density of mass throughout the universe is constant, and assuming mass outside the shell has no gravitational effect, then the mass m of the universe inside the shell in which we reside is: m = rho*r^3 so: M = (G/c^2) rho * r^3 dt_shell = (1 - (2 (G/c^2) rho * r^3/r))^(1/2) dt dt_shell = (1 - 2 (G/c^2) rho * r^2)^(1/2) dt so an observer on the outermost shell, looking inwards at the universe, will see an increasing red shift towards the center of the universe. If mass external to the shell of observation has no effect, then we should see a red shift when looking towards the center of the universe, but a reduced red shift when looking beyond it. If we are red shifted with respect to observers external to our shell, then they should be blue shifted with respect to us. (This is a change in position from that which I originally stated, but the assumptions about density are now nailed down better.) It is interesting that the above sets a limit to the size of the observable universe: 2 (G/c^2) rho * r^2 < 1 r < 1/[2 (G/c^2) rho] Regards, Horace Heffner From vortex-l-request eskimo.com Sat Feb 24 10:18:35 2001 Received: (from smartlst localhost) by mx1.eskimo.com (8.9.1a/8.8.8) id KAA09771; Sat, 24 Feb 2001 10:12:04 -0800 Resent-Date: Sat, 24 Feb 2001 10:12:04 -0800 Date: Sat, 24 Feb 2001 10:06:47 -0800 From: Jones Beene Subject: Re: Quaternons & 4D Wave Equations To: vortex-l eskimo.com Message-id: <3A97F837.2030707 pacbell.net> MIME-version: 1.0 Content-type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii; format=flowed Content-transfer-encoding: 7bit User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (Windows; U; Win98; en-US; m18) Gecko/20001108 Netscape6/6.0 X-Accept-Language: en References: <52.7a895e6.27c91844 aol.com> Resent-Message-ID: <"zfO2Z2.0.VO2.qb_bw" mx1> Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/40978 X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com Status: O X-Status: ConexTom aol.com wrote: > I was reading about the equations of Quaternons (4 dimensional (x,y,z,q) > waves in a math book, and I figured out how to produce and block out 4th > dimensional energy waves. Wow, thanks for choosing Vortex to announce your discovery. > I also discovered how an individual or group may > ascend, descend into a universe of one's own choice. Yea, I tried that same stuff back in the sixties. Be careful, if you do too much, it makes you a little p'noid... From vortex-l-request eskimo.com Sat Feb 24 10:36:17 2001 Received: (from smartlst localhost) by mx1.eskimo.com (8.9.1a/8.8.8) id KAA17453; Sat, 24 Feb 2001 10:35:23 -0800 Resent-Date: Sat, 24 Feb 2001 10:35:23 -0800 Date: Sat, 24 Feb 2001 10:24:28 -0800 From: Jones Beene Subject: Re: Pure Fusion Bomb? To: vortex-l eskimo.com Message-id: <3A97FC5C.8060102 pacbell.net> MIME-version: 1.0 Content-type: text/plain; format=flowed; charset=ISO-8859-1 Content-transfer-encoding: 8BIT User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (Windows; U; Win98; en-US; m18) Gecko/20001108 Netscape6/6.0 X-Accept-Language: en References: <001601c09e1e$06533de0$c3c01d18 pestilence.ce.mediaone.net> <3A97FFF3.1B6D bellsouth.net> Resent-Message-ID: <"0-UHZ2.0.bG4.gx_bw" mx1> Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/40979 X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com Status: O X-Status: Terry Blanton wrote: > You'd really enjoy Jim Hougan's book 'Kingdom Come'. Jim used to write > exposé books on the CIA. Now he has written the ultimate conspiracy > "fiction" in this work. I second that, especially if you have been into any of the "Illuminati" stuff - R.A.W. etc. It's a good read that tells it all (to say the least)! Jones From vortex-l-request eskimo.com Sat Feb 24 10:37:14 2001 Received: (from smartlst localhost) by mx1.eskimo.com (8.9.1a/8.8.8) id KAA17848; Sat, 24 Feb 2001 10:36:20 -0800 Resent-Date: Sat, 24 Feb 2001 10:36:20 -0800 Message-Id: Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Date: Sat, 24 Feb 2001 09:46:37 -0900 To: vortex-l eskimo.com From: hheffner mtaonline.net (Horace Heffner) Subject: Re: Neutrons from Electron Impact? Resent-Message-ID: <"EhqSD1.0.mM4.Zy_bw" mx1> Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/40980 X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com Status: O X-Status: >From the Swartzchild metric and the assumption that the universe has a constant density rho we obtained: 2 (G/c^2) rho * r^2 < 1 If we further assume r to be known, say 17 billion light years (ly), then we can compute the maximum feasible density of the observable universe as: rho < 1/[2 (G/c^2) r^2] < 1/[2 ((7.425x10^-28 m/kg)/c^2) (17x10^9 ly)^2]) and using 1 ly = 9.4605x10^15 m: rho < 1/[2 (G/c^2) r^2] rho < 2.60368439x10^-26 kg/m^3 If that is true then there isn't much there on average. It' a mighty wispy universe. Regards, Horace Heffner From vortex-l-request eskimo.com Sat Feb 24 12:39:27 2001 Received: (from smartlst localhost) by mx1.eskimo.com (8.9.1a/8.8.8) id MAA05557; Sat, 24 Feb 2001 12:38:15 -0800 Resent-Date: Sat, 24 Feb 2001 12:38:15 -0800 Message-Id: Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Date: Sat, 24 Feb 2001 11:48:24 -0900 To: vortex-l eskimo.com From: hheffner mtaonline.net (Horace Heffner) Subject: Size of universe Resent-Message-ID: <"OImOa2.0.lM1.tk1cw" mx1> Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/40981 X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com Status: O X-Status: The following is meant to correct and summarize statements in the "Neutrons from Electron Impact?" thread. >From the Swartzchild metric the gravitational red shift, the relation of time between events at differing shells can be boiled down to: dt_shell = (1 - (2M/r))^(1/2) dt where dt is the time between events that occur at the same place on a shell (dr = d theta = 0) as observed by a distant observer and dt_shell is the time observed on a shell clock. M here is the mass in meters typically used in GR calcualtions, and is given in terms of gravitational mass m: M = (G/c^2) m = (7.425x10^-28 m/kg) m If the universe is sphericallly symmetrical, and density of mass throughout the universe is constant, and assuming mass outside the shell has no gravitational effect, then the mass m of the universe inside the shell in which we reside is: m = rho (4/3 Pi) r^3 so: M = (G/c^2) rho (4/3 Pi) r^3 dt_shell = (1 - (2 (G/c^2) rho (4/3 Pi) r^3/r))^(1/2) dt dt_shell = (1 - 2 (G/c^2) rho (4/3 Pi) r^2)^(1/2) dt so an observer on the outermost shell, looking inwards at the universe, will see an increasing red shift towards the center of the universe. If mass external to the shell of observation has no effect, then we should see a red shift when looking towards the center of the universe, but a reduced red shift when looking beyond it in a line through the center of the universe. If we are red shifted with respect to observers external to our shell, then they should be blue shifted with respect to us. Since we don't see this, either gravitational red shift can not account for the observed red shift, or the density of the universe is not uniform. It is interesting that the above formulation sets a limit to the size of the observable universe: 2 (G/c^2) rho (4/3 Pi) r^2 < 1 r < 1/[2 (G/c^2) rho (4/3 Pi)] If we further assume r to be known, say 17 billion light years (ly), then we can compute the maximum feasible density of the observable universe as: rho < 1/[2 (G/c^2) (4/3 Pi) r^2] < 1/[2 ((7.425x10^-28 m/kg)/c^2) (4/3 Pi) (17x10^9 ly)^2]) and using 1 ly = 9.4605x10^15 m: rho < 1/[2 (G/c^2) (4/3 Pi) r^2] rho < 6.2158x10^-27 kg/m^3 so we have a limit on the mass of the observable universe: m = rho (4/3 Pi r^3) m < 1.0831x10^53 kg and a Swartzchild radius Rs corresponding to a maximum m of: Rs = 2M = 2 (G/c^2) m Rs = 1.6083x10^26 m = 1.7x10^10 ly or 17 billion light years. Hope I got all that right. It should be noted that the r used above is the (relatiivistically) reduced r. Regards, Horace Heffner From vortex-l-request eskimo.com Sat Feb 24 13:04:30 2001 Received: (from smartlst localhost) by mx1.eskimo.com (8.9.1a/8.8.8) id NAA13493; Sat, 24 Feb 2001 13:01:12 -0800 Resent-Date: Sat, 24 Feb 2001 13:01:12 -0800 X-Sent: 24 Feb 2001 21:01:06 GMT From: "Peter Fred" To: Subject: An explanation for Peltier thermo-gravity experiments Date: Sat, 24 Feb 2001 15:57:13 -0500 Message-ID: <000601c09ea4$5ca95400$25476520 default> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-Priority: 3 (Normal) X-MSMail-Priority: Normal X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook 8.5, Build 4.71.2173.0 X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V5.50.4133.2400 Importance: Normal Resent-Message-ID: <"H0KTm3.0.gI3.O42cw" mx1> Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/40982 X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com Status: O X-Status: Scott Little wrote: "Normally I'd be terribly skeptical of such a claim but I've worked with Reiter before and he is a careful, thorough investigator. Since the effect reverses with polarity, my first guess would be a magnetic influence ....but apparently he can rearrange the leads pretty much at will and get the same effect AND he does not get the effect with a dummy resistive load! Does anybody have a hypothesis for a mundane explanation for this observation?" I like to think that results the Peltier effect thermo-gravity experiments are a confirmation of my heat-based gravity theory. It took me years to develop the theory and so its basic ideas may seem strange or unbelievable at first. Thus to understand the theory it is probably best to download my paper and take some time to study the theory which can be found at: http://pbfred.tripod.com/ I have gotten a ~3 % decrease in weight by making heat flow radially down into a 82-cm hollow aluminum hemisphere and a 0.4 % increase in weight by making heat flow radially up flow into a hollow copper hemisphere. These results are consistent with my theory whose basic idea is that gravitational force is a manifestation of the way heat flows in a radial direction in a sphere or cylinder. The textbooks do not emphasize enough that heat does not flow the same way in a sphere as it does in a slab. With a sphere, along a radius vector r, the unit area heat flux can be described to vary as q = Q/(4 pi r^2). (1) With a slab the heat flux can be described to vary by Fourier's law for heat transfer in a slab as q = kA dt/dx. (2) With Eq. (1) the heat flux varies inversely with the square of the distance r. With Eq. (2) the amount of heat flux does not vary with distance but remains the same throughout the length x of the slab. It is this contradiction between Eq. (1) and Eq. (2) that I base my theory on. I claim that it is the gravitational force that sees to it that the unit area heat flux varies inversely as r^2 as described by Eq. (1). We know that if the earth were of uniform density the gravitational force inside the earth would vary as F = -k'r. (3) This is just the right variation with distance that would cause the unit area heat flux to decrease as described by Eq. (1). This is why I call my theory the Thermal Resistance theory -- the gravitational force supplies the necessary thermal resistance so that the unit area heat flux will vary as described by Eq. (1). I have hounded Nick for several years now about my theory and I hope that this hounding has somehow inspired him to go out and weigh the Peltier device and get the results that he has gotten. I hope also someone is aware that the mass-based gravitational theories of Newton and Einstein are in trouble because some in astronomy are to serious doubt the dark matter concept. See http://xxx.lanl.gov/abs/astro-ph/0009074 http://xxx.lanl.gov/abs/astro-ph/0008188 http://xxx.lanl.gov/abs/astro-ph/0102082 If there is no dark matter, than the mass-based gravity theories can no longer predict beyond the solar system. But a heat-based theory should no trouble because it can use the easily-observed, ubiquitous star light and not the hard-to-detect, questionable dark matter. Peter B. Fred From vortex-l-request eskimo.com Sat Feb 24 14:07:23 2001 Received: (from smartlst localhost) by mx1.eskimo.com (8.9.1a/8.8.8) id NAA05488; Sat, 24 Feb 2001 13:57:29 -0800 Resent-Date: Sat, 24 Feb 2001 13:57:29 -0800 Message-ID: <008601c09eac$4eb62fa0$62584118 mtwh1.on.wave.home.com> From: "Colin Quinney" To: References: <001c01c09bbf$a23958e0$46d9323f computer> Subject: Re: replication of Peltier force xducer Date: Sat, 24 Feb 2001 16:54:05 -0500 MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-Priority: 3 X-MSMail-Priority: Normal X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook Express 5.50.4522.1200 X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V5.50.4522.1200 Resent-Message-ID: <"IAAbY.0.cL1.9v2cw" mx1> Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/40983 X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com Status: O X-Status: Hi Fred, Right. 20 Kw/ kilogram force. That is correct. :-) That results of that excellent experiment (at the time, I enjoyed calling it the "Sparber Thruster" :-) ..and the theory that you developed, indicated to you that there may very well be an *easily* replicated and measurable net unidirectional force, and you did encourage me to attempt it. Unfortunately, I couldn't keep the carbonized paint to remain on the face of an infrared heat lamp. It stuck to the glass ok but kept bubbling-up-- and as you said, layering on the paint like that and reheating with sequential carbonized layers takes some patience and practice. It's a bit tricky. I used two kinds of black paint and managed to break 2 heat lamps before I finally gave it up :-( You suggested that I place the experiment within a vacuum chamber to eliminate convection. What I need to know; is that the only reason for placing it in a vacuum chamber? I suggested a variation of the experiment-- placing the apparatus within a tight, well insulated box instead of a vacuum chamber. My reasoning was that since heat flow through carbon itself is rather slow, this means that there must be an interval of time where it will not yet have reached the opposite side of the carbon lattice. If the thrust action is occurring from 'within' the lattice itself, then during that heat-flow interval, the system would still be CLOSED and not yet OPEN, since it has *not yet* started to radiate from the cold side. Can that be correct? I am sorry to say that still don't understand the theory of it in spite of your BEST and patient efforts to educate me in that account, and that's simply because my level of basic physics understanding is not sufficient enough to grasp the main idea. All that I am suggesting here though, is that a vacuum chamber may not be immediately necessary to verify the effect if the thrust measurements are done quickly enough. Another reason I might suggest for not utilizing a vacuum chamber (right off the top) is that many of us may be interested in replicating this experiment if it is a bit less complex. Semi-Vorts like myself who occasionally are monitoring (lurking) we don't have labs or vacuum chambers etc., but many of us still enjoy having a go at an occasionally interesting experiment such as this one could turn out to be. If you are correct, the marvellous possibilities resulting from it do not need to be emphasized. You previously indicated that there is a thrusting action occurring, and this also in the correct direction. This was enough for me.. and for you to encourage me to replicate it, (although you very pointedly reminded me that it could very well be from warm air convection currents, and therefore must be done in a vacuum). You suggested also, a certain type of carbon block, cut to fit securely and tightly against a very high wattage bulb. Perhaps a black paint could be used as glue? Once heated, the paint will carbonize and hopefully secure the carbon block's lattice integrity tightly to the glass. I suggested using "heating element wire" such as is used in appliances, like nichrome, and combining this with a light-weight heat reflector. This hopefully might increase the amount of infrared power that can be delivered per unit weight, compared to the weight of a heating lamp. As a result, the effect then may be more noticeable. You had some concerns though, about the nichrome wire burning out quickly when appropriate power is applied (if not in vacuum). Hopefully though, the experiment will have been concluded prior to burn out. Hopefully also, any heat sink properties of the carbon lattice may slow that down. Best Regards, Colin Quinney :-) ----- Original Message ----- From: "Frederick Sparber" To: Sent: Tuesday, February 20, 2001 11:33 PM Subject: replication of Peltier force xducer > > Based on an experiment I did using an infrared heat lamp with a coating > of carbon-based paint on the lamp face, I maintain that unidirectional heat > flow > through a solid at a given delta-T is a Carnot Limited Engine with > efficiency = (Th-Tc)/Th or 1-(Tc/Th). > > This IS NOT a Closed System if the heat can be radiated from the > cold side in a vacuum-space. > > At the time, I calculated about 20 Kw/ kilogram force. > > Right Colin? :-) > > Regards, Frederick > > > > From vortex-l-request eskimo.com Sat Feb 24 14:26:58 2001 Received: (from smartlst localhost) by mx1.eskimo.com (8.9.1a/8.8.8) id OAA18450; Sat, 24 Feb 2001 14:25:16 -0800 Resent-Date: Sat, 24 Feb 2001 14:25:16 -0800 Message-ID: <020401c09eb1$5ab3b2a0$c3c01d18 pestilence.ce.mediaone.net> From: "Scott Stephens" To: Subject: Re: Calculating the thrust from a heat pump Date: Sat, 24 Feb 2001 16:30:12 -0600 MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-Priority: 3 X-MSMail-Priority: Normal X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook Express 4.72.3155.0 X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V4.72.3155.0 Resent-Message-ID: <"2-7pA3.0.AW4.BJ3cw" mx1> Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/40985 X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com Status: O X-Status: From: Robin van Spaandonk >OTOH heat radiated from the hot side will be greater than heat radiated from >the cold side, so there would be a net momentum transfer, but I suspect this >would be too small to be of interest. What about the heat sucked from the cold side and pushed from the hot side, from the air and copper leads? The junction the current is producing the thermal gradient across would experience a force just like a fan spinning in a fluid. Isn't that the origin of the term 'caloric' - a thermal fluid? Scott **************************************************************************** Freedom is pursuing your carrot, not running from somebody's stick Does society make you enthusiastic, or fearful? The mob rules only what its members achieve. **************************************************************************** From vortex-l-request eskimo.com Sat Feb 24 14:26:59 2001 Received: (from smartlst localhost) by mx1.eskimo.com (8.9.1a/8.8.8) id OAA18364; Sat, 24 Feb 2001 14:25:08 -0800 Resent-Date: Sat, 24 Feb 2001 14:25:08 -0800 Message-ID: <020101c09eb1$5469e540$c3c01d18 pestilence.ce.mediaone.net> From: "Scott Stephens" To: Subject: Re: Calculating the thrust from a heat pump Date: Sat, 24 Feb 2001 16:30:01 -0600 MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-Priority: 3 X-MSMail-Priority: Normal X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook Express 4.72.3155.0 X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V4.72.3155.0 Resent-Message-ID: <"uMWz_1.0.oU4.3J3cw" mx1> Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/40984 X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com Status: O X-Status: From: Horace Heffner >At 12:28 PM 2/23/1, Scott Stephens wrote: >>Since F= d(mv)/dt Newtons 2nd law >> >>and KE=1/2 (mv^2) Kinetic Energy >> >>then KE= 1/2 (mv)(mv)/m Solving for Force in terms of kinetic energy and >>mass (m) > >The next step appears to invalid. I wanted to use the 67 degree temperature drop, but not knowing the other specs for the Peltier, I just decided to quickly guess at the performance. > You have to keep in mind that F and v >are vectors. It appears that you are trying to obtain a vector, the >momentum mv, from a scalar (KE). There is no net direction to the momentum >in heat. But there is if heat is flowing in a direction! Heat is a form of ultrasound (phonons) that are absorbed and re-radiated as it slowly diffuses. > To show existence of a force, using Newton's laws, a mass must be >accelerated. OK > Since no mass changes location, on average, i.e. the center >of mass remains constant, there is no net momentum applied to the system. The asymmetrical change in momentum across the gradient results in thrust! It is the reaction to the momentum carried away by the phonons. Phonons which the current cause to flow in a net direction from cold to hot. Scott **************************************************************************** Freedom is pursuing your carrot, not running from somebody's stick Does society make you enthusiastic, or fearful? The mob rules only what its members achieve. **************************************************************************** From vortex-l-request eskimo.com Sat Feb 24 14:32:26 2001 Received: (from smartlst localhost) by mx1.eskimo.com (8.9.1a/8.8.8) id OAA20980; Sat, 24 Feb 2001 14:29:11 -0800 Resent-Date: Sat, 24 Feb 2001 14:29:11 -0800 From: Robin van Spaandonk To: vortex-l eskimo.com Subject: Re: Size of universe Date: Sun, 25 Feb 2001 09:29:04 +1100 Organization: Improving Message-ID: <9ecg9tcp7fofmjgnc0o2q4d2nedeqmt4ui 4ax.com> References: In-Reply-To: X-Mailer: Forte Agent 1.8/32.548 MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit X-MIME-Autoconverted: from quoted-printable to 8bit by mx1.eskimo.com id OAA20935 Resent-Message-ID: <"7jKl51.0.k75.sM3cw" mx1> Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/40986 X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com Status: O X-Status: In reply to Horace Heffner's message of Sat, 24 Feb 2001 11:48:24 -0900: [snip] >universe. If we are red shifted with respect to observers external to our >shell, then they should be blue shifted with respect to us. Since we don't Or at least less red shifted if gravitational red shift is only part of the cause of red shift. >see this, either gravitational red shift can not account for the observed >red shift, or the density of the universe is not uniform. [snip] My previous post on this topic clearly needs a little further explanation. In your post prior to my prior post, you introduced the concept of particle mass equivalence with gravitational energy. In my post, I took that one step further, assuming that the mass of the resultant particle would depend on exactly how far from the centre of the universe the particle was created. The next logical step was to assume that particles at any given radius actually do have such masses. I.e. that the mass of subatomic particles depends on their distance from the centre of the universe. Since electrons form a subset thereof, they too would then have masses which vary with radial distance. Since radiation frequencies depend a.o. on electron mass (from the kinetic energy of the electron), radiation frequencies would therefore also vary with radial distance. I don't think this is the same thing as gravitational red shift, though perhaps that's just because I haven't thought it through far enough. Regards, Robin van Spaandonk A Future For Humanity see: http://users.bigpond.net.au/rvanspaa/ From vortex-l-request eskimo.com Sat Feb 24 14:47:40 2001 Received: (from smartlst localhost) by mx1.eskimo.com (8.9.1a/8.8.8) id OAA28757; Sat, 24 Feb 2001 14:43:19 -0800 Resent-Date: Sat, 24 Feb 2001 14:43:19 -0800 Message-ID: <3A982B7A.6219546E ix.netcom.com> Date: Sat, 24 Feb 2001 15:46:02 -0600 From: Edmund Storms X-Mailer: Mozilla 4.5 (Macintosh; U; PPC) X-Accept-Language: en,pdf MIME-Version: 1.0 To: vortex-l eskimo.com Subject: New work on cold fusion Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii; x-mac-type="54455854"; x-mac-creator="4D4F5353" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Resent-Message-ID: <"PkMR42.0.C17.6a3cw" mx1> Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/40987 X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com Status: RO X-Status: To all persons interested in cold fusion: I have just down loaded on my website (http://home.netcom.com/~storms2/index.html) a paper that will be presented at the APS meeting in March. In it, I describe experiments using a novel way to create conditions that generate excess energy using the Pons-Fleischmann method. In additions, this anomalous energy has been detected in two different and independent calorimeters. I would welcome any comments, criticisms or ideas about the work, the paper or the conclusions. Please take your best shot. The more challenges I can answer, the better the work will become. Regards, Ed Storms From vortex-l-request eskimo.com Sat Feb 24 15:56:12 2001 Received: (from smartlst localhost) by mx1.eskimo.com (8.9.1a/8.8.8) id PAA26120; Sat, 24 Feb 2001 15:53:49 -0800 Resent-Date: Sat, 24 Feb 2001 15:53:49 -0800 Message-ID: <000001c09eb4$b12b9820$09d5323f computer> From: "Frederick Sparber" To: References: <001c01c09bbf$a23958e0$46d9323f computer> <008601c09eac$4eb62fa0$62584118@mtwh1.on.wave.home.com> Subject: Re: replication of Peltier force xducer Date: Sat, 24 Feb 2001 16:51:53 -0600 MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-Priority: 3 X-MSMail-Priority: Normal X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook Express 5.50.4133.2400 X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V5.50.4133.2400 Resent-Message-ID: <"y_7np3.0.vN6.Cc4cw" mx1> Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/40988 X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com Status: O X-Status: ----- Original Message ----- From: "Colin Quinney" To: Sent: Saturday, February 24, 2001 3:54 PM Subject: Re: replication of Peltier force xducer Colin Quinney wrote: >Hi Fred > You suggested that I place the experiment within a vacuum chamber to > eliminate convection. What I need to know; is that the only reason for > placing it in a vacuum chamber? Yup. With a temperature gradient between the two faces, you can't get away from developing a pressure difference thus a force on the unit, even if it is only a few hundred gas atoms thick. This is called the beta layer. > > I suggested a variation of the experiment-- placing the apparatus within a > tight, well insulated box instead of a vacuum chamber. My reasoning was that > since heat flow through carbon itself is rather slow, this means that there > must be an interval of time where it will not yet have reached the opposite > side of the carbon lattice. If the thrust action is occurring from 'within' > the lattice itself, then during that heat-flow interval, the system would > still be CLOSED and not yet OPEN, since it has *not yet* started to radiate > from the cold side. Can that be correct? I am sorry to say that still don't > understand the theory of it in spite of your BEST and patient efforts to > educate me in that account, and that's simply because my level of basic > physics understanding is not sufficient enough to grasp the main idea. All > that I am suggesting here though, is that a vacuum chamber may not be > immediately necessary to verify the effect if the thrust measurements are > done quickly enough. Only a good vacuum, well below the 100 millitorr that the Crookes Radiometer is optimized at would be an honest test. > > You suggested also, a certain type of carbon block, cut to fit securely and > tightly against a very high wattage bulb. Perhaps a black paint could be > used as glue? Once heated, the paint will carbonize and hopefully secure the > carbon block's lattice integrity tightly to the glass. There are sources of graphite fibre "paper". > > I suggested using "heating element wire" such as is used in appliances, like > nichrome, and combining this with a light-weight heat reflector. This > hopefully might increase the amount of infrared power that can be delivered > per unit weight, compared to the weight of a heating lamp. As a result, the > effect then may be more noticeable. You had some concerns though, about the > nichrome wire burning out quickly when appropriate power is applied (if not > in vacuum). Hopefully though, the experiment will have been concluded prior > to burn out. Hopefully also, any heat sink properties of the carbon lattice > may slow that down. The best bets are the off-the-shelf, inexpensive ~ 150 watt heat lamps. Regards, Frederick > > Best Regards, > Colin Quinney :-) From vortex-l-request eskimo.com Sat Feb 24 16:08:38 2001 Received: (from smartlst localhost) by mx1.eskimo.com (8.9.1a/8.8.8) id QAA31857; Sat, 24 Feb 2001 16:07:31 -0800 Resent-Date: Sat, 24 Feb 2001 16:07:31 -0800 Message-ID: <002001c09ebe$31780d20$573dee3f default> From: "Nick Reiter" To: Subject: Moving here from Freenrg - Nick Reiter Date: Sat, 24 Feb 2001 19:02:05 -0500 MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary="----=_NextPart_000_001D_01C09E94.4730C1E0" X-Priority: 3 X-MSMail-Priority: Normal X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook Express 5.00.2919.6600 X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V5.00.2919.6600 Resent-Message-ID: <"Ow5r42.0.hn7.2p4cw" mx1> Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/40989 X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com Status: O X-Status: This is a multi-part message in MIME format. ------=_NextPart_000_001D_01C09E94.4730C1E0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1" Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable This seems to be the hotbed of action these days, what with the Peltier = weight change efffect, etc. Rather than stay on another list and beg = good folk like Rick M. to translate messages over here, I shall set up = camp here myself. Hope I can bring lots to the party. NR ------=_NextPart_000_001D_01C09E94.4730C1E0 Content-Type: text/html; charset="iso-8859-1" Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
This seems to be the hotbed of action = these days,=20 what with the Peltier weight change efffect, etc.  Rather than stay = on=20 another list and beg good folk like Rick M. to translate messages over = here, I=20 shall set up camp here myself.  Hope I can bring lots to the=20 party.
 
NR
------=_NextPart_000_001D_01C09E94.4730C1E0-- From vortex-l-request eskimo.com Sat Feb 24 17:41:26 2001 Received: (from smartlst localhost) by mx1.eskimo.com (8.9.1a/8.8.8) id RAA03761; Sat, 24 Feb 2001 17:38:18 -0800 Resent-Date: Sat, 24 Feb 2001 17:38:18 -0800 From: Robin van Spaandonk To: vortex-l eskimo.com Subject: Re: Calculating the thrust from a heat pump Date: Sun, 25 Feb 2001 12:37:37 +1100 Organization: Improving Message-ID: References: <020401c09eb1$5ab3b2a0$c3c01d18 pestilence.ce.mediaone.net> In-Reply-To: <020401c09eb1$5ab3b2a0$c3c01d18 pestilence.ce.mediaone.net> X-Mailer: Forte Agent 1.8/32.548 MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit X-MIME-Autoconverted: from quoted-printable to 8bit by mx1.eskimo.com id RAA03641 Resent-Message-ID: <"eB35V2.0.Zw.886cw" mx1> Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/40990 X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com Status: O X-Status: In reply to Scott Stephens's message of Sat, 24 Feb 2001 16:30:12 -0600: >From: Robin van Spaandonk > >>OTOH heat radiated from the hot side will be greater than heat radiated >from >>the cold side, so there would be a net momentum transfer, but I suspect >this >>would be too small to be of interest. > >What about the heat sucked from the cold side and pushed from the >hot side, from the air and copper leads? The junction the current is >producing the thermal gradient across would experience a force just like a >fan spinning in a fluid. Isn't that the origin of the term 'caloric' - a >thermal fluid? It is the photons radiating from the sides that I was referring to. However I suspect you are referring to something internal within the junction. I suspect however that for every action within the junction there is an equal and opposite reaction, resulting in no net force. In order to achieve a net force on the object as a whole, one would need to react against space itself, which implies an unusual "connection" somewhere within the device. [snip] Regards, Robin van Spaandonk A Future For Humanity see: http://users.bigpond.net.au/rvanspaa/ From vortex-l-request eskimo.com Sat Feb 24 20:27:59 2001 Received: (from smartlst localhost) by mx1.eskimo.com (8.9.1a/8.8.8) id UAA32304; Sat, 24 Feb 2001 20:26:02 -0800 Resent-Date: Sat, 24 Feb 2001 20:26:02 -0800 Message-ID: <20010225042556.6694.qmail web2104.mail.yahoo.com> Date: Sat, 24 Feb 2001 20:25:56 -0800 (PST) From: Michael Schaffer Subject: Re: Calculating the thrust from a heat pump To: vortex-l eskimo.com In-Reply-To: <000c01c09dc6$b0c28f40$c3c01d18 pestilence.ce.mediaone.net> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Resent-Message-ID: <"DiVVJ1.0.gu7.Pb8cw" mx1> Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/40991 X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com Status: O X-Status: Scott Stephens wrote: > Since F= d(mv)/dt Newtons 2nd law > > and KE=1/2 (mv^2) Kinetic Energy > > then KE= 1/2 (mv)(mv)/m Solving for Force in terms of kinetic energy and > mass (m) > > (mv)= (2m KE)^1/2 > > so F= d (2m KE)^1/2 / dt > > Therefore, it seems a 15 Joule, (watt/second) 1 gram perfect Peltier should > produce 173mN or 17 grams of thrust, as long as it can pump those calories > from a source to a sink. I assumed the 2.3 x 2.3 x.3 cm Peltier has the heat > capacity and density of water (which I know it doesn't). If the efficiency > is 1%, my figure of 170 milligrams is still 30 times more than the measured > 5 mg. Scott's equations at the top os his post are correct only for one-dimensional motion. To use F= d (2m KE)^1/2 / dt when the kinetic energy KE is the sum of randomly directed velocities, as with the microscopic motion of atoms, electrons and molecules summarized macroscopically as temperature, is an error. ===== Michael J. Schaffer __________________________________________________ Do You Yahoo!? Get email at your own domain with Yahoo! Mail. http://personal.mail.yahoo.com/ From vortex-l-request eskimo.com Sat Feb 24 21:16:42 2001 Received: (from smartlst localhost) by mx1.eskimo.com (8.9.1a/8.8.8) id VAA13850; Sat, 24 Feb 2001 21:14:05 -0800 Resent-Date: Sat, 24 Feb 2001 21:14:05 -0800 X-Apparently-From: Message-Id: <4.2.0.58.20010224232500.00b85940 postoffice.swbell.net> X-Sender: cjford1 pop.mail.yahoo.com X-Mailer: QUALCOMM Windows Eudora Pro Version 4.2.0.58 Date: Sat, 24 Feb 2001 23:25:07 -0600 To: vortex-l eskimo.com From: Charles Ford Subject: Re: [FG]: Peltier Effect thermo-gravity experiments Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"; format=flowed Resent-Message-ID: <"MeIYu3.0.FO3.TI9cw" mx1> Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/40992 X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com Status: O X-Status: Sitting in my lab watching a Pelter chip hanging from a string scoot over a millimeter or so.. It occurred to me that this effect may not be thermal but strictly electromagnetic or some subatomic effect in the P or N material that is used. The chip does not seem to take up movement instantly upon application of the current. There is some set up time. An electrical subatomic or electromagnetic should react instantly. A quick easy experiment. If I modulate the current with an audio frequency or even use AC there should be an audible tone. I tuned my scanner in to 162550 KHz (our local NOAA Weather radio) plugged it up to the chip and gave it a listen. Nothing. No sound. Not even a peep. Next step is to pump up the power. The particular chip I am using pulls down about 3A when 5V is applied I figured this was pretty close to two ohms and I could tolerate about 15W. At 15W there was still no sound. just a hot chip. A somewhat unverified conclusion at this time is that this effect is strictly thermal. Even if it was a connecting lead problem my leads should have made some sound. _________________________________________________________ Do You Yahoo!? Get your free yahoo.com address at http://mail.yahoo.com From vortex-l-request eskimo.com Sun Feb 25 00:58:50 2001 Received: (from smartlst localhost) by mx1.eskimo.com (8.9.1a/8.8.8) id AAA16227; Sun, 25 Feb 2001 00:58:07 -0800 Resent-Date: Sun, 25 Feb 2001 00:58:07 -0800 Mime-Version: 1.0 X-Sender: rick mail.highsurf.com Message-Id: In-Reply-To: <4.2.0.58.20010224232500.00b85940 postoffice.swbell.net> References: <4.2.0.58.20010224232500.00b85940 postoffice.swbell.net> Date: Sat, 24 Feb 2001 22:58:01 -1000 To: vortex-l eskimo.com From: Rick Monteverde Subject: Re: [FG]: Peltier Effect thermo-gravity experiments Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" ; format="flowed" Resent-Message-ID: <"xVVhf1.0.Tz3.UaCcw" mx1> Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/40993 X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com Status: O X-Status: Charles - >A somewhat unverified conclusion at this time is that this effect is >strictly thermal. If it's thermal only, what do you think might happen if two copper slugs were clamped together where one was previously iced and the other was heated? IOW, is it any heat flow, or only heat flow when it's backwards: cold to hot? A third possibility is that hot and cold objects close together (maybe even if insulated from one another) catch thrust from some sort of external differential. - Rick Monteverde Honolulu, HI From vortex-l-request eskimo.com Sun Feb 25 04:47:28 2001 Received: (from smartlst localhost) by mx1.eskimo.com (8.9.1a/8.8.8) id EAA13432; Sun, 25 Feb 2001 04:46:45 -0800 Resent-Date: Sun, 25 Feb 2001 04:46:45 -0800 Message-ID: <001701c09f28$3cc31520$c23dee3f default> From: "Nick Reiter" To: Cc: "Lori Lou Schillig" , "Bruce Reiter" References: <4.2.0.58.20010224232500.00b85940 postoffice.swbell.net> Subject: Re: [FG]: Peltier Effect thermo-gravity experiments Date: Sun, 25 Feb 2001 07:40:06 -0500 MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-Priority: 3 X-MSMail-Priority: Normal X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook Express 5.00.2919.6600 X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V5.00.2919.6600 Resent-Message-ID: <"4F9pn3.0.jH3.rwFcw" mx1> Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/40994 X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com Status: O X-Status: Well now isn't that interesting! Thanks Charlie, for setting up such an experiment. Very interesting result. You may want to next make a little aluminum foil thermal shunting envelope for the Peltier, and pinch it around it to allow a constant flow of heat, or at least a few more seconds before she becomes terminally swamped at higher current. If you still get a deflection, then the next step is to glue some little discs or squares of foam rubber to the surfaces of the envelope. At that point, when you have a consistent effect, you might wish to confirm the direction versus polarity. As I had also seen, the effect is not immediate, but evolves over a half second to a couple of seconds. A torque with the geomagnetic or ambient magnetic environment would be a little quicker, one would think, depending on your mass. Also keep in mind that the Peltier chip is as delightfully non-inductive a device as you could hope! The current path through the P and N bismuth telluride blocks is both up-and down serpentine AND side to side (rows) serpentine! I also gather that the transfer of heat / phonons by the charge carriers is not immediate either. Some of the tech information on Peltier chips says that applying high frequency pulses does nothing useful, because the heat tranfer effect requires a longer ramp or influence time. I think many folks would equate a Peltier junction to a diode because it has both N and P materials. However, it is more like an incredibly shunted, very very SLOW diode, made with very conductive degenerate semiconductors. Whole different mechanism I am beginning to fancy. Thanks again for your efforts; NR ----- Original Message ----- From: "Charles Ford" To: Sent: Sunday, February 25, 2001 12:25 AM Subject: Re: [FG]: Peltier Effect thermo-gravity experiments > Sitting in my lab watching a Pelter chip hanging from a string scoot over a > millimeter or so.. > > It occurred to me that this effect may not be thermal but strictly > electromagnetic or some subatomic effect in the P or N material that is > used. The chip does not seem to take up movement instantly upon > application of the current. There is some set up time. An electrical > subatomic or electromagnetic should react instantly. > > A quick easy experiment. If I modulate the current with an audio frequency > or even use AC there should be an audible tone. I tuned my scanner in to > 162550 KHz (our local NOAA Weather radio) plugged it up to the chip and > gave it a listen. > > Nothing. > > No sound. > > Not even a peep. > > Next step is to pump up the power. The particular chip I am using pulls > down about 3A when 5V is applied I figured this was pretty close to two > ohms and I could tolerate about 15W. At 15W there was still no sound. > just a hot chip. > > A somewhat unverified conclusion at this time is that this effect is > strictly thermal. > Even if it was a connecting lead problem my leads should have made some sound. > > > _________________________________________________________ > Do You Yahoo!? > Get your free yahoo.com address at http://mail.yahoo.com > > From vortex-l-request eskimo.com Sun Feb 25 07:42:37 2001 Received: (from smartlst localhost) by mx1.eskimo.com (8.9.1a/8.8.8) id HAA23586; Sun, 25 Feb 2001 07:40:57 -0800 Resent-Date: Sun, 25 Feb 2001 07:40:57 -0800 Message-Id: Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Date: Sun, 25 Feb 2001 06:51:13 -0900 To: vortex-l eskimo.com From: hheffner mtaonline.net (Horace Heffner) Subject: Re: Calculating the thrust from a heat pump Resent-Message-ID: <"71s231.0.Rm5.8UIcw" mx1> Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/40995 X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com Status: O X-Status: At 4:30 PM 2/24/1, Scott Stephens wrote: >From: Horace Heffner > >>At 12:28 PM 2/23/1, Scott Stephens wrote: >>>Since F= d(mv)/dt Newtons 2nd law >>> >>>and KE=1/2 (mv^2) Kinetic Energy >>> >>>then KE= 1/2 (mv)(mv)/m Solving for Force in terms of kinetic energy >and >>>mass (m) >> >>The next step appears to invalid. > >I wanted to use the 67 degree temperature drop, but not knowing the other >specs for the Peltier, I just decided to quickly guess at the performance. The above equations are valid if your multiplication is assumed to be a dot product or scalar product as required. This is a three dimensional problem, because heat involves 3 dimensional motion. The problem comes in trying to figure out how much linear momentum is extracted at the hot/cold boundary when the particles hit the boundary from all different directions, and vice versa. You can't go from an energy, which is a scalar value, to a three dimensional vector without some further information and manipulation. > >> You have to keep in mind that F and v >>are vectors. It appears that you are trying to obtain a vector, the >>momentum mv, from a scalar (KE). There is no net direction to the momentum >>in heat. > >But there is if heat is flowing in a direction! Heat is a form of ultrasound >(phonons) that are absorbed and re-radiated as it slowly diffuses. Yes, this is correct. However, you can't apply a one dimensional analysis to obtain the momentum transfer at the boundary without forther information. > > >> To show existence of a force, using Newton's laws, a mass must be >>accelerated. > >OK > >> Since no mass changes location, on average, i.e. the center >>of mass remains constant, there is no net momentum applied to the system. > >The asymmetrical change in momentum across the gradient >results in thrust! Yes, that is correct. However, if you are to make a space drive you have to look at the system as a whole. Momentum is preserved at every step. Note, however, this is not the case with the Peltier device in air. The hot side ejects (reflects) air molecues faster than when they hit, on average, and the cool side ejects colliding molecules slower on average than they arrived. Since the air is external to the scale/peltier system, a net thrust develops. I think you are on the right track to explaining the Peltier experimental results with this approach, it is just a matter of getting the quantities right. >It is the reaction to the momentum carried away by the >phonons. Phonons which the current cause to flow in a net direction from >cold to hot. Yes, the phonons carry the momentum to the next boundary or thermal gradient, but they also carry it sideways to side boundaries. Phonons are just another form of a gas when it comes to mementum. What you are saying is true, it is just a question of how to calculate the circulating momentum. Also, sooner or later the direction of momentum travel comes to an end or goes full circle and the system reaches equilibrium and/or radiation occurs. Actually radiation always occurs, but for some systems more occurs in one direction than another. The momentum carried away by radiation is very small, on the order of E/c (exactly E/c if unidirectional light,) where E is the energy radiated and c is the speed of light. When the thermal interface is particle-particle lots of momentum is exchanged, as you intuit. However, particle-particle exchange is necessarily closed ciruit. In a closed system, sooner or later the momentum exchange closes the circle and all motion, other than the random motion associated with heat, stops. The forces summed over all the thermal boundaries or gradients is zero. That is because the sum of temperatures around any closed loop is zero. Therefore the momentum exchange sums to zero. However, when the process first starts, there can result motion. An analagous situation is that, if you are in a closed box on a frictionless plane, you can cause the box to move by moving form one end of the box to the other. You can not, however, cause the center of gravity of the box to move. If you come to a boundary where radiation must occur to transfer the momentum, then the momentum is only released very gradually due to the onerous E/c requirement. The rest is reflected off the boundary by phonon reflection. Heat builds up until the energy flow can meet the E/c requirement, thus producing very little thrust for the energy expended. Well, now to get back to your problem of estimating the momentum transfer. The root-mean-squared speed v_rms of molcules in a gas at temperature T is given as: (1/2) m (v_rms)^2 = (3/2) k T where k is Boltzman's constant (1.380658x10^-23 J/(deg. k)), m is the mass of gas molecule and v is the root-mean-squared speed. However, the rms speed is divided equally over 3 dimensions, so the single dimensional value is given by: (1/2) m (v_rms_x)^2 = (1/2) k T v_rms_x = (k T/m)^(1/2) If we assume the temperature incoming to be T1 and on rebound to be T2 then: deltav = (k T1/m)^(1/2) - (k T2/m)^(1/2) and the one dimensional momentum transfer to be estimated by: m delatv = m (k T1/m)^(1/2) - (k T2/m)^(1/2) so the absolute temperatures in deg. Kelvin, not just the delta T, are important to know. From the above I would guess the force on the Peltier surface in air can be estimated, knowing the ambient pressure P, and Peltier surface area A, by: F = A * P * [(T1)^(1/2) - T2(1/2)]/(T1)^(1/2) = A * P * [ 1 - (T1/T2)^(1/2) ] Sorry, but I don't have time right now to work it all out in detail. Regards, Horace Heffner From vortex-l-request eskimo.com Sun Feb 25 08:01:59 2001 Received: (from smartlst localhost) by mx1.eskimo.com (8.9.1a/8.8.8) id HAA00454; Sun, 25 Feb 2001 07:59:21 -0800 Resent-Date: Sun, 25 Feb 2001 07:59:21 -0800 Message-ID: <008e01c09f3b$95a0bcc0$09d5323f computer> From: "Frederick Sparber" To: Subject: Re: A Poor Man's Vacuum Chamber? Date: Sun, 25 Feb 2001 08:58:38 -0600 MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-Priority: 3 X-MSMail-Priority: Normal X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook Express 5.50.4133.2400 X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V5.50.4133.2400 Resent-Message-ID: <"xxRhD.0._6.OlIcw" mx1> Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/40996 X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com Status: O X-Status: If one uses a metal can, strong enough to withstand the externally applied ~14.7 psi atmospheric pressure it can be filled with a small amount of water and heated so that the steam will expell the atmospheric gases and be full of steam at atmospheric pressure at whatever temperature it is heated at. When cooled to ambient or subfreezing temperature it will be at a fairly decent vacuum in the millitorr range. An acetone-dry ice temperature should do nicely. Regards, Frederick From vortex-l-request eskimo.com Sun Feb 25 08:13:03 2001 Received: (from smartlst localhost) by mx1.eskimo.com (8.9.1a/8.8.8) id IAA06236; Sun, 25 Feb 2001 08:11:34 -0800 Resent-Date: Sun, 25 Feb 2001 08:11:34 -0800 Message-ID: <3A995937.1BE3 bellsouth.net> Date: Sun, 25 Feb 2001 11:12:55 -0800 From: Terry Blanton X-Mailer: Mozilla 3.01C-BLS20 (Win16; U) MIME-Version: 1.0 To: vortex-l eskimo.com Subject: Re: [FG]: Peltier Effect thermo-gravity experiments References: <4.2.0.58.20010224232500.00b85940 postoffice.swbell.net> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Resent-Message-ID: <"kpFGq1.0.MX1.swIcw" mx1> Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/40997 X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com Status: O X-Status: Charles Ford wrote: > A quick easy experiment. If I modulate the current with an audio frequency > or even use AC there should be an audible tone. I tuned my scanner in to > 162550 KHz (our local NOAA Weather radio) plugged it up to the chip and > gave it a listen. > > Nothing. AC won't work. Don't forget about the Seebeck effect! Terry From vortex-l-request eskimo.com Sun Feb 25 08:16:24 2001 Received: (from smartlst localhost) by mx1.eskimo.com (8.9.1a/8.8.8) id IAA07428; Sun, 25 Feb 2001 08:14:16 -0800 Resent-Date: Sun, 25 Feb 2001 08:14:16 -0800 Message-ID: <013e01c09ee5$171ab6e0$62584118 mtwh1.on.wave.home.com> From: "Colin Quinney" To: Cc: References: <018e01c09e4f$eeae9e00$e4d4323f computer> Subject: Re: Quartz Plate Thruster? Date: Sat, 24 Feb 2001 23:40:33 -0500 MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-Priority: 3 X-MSMail-Priority: Normal X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook Express 5.50.4522.1200 X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V5.50.4522.1200 Resent-Message-ID: <"yo3Sa1.0.sp1.NzIcw" mx1> Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/40998 X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com Status: O X-Status: Fred, Thank you very much for sharing that. So you did variations of this experiment and you used Nichrome? This is simply amazing stuff Fred. I find it fascinating that you got almost the exact same results years later with the S- Thruster ~ 20 Kw/kg thrust. What purpose does the quartz serve and why that particular thickness? Best Regards, Colin Quinney ----- Original Message ----- From: "Frederick Sparber" To: Cc: Sent: Saturday, February 24, 2001 5:51 AM Subject: Re: Quartz Plate Thruster? > Another iteration, Colin. > > Put a ~ 1.0 ohm coating of Nichrome on one side of a 10 cm square by 0.3 cm > thick > quartz plate and a coating of carbon black/graphite on the opposite side. > Then take another quartz reflector plate of the same size and put a coating > of silver > (or aluminum) on it and lay it over the Nichrome side of the first plate > with > the reflective coating facing out. > > With a 12 volt 12 ampere power supply connected to the Nichrome layer > you should develop ~ 144 watts, thus ~ 14,400 watts/meter^2. > > Then the blackened surface should radiate the most of the 144 watts > when at a temperature of ~ 710 deg Kelvin (~ 437 deg C). > > Assuming a delta T of 100 degrees, the Carnot efficiency (Th - Tc)/Th > (810 - 710)/810 = 12%. > > If some of the heat energy exerts a thrust on the device (in vacuum) it > becomes a passive heat engine that can exert a push on a payload. > > How much, or how little? My crude experiments (years back) with > a similar approach in air, indicated about 25 Kw/kg thrust. > > Regards, Frederick From vortex-l-request eskimo.com Sun Feb 25 08:25:27 2001 Received: (from smartlst localhost) by mx1.eskimo.com (8.9.1a/8.8.8) id IAA11667; Sun, 25 Feb 2001 08:23:34 -0800 Resent-Date: Sun, 25 Feb 2001 08:23:34 -0800 Message-ID: <00b101c09f3e$f4aad900$09d5323f computer> From: "Frederick Sparber" To: References: <018e01c09e4f$eeae9e00$e4d4323f computer> <013e01c09ee5$171ab6e0$62584118@mtwh1.on.wave.home.com> Subject: Re: Quartz Plate Thruster? Date: Sun, 25 Feb 2001 09:23:32 -0600 MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-Priority: 3 X-MSMail-Priority: Normal X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook Express 5.50.4133.2400 X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V5.50.4133.2400 Resent-Message-ID: <"tjhy01.0.Ds2.56Jcw" mx1> Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/41000 X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com Status: O X-Status: ----- Original Message ----- From: "Colin Quinney" To: Cc: Sent: Saturday, February 24, 2001 10:40 PM Subject: Re: Quartz Plate Thruster? The quartz glass is extremely thermal shock resistant. The thicknesss is for easy handling. Fred > Fred, > > Thank you very much for sharing that. So you did variations of this > experiment and you used Nichrome? This is simply amazing stuff Fred. I find > it fascinating that you got almost the exact same results years later with > the S- Thruster ~ 20 Kw/kg thrust. > > What purpose does the quartz serve and why that particular thickness? > > Best Regards, > Colin Quinney > > ----- Original Message ----- > From: "Frederick Sparber" > To: > Cc: > Sent: Saturday, February 24, 2001 5:51 AM > Subject: Re: Quartz Plate Thruster? > > > > Another iteration, Colin. > > > > Put a ~ 1.0 ohm coating of Nichrome on one side of a 10 cm square by 0.3 > cm > > thick > > quartz plate and a coating of carbon black/graphite on the opposite side. > > Then take another quartz reflector plate of the same size and put a > coating > > of silver > > (or aluminum) on it and lay it over the Nichrome side of the first plate > > with > > the reflective coating facing out. > > > > With a 12 volt 12 ampere power supply connected to the Nichrome layer > > you should develop ~ 144 watts, thus ~ 14,400 watts/meter^2. > > > > Then the blackened surface should radiate the most of the 144 watts > > when at a temperature of ~ 710 deg Kelvin (~ 437 deg C). > > > > Assuming a delta T of 100 degrees, the Carnot efficiency (Th - Tc)/Th > > (810 - 710)/810 = 12%. > > > > If some of the heat energy exerts a thrust on the device (in vacuum) it > > becomes a passive heat engine that can exert a push on a payload. > > > > How much, or how little? My crude experiments (years back) with > > a similar approach in air, indicated about 25 Kw/kg thrust. > > > > Regards, Frederick > > > From vortex-l-request eskimo.com Sun Feb 25 08:25:29 2001 Received: (from smartlst localhost) by mx1.eskimo.com (8.9.1a/8.8.8) id IAA11655; Sun, 25 Feb 2001 08:23:33 -0800 Resent-Date: Sun, 25 Feb 2001 08:23:33 -0800 Message-ID: <3A995C11.2918 bellsouth.net> Date: Sun, 25 Feb 2001 11:25:05 -0800 From: Terry Blanton X-Mailer: Mozilla 3.01C-BLS20 (Win16; U) MIME-Version: 1.0 To: vortex-l eskimo.com Subject: Re: [FG]: Peltier Effect thermo-gravity experiments References: <4.2.0.58.20010224232500.00b85940 postoffice.swbell.net> <001701c09f28$3cc31520$c23dee3f@default> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Resent-Message-ID: <"B6EMW.0.-r2.46Jcw" mx1> Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/40999 X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com Status: O X-Status: Nick Reiter wrote: > > Well now isn't that interesting! > > Thanks Charlie, for setting up such an experiment. Very interesting > result. > You may want to next make a little aluminum foil thermal shunting > envelope for the Peltier, and pinch it around it to allow a constant flow of > heat, or at least a few more seconds before she becomes terminally swamped > at higher current. > If you still get a deflection, then the next step is to glue some little > discs or squares of foam rubber to the surfaces of the envelope. > At that point, when you have a consistent effect, you might wish to > confirm the direction versus polarity. > As I had also seen, the effect is not immediate, but evolves over a half > second to a couple of seconds. A torque with the geomagnetic or ambient > magnetic environment would be a little quicker, one would think, depending > on your mass. Also keep in mind that the Peltier chip is as delightfully > non-inductive a device as you could hope! The current path through the P > and N bismuth telluride blocks is both up-and down serpentine AND side to > side (rows) serpentine! > I also gather that the transfer of heat / phonons by the charge carriers > is not immediate either. Some of the tech information on Peltier chips says > that applying high frequency pulses does nothing useful, because the heat > tranfer effect requires a longer ramp or influence time. I think many folks > would equate a Peltier junction to a diode because it has both N and P > materials. However, it is more like an incredibly shunted, very very SLOW > diode, made with very conductive degenerate semiconductors. Whole different > mechanism I am beginning to fancy. Nick, Yes, the "longer ramp" is due to the Seebeck effect which counters the Peltier effect. I'm a bit of a crackpot; however, you might wish to explore the G-Strain explanation from my previous post: http://www.escribe.com/science/vortex/m17442.html where P channel devices tap a form of gravitational potential. It says there *is* a difference between semiconductor hole flow vs. electron flow. Terry From vortex-l-request eskimo.com Sun Feb 25 08:36:29 2001 Received: (from smartlst localhost) by mx1.eskimo.com (8.9.1a/8.8.8) id IAA15830; Sun, 25 Feb 2001 08:35:27 -0800 Resent-Date: Sun, 25 Feb 2001 08:35:27 -0800 Message-ID: <3A995EC7.475C bellsouth.net> Date: Sun, 25 Feb 2001 11:36:39 -0800 From: Terry Blanton X-Mailer: Mozilla 3.01C-BLS20 (Win16; U) MIME-Version: 1.0 To: vortex-l eskimo.com Subject: Re: [FG]: Peltier Effect thermo-gravity experiments References: <4.2.0.58.20010224232500.00b85940 postoffice.swbell.net> <001701c09f28$3cc31520$c23dee3f@default> <3A995C11.2918@bellsouth.net> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Resent-Message-ID: <"EKg-G3.0.Gt3.EHJcw" mx1> Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/41001 X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com Status: O X-Status: Terry Blanton wrote: > Nick, > > Yes, the "longer ramp" is due to the Seebeck effect which counters the > Peltier effect. > > I'm a bit of a crackpot; however, you might wish to explore the G-Strain > explanation from my previous post: > > http://www.escribe.com/science/vortex/m17442.html > > where P channel devices tap a form of gravitational potential. It says > there *is* a difference between semiconductor hole flow vs. electron > flow. Actually, this would be easy to test if someone makes a pure P dopant Peltier device. It is more difficult to manufacture since wiring must go from the top of one semi to the bottom of the other as opposed to alternating P and N dopant devices. The latter wiring goes from the top of one device to the top of the next. Terry From vortex-l-request eskimo.com Sun Feb 25 10:57:42 2001 Received: (from smartlst localhost) by mx1.eskimo.com (8.9.1a/8.8.8) id KAA12310; Sun, 25 Feb 2001 10:54:30 -0800 Resent-Date: Sun, 25 Feb 2001 10:54:30 -0800 From: dtmiller midiowa.net (Dean T. Miller) To: vortex-l eskimo.com Subject: Re: A Poor Man's Vacuum Chamber? Date: Sun, 25 Feb 2001 18:54:06 GMT Organization: Miller and Associates Message-ID: <3a9e54bb.119998450 mail.midiowa.net> References: <008e01c09f3b$95a0bcc0$09d5323f computer> In-Reply-To: <008e01c09f3b$95a0bcc0$09d5323f computer> X-Mailer: Forte Agent 1.5/32.452 MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit X-MIME-Autoconverted: from quoted-printable to 8bit by mx1.eskimo.com id KAA12278 Resent-Message-ID: <"yoKPt3.0.B03.bJLcw" mx1> Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/41002 X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com Status: O X-Status: On Sun, 25 Feb 2001 08:58:38 -0600, "Frederick Sparber" wrote: >If one uses a metal can, strong enough to withstand the >externally applied ~14.7 psi atmospheric pressure it can >be filled with a small amount of water and heated so that >the steam will expell the atmospheric gases and be full >of steam at atmospheric pressure at whatever temperature >it is heated at. > >When cooled to ambient or subfreezing temperature it will >be at a fairly decent vacuum in the millitorr range. Yup. Seems there's a coffee maker that works that way. -- Dean -- from (almost) Duh Moines (CDP, KB0ZDF) From vortex-l-request eskimo.com Sun Feb 25 11:29:47 2001 Received: (from smartlst localhost) by mx1.eskimo.com (8.9.1a/8.8.8) id LAA29389; Sun, 25 Feb 2001 11:29:30 -0800 Resent-Date: Sun, 25 Feb 2001 11:29:30 -0800 Message-Id: Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Date: Sun, 25 Feb 2001 10:39:44 -0900 To: vortex-l eskimo.com From: hheffner mtaonline.net (Horace Heffner) Subject: Re: Calculating the thrust from a heat pump Resent-Message-ID: <"gdxw22.0.0B7.QqLcw" mx1> Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/41004 X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com Status: O X-Status: At 6:51 AM 2/25/1, Horace Heffner wrote: [snip] I would guess the force on the Peltier >surface in air can be estimated, knowing the ambient pressure P, and >Peltier surface area A, by: > > F = A * P * [(T1)^(1/2) - T2(1/2)]/(T1)^(1/2) > > = A * P * [ 1 - (T1/T2)^(1/2) ] This gives a result way high - so it was a maybe bad guess, or a bad conceptual leap. One problem is that, if T1 is the temperature of the air and T2 the temperature of the Peltier, then the temperature at the boundary layer close to the Peltier surface will be very close to that of the surface. That may be the problem with the conceptual leap to using pressure. An increase in pressure near the surface of the Peltier due to heat exchange between layers of air will be quickly dissapated laterally. Pressure can not be sustained at the Peltier surface, yet he kinetic energy is dissapated. Therefore, this principle should actually work better at low air pressures, although it then becomes difficult to dissipate the heat due to the low specific heat of the air. The concept behind this can not explain a prolonged thrust (acceleration) inside an insulated envelope - like Scott's paper towel. Regards, Horace Heffner From vortex-l-request eskimo.com Sun Feb 25 11:30:05 2001 Received: (from smartlst localhost) by mx1.eskimo.com (8.9.1a/8.8.8) id LAA29069; Sun, 25 Feb 2001 11:29:08 -0800 Resent-Date: Sun, 25 Feb 2001 11:29:08 -0800 Mime-Version: 1.0 Message-Id: In-Reply-To: <3A96BE8E.708F2E6E bellsouth.net> References: <3A96BE8E.708F2E6E bellsouth.net> Date: Sat, 24 Feb 2001 13:28:09 -0600 To: vortex-l eskimo.com From: thomas malloy Subject: Re: Pure Fusion Bomb? Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" ; format="flowed" Resent-Message-ID: <"LyEjs1.0.667.3qLcw" mx1> Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/41003 X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com Status: O X-Status: >Horace Heffner wrote: >> >> At 1:02 PM 2/23/1, Terry Blanton wrote: >> >How do you trigger a pure fusion bomb? >> >> I think the answer to that question is practically self-evident, but there >> is no way it should be discussed. > >I just thought this might relate to a previous article which many >here poo-pooed which talked about a Russian system which used >nukes for power generation. > Terry I've seen postings about the Russians having figured out how to create controlled fusion reactions. If this is true then the first technology to emerge from this would be a power plant, Given the size of the machines which the American hot fusioneers have built attempting to do this, it would be much easier to accomplish then miniturizing it into a bomb. From vortex-l-request eskimo.com Sun Feb 25 11:52:43 2001 Received: (from smartlst localhost) by mx1.eskimo.com (8.9.1a/8.8.8) id LAA07022; Sun, 25 Feb 2001 11:50:44 -0800 Resent-Date: Sun, 25 Feb 2001 11:50:44 -0800 Message-ID: <000e01c09f63$704ac1a0$5a3dee3f default> From: "Nick Reiter" To: References: <4.2.0.58.20010224232500.00b85940 postoffice.swbell.net> <001701c09f28$3cc31520$c23dee3f@default> <3A995C11.2918@bellsouth.net> Subject: Re: [FG]: Peltier Effect - Seike - p Materials Date: Sun, 25 Feb 2001 14:44:56 -0500 MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-Priority: 3 X-MSMail-Priority: Normal X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook Express 5.00.2919.6600 X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V5.00.2919.6600 Resent-Message-ID: <"fjZYT2.0.ej1.I8Mcw" mx1> Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/41005 X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com Status: RO X-Status: Terry; I see from your earlier post that you link two pages from Martin's website ( a fine place to go, by the way) If you will note, one of these was a paper by me! In 1994 and 1995, I tried a number of replications of Seike's transistor rings. Saw the same frequency decrement (which JLN later found to be due to capacitance shift due to heating) and also weight losses and recoveries as well. However, toward the end of my experimental period with those devices, I found that in those cases, lead wire expansion artifact by I2R heating was causing the weight changes. I found that by draping lead wires at different angles onto the device under test, the weight loss could also be a weight gain, as the wires either tugged or pushed on the circuits. The Peltier force experiments have so far defied those same artifacts, though we shall see what Scott Little may find when he returns. Seike's stuff is cool, don't get me wrong! But I think that this may be shaping up to be a horse of a different color. Thank you for your input and ideas, though! NR PS - Tellurium and Selenium are both p-type materials in their predominant form. Maybe I should experiment a bit with these (since I work in a lab where we use Te by the bucketfulls for CdTe photovoltaics) > > Nick, > > Yes, the "longer ramp" is due to the Seebeck effect which counters the > Peltier effect. > > I'm a bit of a crackpot; however, you might wish to explore the G-Strain > explanation from my previous post: > > http://www.escribe.com/science/vortex/m17442.html > > where P channel devices tap a form of gravitational potential. It says > there *is* a difference between semiconductor hole flow vs. electron > flow. > > Terry > From vortex-l-request eskimo.com Sun Feb 25 12:06:33 2001 Received: (from smartlst localhost) by mx1.eskimo.com (8.9.1a/8.8.8) id MAA12706; Sun, 25 Feb 2001 12:05:07 -0800 Resent-Date: Sun, 25 Feb 2001 12:05:07 -0800 Message-ID: <00f101c09f5d$eade8380$09d5323f computer> From: "Frederick Sparber" To: Subject: CRC Handbook of Chemistry and Physics- CRCNetbase 1999 Date: Sun, 25 Feb 2001 12:56:18 -0600 MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: multipart/mixed; boundary="----=_NextPart_000_000D_01C09F2A.5842F5C0" X-Priority: 3 X-MSMail-Priority: Normal X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook Express 5.50.4133.2400 X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V5.50.4133.2400 Resent-Message-ID: <"0JoA1.0.R63.oLMcw" mx1> Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/41006 X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com Status: O X-Status: This is a multi-part message in MIME format. ------=_NextPart_000_000D_01C09F2A.5842F5C0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Just what I've always wanted. :-) http://www.floridaplants.com/CR/netbase99.htm ------=_NextPart_000_000D_01C09F2A.5842F5C0 Content-Type: application/octet-stream; name="CRC Handbook of Chemistry and Physics- CRCNetbase 1999.url" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Content-Disposition: attachment; filename="CRC Handbook of Chemistry and Physics- CRCNetbase 1999.url" [DEFAULT] BASEURL=http://www.floridaplants.com/CR/netbase99.htm [InternetShortcut] URL=http://www.floridaplants.com/CR/netbase99.htm Modified=E09F53825C9FC00110 ------=_NextPart_000_000D_01C09F2A.5842F5C0-- From vortex-l-request eskimo.com Sun Feb 25 12:40:18 2001 Received: (from smartlst localhost) by mx1.eskimo.com (8.9.1a/8.8.8) id MAA22731; Sun, 25 Feb 2001 12:29:49 -0800 Resent-Date: Sun, 25 Feb 2001 12:29:49 -0800 Message-ID: <3A9995E3.67EB bellsouth.net> Date: Sun, 25 Feb 2001 15:31:47 -0800 From: Terry Blanton X-Mailer: Mozilla 3.01C-BLS20 (Win16; U) MIME-Version: 1.0 To: vortex-l eskimo.com Subject: Re: [FG]: Peltier Effect - Seike - p Materials References: <4.2.0.58.20010224232500.00b85940 postoffice.swbell.net> <001701c09f28$3cc31520$c23dee3f@default> <3A995C11.2918@bellsouth.net> <000e01c09f63$704ac1a0$5a3dee3f@default> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Resent-Message-ID: <"Z1WAx3.0.nY5.xiMcw" mx1> Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/41007 X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com Status: O X-Status: Nick Reiter wrote: > > Terry; > > I see from your earlier post that you link two pages from Martin's > website ( a fine place to go, by the way) > If you will note, one of these was a paper by me! Well, duh! I *knew* it would interest you. :) Terry From vortex-l-request eskimo.com Sun Feb 25 12:47:03 2001 Received: (from smartlst localhost) by mx1.eskimo.com (8.9.1a/8.8.8) id MAA27390; Sun, 25 Feb 2001 12:44:49 -0800 Resent-Date: Sun, 25 Feb 2001 12:44:49 -0800 Mime-Version: 1.0 X-Sender: rick mail.highsurf.com Message-Id: In-Reply-To: References: Date: Sun, 25 Feb 2001 10:44:33 -1000 To: vortex-l eskimo.com From: Rick Monteverde Subject: Re: Calculating the thrust from a heat pump Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" ; format="flowed" Resent-Message-ID: <"XHeyv2.0.qh6.0xMcw" mx1> Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/41008 X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com Status: O X-Status: Horace - >The >hot side ejects (reflects) air molecues faster than when they hit, on >average, and the cool side ejects colliding molecules slower on average >than they arrived. Since the air is external to the scale/peltier system, >a net thrust develops. I think you are on the right track to explaining >the Peltier experimental results with this approach, it is just a matter of >getting the quantities right. I think they've been reporting that the device moves towards the hot side, not the cold - the reverse of your explanation above. - Rick Monteverde Honolulu, HI From vortex-l-request eskimo.com Sun Feb 25 12:48:56 2001 Received: (from smartlst localhost) by mx1.eskimo.com (8.9.1a/8.8.8) id MAA27732; Sun, 25 Feb 2001 12:46:21 -0800 Resent-Date: Sun, 25 Feb 2001 12:46:21 -0800 Mime-Version: 1.0 Message-Id: In-Reply-To: <3A97D6DD.B933F17B ix.netcom.com> References: <200102232041.PAA23618 tron.aps.org> <3A97D6DD.B933F17B ix.netcom.com> Date: Sat, 24 Feb 2001 14:45:17 -0600 To: vortex-l eskimo.com From: thomas malloy Subject: Re: What's New for Feb 23, 2001 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" ; format="flowed" Resent-Message-ID: <"M8cv1.0.En6.SyMcw" mx1> Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/41009 X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com Status: RO X-Status: >Feb. 23, 2001 > >Vortex, > >It seems Robert Park's bias is showing all over the place, once again, >in writing about M .Swartz's Supreme Court Appeal on his CF patent >case. And Park, for all his years of writing, surely knows his past, >present, and future tenses in english grammer. Well, his mind is made up, OTOH perhaps he's just following his agenda From vortex-l-request eskimo.com Sun Feb 25 13:17:42 2001 Received: (from smartlst localhost) by mx1.eskimo.com (8.9.1a/8.8.8) id NAA10284; Sun, 25 Feb 2001 13:16:37 -0800 Resent-Date: Sun, 25 Feb 2001 13:16:37 -0800 X-Sender: hheffner mtaonline.net (Unverified) Message-Id: Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Date: Sun, 25 Feb 2001 12:26:20 -0900 To: vortex-l eskimo.com From: hheffner mtaonline.net (Horace Heffner) Subject: Re: Calculating the thrust from a heat pump Resent-Message-ID: <"X-Syj.0.bW2.qONcw" mx1> Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/41010 X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com Status: O X-Status: To obtain the thrust of the Peltier device in air we need to apply the following formula over the temperature drop T1 - T2 across the distance of the mean free path: F = A * P * [ 1 - (T1/T2)^(1/2) ] The mean free path of a molecule in air is about 6.32x10^-6 cm. If a temperature gradiant of 40 degrees C is spread over about a cm or air then the differential at the mean free path boundary layer is (40 deg. C)*(6.32x10^-6 cm)/(1 cm) = 2.528x10^-4 deg C. Using T1 as a surface temperature of 297 + 30 + 40 = 367 kelvin, the above, and T2 = (T1-2.528x10^-4 deg C) for a (1.5 in)^2 device becomes: F = (1.5 in)^2 * (15 lb/in^2) * ( 1 - (367/(367-2.528x10^-4)) F = -1.034x10^-4 N = -1.055x10^-2 gf which is 10 milligrams on a scale, in the right order of magnitude, given Scott Little's force estimate of about 5-10 milligrams. Regards, Horace Heffner From vortex-l-request eskimo.com Sun Feb 25 13:31:41 2001 Received: (from smartlst localhost) by mx1.eskimo.com (8.9.1a/8.8.8) id NAA14358; Sun, 25 Feb 2001 13:25:06 -0800 Resent-Date: Sun, 25 Feb 2001 13:25:06 -0800 Message-ID: <011f01c09f69$151a4700$09d5323f computer> From: "Frederick Sparber" To: Cc: References: Subject: Re: Calculating the thrust from a heat pump Date: Sun, 25 Feb 2001 14:24:16 -0600 MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-Priority: 3 X-MSMail-Priority: Normal X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook Express 5.50.4133.2400 X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V5.50.4133.2400 Resent-Message-ID: <"RYUT.0.GW3.oWNcw" mx1> Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/41011 X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com Status: O X-Status: ----- Original Message ----- From: "Rick Monteverde" To: Sent: Sunday, February 25, 2001 2:44 PM Subject: Re: Calculating the thrust from a heat pump Listen up Colin. :-) Rick wrote: > Horace - > > > >The > >hot side ejects (reflects) air molecues faster than when they hit, on > >average, and the cool side ejects colliding molecules slower on average > >than they arrived. Since the air is external to the scale/peltier system, > >a net thrust develops. I think you are on the right track to explaining > >the Peltier experimental results with this approach, it is just a matter of > >getting the quantities right. > > > I think they've been reporting that the device moves towards the hot > side, not the cold - the reverse of your explanation above. That's just fine, Rick, this implies that the lattice vibrations (phonons) have a force gradient that follows the thermal gradient across the (P-N or N-P?)interface. You could probably get the same effect with a thermal gradient across any large area "slab" of semiconducting or high resistivity material where heat conduction is by lattice vibrations. IOW. in air the effect Horace is describing is bucking the Carnot Limited Heat Engine Effect that Colin Quinney and I have are pursuing for use in space to compete with the Ion Propulsion devices. Keep those cards and letters coming in! :-) Regards, Frederick > > - Rick Monteverde > Honolulu, HI > > From vortex-l-request eskimo.com Sun Feb 25 16:00:27 2001 Received: (from smartlst localhost) by mx1.eskimo.com (8.9.1a/8.8.8) id PAA03056; Sun, 25 Feb 2001 15:58:58 -0800 Resent-Date: Sun, 25 Feb 2001 15:58:58 -0800 Message-ID: <004201c09f86$6e90eec0$62584118 mtwh1.on.wave.home.com> From: "Colin Quinney" To: References: <001c01c09bbf$a23958e0$46d9323f computer> <008601c09eac$4eb62fa0$62584118@mtwh1.on.wave.home.com> <000001c09eb4$b12b9820$09d5323f@computer> Subject: Re: replication of Peltier force xducer Date: Sun, 25 Feb 2001 18:55:28 -0500 MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-Priority: 3 X-MSMail-Priority: Normal X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook Express 5.50.4522.1200 X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V5.50.4522.1200 Resent-Message-ID: <"kt9aS1.0.Tl.0nPcw" mx1> Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/41012 X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com Status: O X-Status: ----- Original Message ----- From: "Frederick Sparber" To: Sent: Saturday, February 24, 2001 5:51 PM Subject: Re: replication of Peltier force xducer > > All that I am suggesting here though, is that a vacuum chamber may not be > > immediately necessary to verify the effect if the thrust measurements are > > done quickly enough. > > Only a good vacuum, well below the 100 millitorr that the Crookes Radiometer > is optimized at would be an honest test. > > The best bets are the off-the-shelf, inexpensive ~ 150 watt heat lamps. > > Regards, Frederick Fred, You have supplied myself and Vo enough information about building a good home built vacuum that I think I can go ahead with that now. Thanks. Best Regards, Colin From vortex-l-request eskimo.com Sun Feb 25 16:27:13 2001 Received: (from smartlst localhost) by mx1.eskimo.com (8.9.1a/8.8.8) id QAA12234; Sun, 25 Feb 2001 16:25:25 -0800 Resent-Date: Sun, 25 Feb 2001 16:25:25 -0800 Message-Id: Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Date: Sun, 25 Feb 2001 15:35:36 -0900 To: vortex-l eskimo.com From: hheffner mtaonline.net (Horace Heffner) Subject: Re: Calculating the thrust from a heat pump Resent-Message-ID: <"0w2xH1.0.4_2.q9Qcw" mx1> Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/41013 X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com Status: O X-Status: At 10:44 AM 2/25/1, Rick Monteverde wrote: >Horace - > > >>The >>hot side ejects (reflects) air molecues faster than when they hit, on >>average, and the cool side ejects colliding molecules slower on average >>than they arrived. Since the air is external to the scale/peltier system, >>a net thrust develops. I think you are on the right track to explaining >>the Peltier experimental results with this approach, it is just a matter of >>getting the quantities right. > > >I think they've been reporting that the device moves towards the hot >side, not the cold - the reverse of your explanation above. > At 10:22 PM 2/20/1, Scott Little wrote: >It is as if the >flow of heat exerts a small force in the same direction as the heat is >flowing thru the Peltier device. The magnitude of my effect was 5-10 >milligrams, perhaps larger due to my larger device. Indeed the effect >reverses direction with reversed polarity. Say, that's right, Rick! (Slaps forehead.) Hmmm.., that means the solid state effect, if it is real, is actually about twice that which can be accounted for by the solid/air interface, and in the opposite direction. At 2:24 PM 2/25/1, Frederick Sparber wrote: [snip] >That's just fine, Rick, this implies that the lattice vibrations (phonons) >have a force >gradient that follows the thermal gradient across the (P-N or >N-P?)interface. This is interesting. I think the principle active thermal gradient is located there in a narrow band. A key thing might be that phonons are bosons. They flow right through each other like photons. Their mean free path is from boundary to boundary in the solid. The interface might resemble that of gas-gas interface if such were feasible. The problem is still that a net force can not be sustained. Sooner or later the loop has to be closed. There is no way Newton's laws can be applied so as to gain net momentum from a closed system. If the Peltier creates force by other means then it therefore strikes me as important to run a long experiment to prove that is true. > >You could probably get the same effect with a thermal gradient across any >large area "slab" of semiconducting or high resistivity material where >heat conduction is by lattice vibrations. > >IOW. in air the effect Horace is describing is bucking the Carnot Limited >Heat Engine Effect that Colin Quinney and I have are pursuing for use >in space to compete with the Ion Propulsion devices. This I think is true. In your case the momentum is applied to the hot side, in the direction of the cold side. Regards, Horace Heffner From vortex-l-request eskimo.com Sun Feb 25 16:41:35 2001 Received: (from smartlst localhost) by mx1.eskimo.com (8.9.1a/8.8.8) id QAA15950; Sun, 25 Feb 2001 16:39:45 -0800 Resent-Date: Sun, 25 Feb 2001 16:39:45 -0800 Message-ID: <000b01c09f8b$d61450a0$5e3dee3f default> From: "Nick Reiter" To: References: Subject: Re: Calculating the thrust from a heat pump Date: Sun, 25 Feb 2001 19:34:07 -0500 MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-Priority: 3 X-MSMail-Priority: Normal X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook Express 5.00.2919.6600 X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V5.00.2919.6600 Resent-Message-ID: <"9uxQY2.0.3v3.HNQcw" mx1> Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/41014 X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com Status: O X-Status: Gentlemen; This is all very fascinating, yet I am not entirely sure how you are applying it to the Peltier device force effect, considering that the effect manifested inside both a thermally shunting (copper or Al envelope) AND foam insulation firmly bonded to the outer envelope surface. Empirically I remain; NR ----- Original Message ----- From: "Horace Heffner" To: Sent: Sunday, February 25, 2001 4:26 PM Subject: Re: Calculating the thrust from a heat pump > To obtain the thrust of the Peltier device in air we need to apply the > following formula over the temperature drop T1 - T2 across the distance of > the mean free path: > > F = A * P * [ 1 - (T1/T2)^(1/2) ] > > The mean free path of a molecule in air is about 6.32x10^-6 cm. If a > temperature gradiant of 40 degrees C is spread over about a cm or air then > the differential at the mean free path boundary layer is (40 deg. > C)*(6.32x10^-6 cm)/(1 cm) = 2.528x10^-4 deg C. Using T1 as a surface > temperature of 297 + 30 + 40 = 367 kelvin, the above, and T2 = > (T1-2.528x10^-4 deg C) for a (1.5 in)^2 device becomes: > > F = (1.5 in)^2 * (15 lb/in^2) * ( 1 - (367/(367-2.528x10^-4)) > > F = -1.034x10^-4 N = -1.055x10^-2 gf > > which is 10 milligrams on a scale, in the right order of magnitude, given > Scott Little's force estimate of about 5-10 milligrams. > > Regards, > > Horace Heffner > > > From vortex-l-request eskimo.com Sun Feb 25 17:00:15 2001 Received: (from smartlst localhost) by mx1.eskimo.com (8.9.1a/8.8.8) id QAA22424; Sun, 25 Feb 2001 16:57:53 -0800 Resent-Date: Sun, 25 Feb 2001 16:57:53 -0800 Message-ID: <3A99A9C9.423 suite224.net> Date: Sun, 25 Feb 2001 19:56:41 -0500 From: "Francis J. Stenger" Organization: NASA (Retired) X-Mailer: Mozilla 3.01 (Win95; I) MIME-Version: 1.0 To: vortex-l eskimo.com Subject: Stars are us? Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Resent-Message-ID: <"1LYR9.0.7U5.EeQcw" mx1> Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/41015 X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com Status: O X-Status: Hi, I just surfaced to see what's going on. You folks may be aware of this but, in case you missed it, check: http://www.science.nasa.gov/newhome/headlines/prop19aug99_1.htm from a tip from Larry Adams. After max velocity is achieved from one star's radiation, shut down bubble for approach to another star? Then, use bubble to orbit the star, then use bubble for return trip? Looks like a neat way to tap propulsion power AND MASS from a star!! Frank Stenger From vortex-l-request eskimo.com Sun Feb 25 18:52:43 2001 Received: (from smartlst localhost) by mx1.eskimo.com (8.9.1a/8.8.8) id SAA28851; Sun, 25 Feb 2001 18:51:40 -0800 Resent-Date: Sun, 25 Feb 2001 18:51:40 -0800 Message-ID: <017d01c09f96$b11184c0$09d5323f computer> From: "Frederick Sparber" To: Subject: Re: Peltier Force & The Radiometer Date: Sun, 25 Feb 2001 19:51:10 -0600 MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: multipart/related; boundary="----=_NextPart_000_0177_01C09F64.4D0E4260"; type="multipart/alternative" X-Priority: 3 X-MSMail-Priority: Normal X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook Express 5.50.4133.2400 X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V5.50.4133.2400 Resent-Message-ID: <"PhqJN1.0.g27.xIScw" mx1> Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/41016 X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com Status: O X-Status: This is a multi-part message in MIME format. ------=_NextPart_000_0177_01C09F64.4D0E4260 Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary="----=_NextPart_001_0178_01C09F64.4D0E4260" ------=_NextPart_001_0178_01C09F64.4D0E4260 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="Windows-1252" Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable The Radiometer The Radiometer The history of the Crookes Radiometer and some experiments that may be = performed with a modified commercial unit. This original version of this article appeared in Volume 4, Number 1 of = the Bell Jar. -------------------------------------------------------------------------= ------- The first paragraph is drawn from material developed by Franklin B. Lee = in "Experiments in High Vacuum" (Morris and Lee, Buffalo, NY, ca. 1960) = and is used with permission.=20 -------------------------------------------------------------------------= -------------------------------------------------------------------------= ----------------------------------- FWIW. At more than a GIGAWATT/pound the Crookes Radiometer SHOULDN"T = RUN BACKWARDS under HARD Vacuum, But it does. FJS -------------------------------------------------------------------------= ------- A radiometer consists of a set of vanes, each shiny on one side and = blackened on the other, that is mounted in an evacuated vessel. When = exposed to light, the vanes revolve. The first radiometer was = constructed to settle the controversy regarding whether light exerts a = force. The idea was that a reflecting surface would experience a greater = force from the light than an absorbing one. The instrument was therefore = made in the now familiar form. Unexpectedly, the opposite effect was = observed. The blackened vane retreated from the light source. We now = know that the black surface is warmer than the shiny one and that gas = molecules will recoil faster from the hot surface. The slight difference = in molecule recoil is what causes the device to spin. (Later experiments = in a much better vacuum have confirmed that light does exert a very = small pressure. The action of the radiometer depends upon striking a = balance between molecular drag and recoil. At higher pressures, drag = will dominate and the vanes will fail to spin. At lower pressures, there = are too few recoiling molecules to drive the vanes. The optimum balance = occurs at a pressure of about 60 mTorr (60 microns Hg). By using a = suitable tachometer (e.g. a 'Strobotach' or an electronic counter with a = photocell that detects the interruption of a light beam by the vanes) it = would be possible to measure the change in rotational velocity with = changing pressure, given a constant light input.=20 While the radiometer is not a very good gauge in itself, Dushman in "The = Scientific Foundations of Vacuum Technique" noted the use of the = radiometer to determine when the vacuum in an incandescent lamp had = reached the required level for sealing-off. At the proper pressure, the = vanes would cease to rotate, even in very bright illumination (this = would be on the low side of the ~60 mTorr peak). He also noted that the = level of vacuum could be quantitatively determined by shaking the bulb = to set the vanes in motion and then noting the rate at which the = spinning ceases. This notion has been embodied in the modern spinning = rotor (molecular drag) gauge.=20 Ready-made radiometers are available from science supply houses. Also = they are increasingly popular as window ornaments and can often be = obtained for about $10 from local craft shops. I've also seen = radiometers in the windows of "New Age" boutiques, leading me to wonder = what strange powers people might attribute to them.=20 For tinkerers, the disadvantage of ready-made radiometers is that they = are sealed off. Fortunately, the glass pump-out tube is readily = accessible. With a file, nick the end of the pump-out and break the tip = off. (I'd suggest placing a piece of rubber or vinyl tubing over the = glass to prevent cuts). Using epoxy cement, seal a length of 5/16" OD = brass tubing (K&S Engineering, available at well stocked hobby and = hardware stores) to the bulb. Be careful not to get epoxy into the = original evacuation ports in the stem. The hanging style of bulb is the = most convenient to use. This tube may be attached to a blank brass KF flange. Drill a 5/16" = diameter hole in the flange and solder the tube in the hole. The flanged = radiometer may now be attached to a vacuum system that is capable of = evacuating to a few tens of milliTorr. (See Figure 1.) Using the = pressure control feature, a pressure vs. rotational speed plot may be = constructed.=20 If no local source can be found for the radiometer, surplus units have = usually been available from American Science and Surplus. New = radiometers of the hanging style are also available from Edmund = Scientific Co., 101 E. Gloucester Pike, Barrington, NJ 08007-1380 as = Catalog #38,510 at $10.95.=20 -------------------------------------------------------------------------= ------- Illustrations View Figure 1 (9k) -------------------------------------------------------------------------= ------- Return to Complete Index of Articles Return to Index of Electronic Articles Return to Home Page -------------------------------------------------------------------------= ------- =A91995-1996, the Bell Jar email: shansen tiac.net ------=_NextPart_001_0178_01C09F64.4D0E4260 Content-Type: text/html; charset="Windows-1252" Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable The Radiometer
 

The Radiometer

The history of the Crookes Radiometer and some experiments that may = be=20 performed with a modified commercial unit.

This original version of this article appeared in Volume = 4,=20 Number 1 of the Bell Jar.

The first paragraph is drawn from material developed by Franklin B. = Lee in=20 "Experiments in High Vacuum" (Morris and Lee, Buffalo, NY, ca. 1960) and = is used=20 with permission.

----------------------------------------------------------------= -------------------------------------------------------------------------= --------------------------------------------

FWIW.   At more than a GIGAWATT/pound the Crookes = Radiometer=20 SHOULDN"T RUN BACKWARDS

under HARD Vacuum, But it=20 does.           =20 FJS

A radiometer consists of a set of vanes, each shiny on one side and = blackened=20 on the other, that is mounted in an evacuated vessel. When exposed to = light, the=20 vanes revolve. The first radiometer was constructed to settle the = controversy=20 regarding whether light exerts a force. The idea was that a reflecting = surface=20 would experience a greater force from the light than an absorbing one. = The=20 instrument was therefore made in the now familiar form. Unexpectedly, = the=20 opposite effect was observed. The blackened vane retreated from the = light=20 source. We now know that the black surface is warmer than the shiny one = and that=20 gas molecules will recoil faster from the hot surface. The slight = difference in=20 molecule recoil is what causes the device to spin. (Later experiments in = a much=20 better vacuum have confirmed that light does exert a very small = pressure. The=20 action of the radiometer depends upon striking a balance between = molecular drag=20 and recoil. At higher pressures, drag will dominate and the vanes will = fail to=20 spin. At lower pressures, there are too few recoiling molecules to drive = the=20 vanes. The optimum balance occurs at a pressure of about 60 mTorr (60 = microns=20 Hg). By using a suitable tachometer (e.g. a 'Strobotach' or an = electronic=20 counter with a photocell that detects the interruption of a light beam = by the=20 vanes) it would be possible to measure the change in rotational velocity = with=20 changing pressure, given a constant light input.

While the radiometer is not a very good gauge in itself, Dushman in = "The=20 Scientific Foundations of Vacuum Technique" noted the use of the = radiometer to=20 determine when the vacuum in an incandescent lamp had reached the = required level=20 for sealing-off. At the proper pressure, the vanes would cease to = rotate, even=20 in very bright illumination (this would be on the low side of the ~60 = mTorr=20 peak). He also noted that the level of vacuum could be quantitatively = determined=20 by shaking the bulb to set the vanes in motion and then noting the rate = at which=20 the spinning ceases. This notion has been embodied in the modern = spinning rotor=20 (molecular drag) gauge.

Ready-made radiometers are available from science supply houses. Also = they=20 are increasingly popular as window ornaments and can often be obtained = for about=20 $10 from local craft shops. I've also seen radiometers in the windows of = "New=20 Age" boutiques, leading me to wonder what strange powers people might = attribute=20 to them.

For tinkerers, the disadvantage of ready-made radiometers is that = they are=20 sealed off. Fortunately, the glass pump-out tube is readily accessible. = With a=20 file, nick the end of the pump-out and break the tip off. (I'd suggest = placing a=20 piece of rubber or vinyl tubing over the glass to prevent cuts). Using = epoxy=20 cement, seal a length of 5/16" OD brass tubing (K&S Engineering, = available=20 at well stocked hobby and hardware stores) to the bulb. Be careful not = to get=20 epoxy into the original evacuation ports in the stem. The hanging style = of bulb=20 is the most convenient to use.

This tube may be attached to a blank brass KF flange. Drill a 5/16" = diameter=20 hole in the flange and solder the tube in the hole. The flanged = radiometer may=20 now be attached to a vacuum = system=20 that is capable of evacuating to a few tens of milliTorr. (See Figure = 1.) Using=20 the pressure control feature, a pressure vs. rotational speed plot may = be=20 constructed.

If no local source can be found for the radiometer, surplus units = have=20 usually been available from American = Science=20 and Surplus. New radiometers of the hanging style are also available = from=20 Edmund Scientific Co., 101 E. Gloucester Pike, Barrington, NJ 08007-1380 = as=20 Catalog #38,510 at $10.95.

Illustrations

View Figure 1 = (9k)

Return to Complete Index of=20 Articles

Return to Index of = Electronic=20 Articles

Return to Home = Page

=A91995-1996, the Bell Jar
email: shansen tiac.net
------=_NextPart_001_0178_01C09F64.4D0E4260-- ------=_NextPart_000_0177_01C09F64.4D0E4260 Content-Type: image/gif; name="ball_pur.gif" Content-Transfer-Encoding: base64 Content-Location: http://www.tiac.net/users/shansen/belljar/ball_pur.gif R0lGODdhDgAOAPUAANyl/9eM/8Ex/8Ah/7cQ/7sQ/7kI/7MA/7cA/6sA76YA558A3r+/v5wI1pYA 1q5jzrBjzqZCzpUQzpQAzsS9xrB7xrF7xo4AxoQAvYcAvYIAtXwArYNKnHAAnGoAlHIxjGMQhFwA hFUQc1IAc0sAa0cAYz8AWkEAWjQASjUASgAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAA AAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAACwAAAAADgAOAAAGa0CGcEgsGo9ES0Qi iViOEMfhgEhcIMXK5EAQGBSXToUYORgCgIID4wERJQiDYNDAdEKn90KxmGjuJXkUQhEYGBkbdyYo IoNCFR4dHiEjJSkoHEUPJCQnKJ8fRYMVIicnIhyOokOOqkSqrQxBADs= ------=_NextPart_000_0177_01C09F64.4D0E4260 Content-Type: image/gif; name="webback.gif" Content-Transfer-Encoding: base64 Content-Location: http://www.tiac.net/users/shansen/belljar/webback.gif R0lGODdhKQApAIcAAOC4+IAAAHBwcODg4MDAwPj4+AAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAA AAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAA AAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAA AAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAA AAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAA AAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAA AAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAA AAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAA AAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAA AAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAA AAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAA AAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAA AAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAA AAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAACwAAAAAKQApAAcI/QAHCBxI sKDBgwgHCiiQsKFDhAIWCiRAsaLFixgzaozIcACBiCBDihxJcqRHjhMFAFjJsqXLAS5jtoT5UeJJ mQBgrtTJMkCAnUBztqzZ8SNLmDx59vSJMybRlE1b+pz6MyrLpzdfLqXKtWtXrEaDrvRKtmwAsCql ml37FWVWAGzjckULV65dn3TH3o2bV+jetX2P1v07123YpoSn9lXqsqvWmSsDCwWqE+ZUsYxzSp6M uCpkl4sblxU8mCqAzUovW2Ya83Jkw2lF/3SdU/VR1ydtHtZpmvbg1qxPw1bbmylv48R39vX6W69n nrTzMi9t+nP04dRZ064OFPfy4Ktffx4P7vwqdu7lu5sOr3x4de3kqW81r1tl8aq2a9MecL2+c9u+ XRYAdOJpdt57Zm0Vn3TxWeXgZg5G+JpuD1WYEFgaZajhRhKV5OGHIC4U4ogkLlTAiSimqOKKLLao YkAAOw== ------=_NextPart_000_0177_01C09F64.4D0E4260 Content-Type: image/gif; name="webhome.gif" Content-Transfer-Encoding: base64 Content-Location: http://www.tiac.net/users/shansen/belljar/webhome.gif R0lGODdhKAAoAIcAAOC4+IAAAHBwcODg4MDAwAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAA AAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAA AAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAA AAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAA AAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAA AAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAA AAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAA AAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAA AAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAA AAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAA AAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAA AAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAA AAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAA AAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAACwAAAAAKAAoAAcI/QAHCBxI sKDBgwgHCkjIsCFCAQsHEJhIsaLFixgzQhRIAKLHjyBDigwpcWNJACgHpETJsqVKAC9bsozZMWJH mTJj4oTJMyfKmhwF4AxAdGXPnTpbAj25cgDRADuhIvW59KbMp0afFsWZFEBVoVe3otSqlavMrzPH biXL1ixPtC6xsp0rdSfclnTzij1696Xevy69mrTK8q/huoJtglV7GPDPwWAbS4aKdvLku0Z5vtTZ tedLzJndhrYLOS3evIHnJg4qGgBWxj5fl1Qctehr2GHr9mUMFavfojpvY24r27XY31Jns+YtV+zt mcJLGyfLvPjp5HBVT09Z9mh02rhPeT7vLl5s9ufbr291Cnz1ye5r2zMvbL50Wd/WyyJneZ78eNun 9dRffKjNp5R06O2koIKgLejgglU5JGFCVWVk4YUaLTTShhx26OGHIEIUEAA7 ------=_NextPart_000_0177_01C09F64.4D0E4260-- From vortex-l-request eskimo.com Sun Feb 25 18:59:55 2001 Received: (from smartlst localhost) by mx1.eskimo.com (8.9.1a/8.8.8) id SAA31174; Sun, 25 Feb 2001 18:59:17 -0800 Resent-Date: Sun, 25 Feb 2001 18:59:17 -0800 Mime-Version: 1.0 X-Sender: rick mail.highsurf.com Message-Id: In-Reply-To: <3A99A9C9.423 suite224.net> References: <3A99A9C9.423 suite224.net> Date: Sun, 25 Feb 2001 16:59:11 -1000 To: vortex-l eskimo.com From: Rick Monteverde Subject: Now antigravity's everywhere! Why couldn't we find it before? Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" ; format="flowed" Resent-Message-ID: <"JJhik2.0.0d7.5QScw" mx1> Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/41017 X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com Status: RO X-Status: Stolen from JLN's list: At 1:47 AM +0000 2/26/01, chrish icnet.net wrote: >Dear Members, > >While thinking about Fran de Aquino's equations in his paper , "The >Correlation Between Gravitation and Electromagnetism, Inertia and >Unification" found at; http://arxiv.org/abs/physics/9905003%20 the >following thought occurred to me. A simple and easy test of his basic >theory can be performed by radiating a piece of Phosphorescence >plastic (my daughter has in her bedroom four inch plastic stars that >she had placed around about) with light and measure the gravitational >mass change with a balance or scale. This would prove his basic >premises and it would be easy to do. I took three plastic stars from >her bedroom and stacked them on top of each other, placing them on a >Ohaus "Cent O Gram" , hanging pan balance with a 0.01 gram >readability. Once the balance was stable I switched on the famous >black-light ( UV ) and the sample instantly became lighter. The weight >change is undeniable and inexplicable without Aquino's theory. The >effect last only as long as the light is on and disappears quickly >when switched off. This effect I have dubbed "The Aquino/ Hardeman >Photo-gravity effect" in honor of its discovery." > >Best Regards- >Chris Hardeman From vortex-l-request eskimo.com Sun Feb 25 20:54:10 2001 Received: (from smartlst localhost) by mx1.eskimo.com (8.9.1a/8.8.8) id UAA26081; Sun, 25 Feb 2001 20:52:09 -0800 Resent-Date: Sun, 25 Feb 2001 20:52:09 -0800 X-Apparently-From: Message-Id: <4.2.0.58.20010225223927.00bc2520 postoffice.swbell.net> X-Sender: cjford1 pop.mail.yahoo.com X-Mailer: QUALCOMM Windows Eudora Pro Version 4.2.0.58 Date: Sun, 25 Feb 2001 23:03:18 -0600 To: vortex-l eskimo.com From: Charles Ford Subject: Re: [FG]: Peltier Effect thermo-gravity experiments In-Reply-To: <001701c09f28$3cc31520$c23dee3f default> References: <4.2.0.58.20010224232500.00b85940 postoffice.swbell.net> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"; format=flowed Resent-Message-ID: <"urez1.0.EN6.u3Ucw" mx1> Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/41018 X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com Status: O X-Status: Nick: I had used .002 copper foil (Ham Radio magic cure all) and clamped the foil around the chip between two bits of 1/8 plexy then stuffed poly foam into the gaps. This is where I saw the effect. My string and pointer setup is rather primitive and I am not sure that my wires did not torque the dangling portion of the setup. It did reverse with a reverse of polarity and was although the the strength varied maybe 50% with different wire configurations it did move always toward the hot side. I had three identical devices so I decided to make a second sample which also behaved this way. although slightly less? (probably the wires) That is about when it ocured to me that I could check the response with an audio signal. As far as the electrical behavior goes... It is more like a posistor in that the load is strictly resistive. At least at first. There is no forward barrier voltage to achieve before it conducts but as the temp difference increases the resistance goes up. (actually there is an internal voltage at that time) If you use a current regulated source you will see the voltage go up as delta T increases. It behaves exactly the same way no matter what the polarity is. At 07:40 AM 2/25/01 -0500, you wrote: >Well now isn't that interesting! > > Thanks Charlie, for setting up such an experiment. Very interesting >result. > You may want to next make a little aluminum foil thermal shunting >envelope for the Peltier, and pinch it around it to allow a constant flow of >heat, or at least a few more seconds before she becomes terminally swamped <> _________________________________________________________ Do You Yahoo!? Get your free yahoo.com address at http://mail.yahoo.com From vortex-l-request eskimo.com Sun Feb 25 20:54:54 2001 Received: (from smartlst localhost) by mx1.eskimo.com (8.9.1a/8.8.8) id UAA26854; Sun, 25 Feb 2001 20:53:50 -0800 Resent-Date: Sun, 25 Feb 2001 20:53:50 -0800 X-Apparently-From: Message-Id: <4.2.0.58.20010225223422.00baa680 postoffice.swbell.net> X-Sender: cjford1 pop.mail.yahoo.com X-Mailer: QUALCOMM Windows Eudora Pro Version 4.2.0.58 Date: Sun, 25 Feb 2001 22:38:18 -0600 To: vortex-l eskimo.com From: Charles Ford Subject: Re: [FG]: Peltier Effect thermo-gravity experiments In-Reply-To: References: <4.2.0.58.20010224232500.00b85940 postoffice.swbell.net> <4.2.0.58.20010224232500.00b85940 postoffice.swbell.net> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"; format=flowed Resent-Message-ID: <"i5Agc2.0.VZ6.T5Ucw" mx1> Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/41019 X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com Status: O X-Status: Rick: I honestly don't know. To venture a gues I think you might see this effect here. However. I am having trouble figuring out how to pull this off and still measure any force. I think the act of simply clamping two slabs of metal together would cause enough internal movement to throw the results into artifact limbo. At 10:58 PM 2/24/01 -1000, you wrote: >Charles - > >>A somewhat unverified conclusion at this time is that this effect is >>strictly thermal. > >If it's thermal only, what do you think might happen if two copper slugs >were clamped together where one was previously iced and the other was >heated? IOW, is it any heat flow, or only heat flow when it's backwards: >cold to hot? A third possibility is that hot and cold objects close >together (maybe even if insulated from one another) catch thrust from some >sort of external differential. > >- Rick Monteverde >Honolulu, HI _________________________________________________________ Do You Yahoo!? Get your free yahoo.com address at http://mail.yahoo.com From vortex-l-request eskimo.com Sun Feb 25 21:38:58 2001 Received: (from smartlst localhost) by mx1.eskimo.com (8.9.1a/8.8.8) id VAA09814; Sun, 25 Feb 2001 21:38:36 -0800 Resent-Date: Sun, 25 Feb 2001 21:38:36 -0800 X-Apparently-From: Message-Id: <4.2.0.58.20010225231108.00b82380 postoffice.swbell.net> X-Sender: cjford1 pop.mail.yahoo.com X-Mailer: QUALCOMM Windows Eudora Pro Version 4.2.0.58 Date: Sun, 25 Feb 2001 23:49:46 -0600 To: vortex-l eskimo.com From: Charles Ford Subject: Re: [FG]: Peltier Effect thermo-gravity experiments In-Reply-To: <3A995937.1BE3 bellsouth.net> References: <4.2.0.58.20010224232500.00b85940 postoffice.swbell.net> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"; format=flowed Resent-Message-ID: <"ZUJt31.0.GP2.SlUcw" mx1> Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/41020 X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com Status: O X-Status: Terry: On the contrary.. IF the effect was electromagnetic then AC would have worked. If the effect was some odd hole flow X files thing then AC should have worked. The Human ear can detect sound levels that are less then 1mW given close enough proximity to the ear canal. At 15W I was using an efficiency of 1/15000 should have made an audible tone. In the Peltier chip heat will leak back through the semiconductors while it is in operation. Nick had a smaller effect when there was no good flow of heat from the hot to the cold. Once the heat was returned in a more efficient manor the effect increased. I have seen this also. Concerning the ring oscillator I suspect that effect is strictly EM. Where the signal radiated from the oscillators circular wiring pattern was bouncing off the ground and causing an inductive repulsion. This ring oscillator is an old (odd inverts delay) method that I have used many times dating back into the early 80's and I got it form a Radio Shack Kit that dates back into the 70's This particular model has no frequency limiting devices added to control the ring rate. It is running full blast at whatever frequency the transistors will allow. Ill bet you have a heat problem. What is new and cool about the device is the round 60degree construction making it into its own antenna. If you try centralizing the ground and using three flat coils in the emitter circuits you will see much much more force. (providing the coils are turned in the same direction. This will even lower the ring frequency and allow the transistors to switch in class C rather then fry in class A operation. So your power consumption will also go down. At 11:12 AM 2/25/01 -0800, you wrote: >Charles Ford wrote: > > > A quick easy experiment. If I modulate the current with an audio frequency > > or even use AC there should be an audible tone. I tuned my scanner in to > > 162550 KHz (our local NOAA Weather radio) plugged it up to the chip and > > gave it a listen. > > > > Nothing. > >AC won't work. Don't forget about the Seebeck effect! > >Terry _________________________________________________________ Do You Yahoo!? Get your free yahoo.com address at http://mail.yahoo.com From vortex-l-request eskimo.com Sun Feb 25 22:04:21 2001 Received: (from smartlst localhost) by mx1.eskimo.com (8.9.1a/8.8.8) id WAA19008; Sun, 25 Feb 2001 22:03:21 -0800 Resent-Date: Sun, 25 Feb 2001 22:03:21 -0800 X-Authentication-Warning: eskimo.com: billb owned process doing -bs Date: Sun, 25 Feb 2001 22:03:15 -0800 (PST) From: William Beaty To: sciclub-list eskimo.com Subject: Photos of touchdown on Eros Message-ID: MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: TEXT/PLAIN; charset=US-ASCII Resent-Message-ID: <"OprC91.0.ne4.d6Vcw" mx1> Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/41021 X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com Status: O X-Status: FYI: Astro Picture of the Day: last NEAR photo before contact http://antwrp.gsfc.nasa.gov/apod/ap010213.html Image sequence during approach http://near-mirror.boulder.swri.edu/iod/archive.html Off topic: eerie 3D gif-anim of one lunar month (500K) http://jasmine.uchicago.edu/fun/synodic.html ((((((((((((((((((((( ( ( ( ( (O) ) ) ) ) ))))))))))))))))))))) William J. Beaty SCIENCE HOBBYIST website billb eskimo.com http://www.amasci.com EE/programmer/sci-exhibits science projects, tesla, weird science Seattle, WA 206-789-0775 freenrg-L taoshum-L vortex-L webhead-L From vortex-l-request eskimo.com Sun Feb 25 22:18:41 2001 Received: (from smartlst localhost) by mx1.eskimo.com (8.9.1a/8.8.8) id WAA29483; Sun, 25 Feb 2001 22:18:12 -0800 Resent-Date: Sun, 25 Feb 2001 22:18:12 -0800 Message-ID: <3A9A0131.FF37D88C ix.netcom.com> Date: Sun, 25 Feb 2001 23:09:37 -0800 From: Akira Kawasaki X-Mailer: Mozilla 4.72 [en]C-CCK-MCD NSCPCD472 (Win95; U) X-Accept-Language: en MIME-Version: 1.0 To: Vortex Subject: The Time's (U.K.) news of Iraq's atomic bombS Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Resent-Message-ID: <"D2QKz2.0.HC7.XKVcw" mx1> Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/41022 X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com Status: RO X-Status: Feb 25, 2001 Vortex, Drudge's link to Britain's The Times shows a report that science defectors from Iraq claims that Iraq had tested an atomic bomb before the petroleum conflict in Kuwait. It seems Iraq now has several bombs ready. Israel may make preemptive strikes. There is another link on the Times' web page that has another link to a report related to the the bomb item. It did not take too long for the United States to develop the Hydrogen (er, Deuterium?) Bomb using an atomic bomb design as trigger. So I would expect those nations having developed and tested their own atomic bombs to be advancing, if not already having a fusion bomb. For them, developing a 'pure fusion bomb' is a far off third project. Proliferation, proliferation! MAD is alive and well. We may yet beat crashing asteroids in minimizing life. -AK- From vortex-l-request eskimo.com Mon Feb 26 00:14:18 2001 Received: (from smartlst localhost) by mx1.eskimo.com (8.9.1a/8.8.8) id AAA07318; Mon, 26 Feb 2001 00:13:41 -0800 Resent-Date: Mon, 26 Feb 2001 00:13:41 -0800 Message-Id: Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Date: Sun, 25 Feb 2001 23:23:59 -0900 To: vortex-l eskimo.com From: hheffner mtaonline.net (Horace Heffner) Subject: Re: Calculating the thrust from a heat pump Resent-Message-ID: <"myGoG1.0.3o1.o0Xcw" mx1> Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/41024 X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com Status: O X-Status: At 7:34 PM 2/25/1, Nick Reiter wrote: >Gentlemen; > > This is all very fascinating, yet I am not entirely sure how you are >applying it to the Peltier device force effect, considering that the effect >manifested inside both a thermally shunting (copper or Al envelope) AND >foam insulation firmly bonded to the outer envelope surface. > >Empirically I remain; > >NR I have already made note of this shortcoming: At 10:39 AM 2/25/1, Horace Heffner wrote: [snip] >The concept behind this can not explain a prolonged thrust (acceleration) >inside an insulated envelope - like Scott's paper towel. (Scott Little's paper towel that is.) I'm still working on Scott Stevens' first 4 equations (see below). Don't bother me with minor details like the fact I have the force going the wrong way, or the Peltier not in a box! 8^) At 12:28 PM 2/23/1, Scott Stephens wrote: >Since F= d(mv)/dt Newtons 2nd law > >and KE=1/2 (mv^2) Kinetic Energy > >then KE= 1/2 (mv)(mv)/m Solving for Force in terms of kinetic energy and >mass (m) *** So far I've only gotten to here. *** > >(mv)= (2m KE)^1/2 > >so F= d (2m KE)^1/2 / dt > I should be a lot further, but I just don't have much time lately. I may have to get away from my computer a while and get busy doing what I should be doing. 8^( Regards, Horace Heffner From vortex-l-request eskimo.com Mon Feb 26 00:15:39 2001 Received: (from smartlst localhost) by mx1.eskimo.com (8.9.1a/8.8.8) id AAA07282; Mon, 26 Feb 2001 00:13:34 -0800 Resent-Date: Mon, 26 Feb 2001 00:13:34 -0800 Message-Id: Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Date: Sun, 25 Feb 2001 23:23:57 -0900 To: vortex-l eskimo.com From: hheffner mtaonline.net (Horace Heffner) Subject: Re: The Time's (U.K.) news of Iraq's atomic bombS Resent-Message-ID: <"o8B973.0.hn1.j0Xcw" mx1> Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/41023 X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com Status: RO X-Status: At 11:09 PM 2/25/1, Akira Kawasaki wrote: >Drudge's link to Britain's The Times shows... What is Drudge? Do you have a URL? Regards, Horace Heffner From vortex-l-request eskimo.com Mon Feb 26 03:24:48 2001 Received: (from smartlst localhost) by mx1.eskimo.com (8.9.1a/8.8.8) id DAA15454; Mon, 26 Feb 2001 03:21:58 -0800 Resent-Date: Mon, 26 Feb 2001 03:21:58 -0800 Message-ID: <01b501c09fdd$fffc7da0$09d5323f computer> From: "Frederick Sparber" To: Subject: Re: A Solar Powered Radiometer Propulsion Machine? Date: Mon, 26 Feb 2001 04:20:52 -0600 MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-Priority: 3 X-MSMail-Priority: Normal X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook Express 5.50.4133.2400 X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V5.50.4133.2400 Resent-Message-ID: <"7q66l2.0.On3.MnZcw" mx1> Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/41025 X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com Status: RO X-Status: Since the force on the blackened vanes in the Crookes Radiometer is maximum at ~ 60 millitorr gas pressure,and many orders of magnitude greater than photon pressure, why not mount sets of vanes in a lightweight clear plastic" bubble" pressurized to ~ 60 millitorr in space, then using some "gearing", work it so that as the sets of vanes rotate into space-darkness (shadow) they will radiate at T^4 power and cool down ready for another impulse as they come back into the ~ 1.3 kw/meter^2 solar insolation at 1.0 A,U.? Details not available. :-) Regards, Frederick From vortex-l-request eskimo.com Mon Feb 26 03:47:07 2001 Received: (from smartlst localhost) by mx1.eskimo.com (8.9.1a/8.8.8) id DAA19563; Mon, 26 Feb 2001 03:46:16 -0800 Resent-Date: Mon, 26 Feb 2001 03:46:16 -0800 Message-ID: <000001c09fe8$f0f522c0$513dee3f default> From: "Nick Reiter" To: References: <3A99A9C9.423 suite224.net> Subject: Re: Now antigravity's everywhere!/ Name for the Peltier force effect Date: Mon, 26 Feb 2001 06:39:24 -0500 MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-Priority: 3 X-MSMail-Priority: Normal X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook Express 5.00.2919.6600 X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V5.00.2919.6600 Resent-Message-ID: <"HkJf83.0.bn4.78acw" mx1> Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/41026 X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com Status: RO X-Status: Well, this one is certainly an easy one to test! Chris Hardeman is the fellow who built the microwave powered simulacrum of the Barbury (sp) crop circle design that supposedly loses some weight when it is powered up. In truth, there could be many approaches to fiddling with gravity, inertia, and space/aether/vacuum. Maybe there is a large enough influx of people thinking out of the box now, that some of these will come to light. On that note, I suppose I should jump on the wagon and think of a clever but elegant name for the Peltier force effect. I'm normally pretty humble about such things, but I guess in the event that it survives artifact gauntlet, it deserves a name. I also suppose I have the right to claim it's discovery, although like other odd effects, someone somewhere has always seen it before... I propose: The Peltier - Reiter Effect (I think someone on the list tagged it with that at one point already) NR ----- Original Message ----- From: "Rick Monteverde" To: Sent: Sunday, February 25, 2001 9:59 PM Subject: Now antigravity's everywhere! Why couldn't we find it before? > Stolen from JLN's list: > > At 1:47 AM +0000 2/26/01, chrish icnet.net wrote: > > >Dear Members, > > > >While thinking about Fran de Aquino's equations in his paper , "The > >Correlation Between Gravitation and Electromagnetism, Inertia and > >Unification" found at; http://arxiv.org/abs/physics/9905003%20 the > >following thought occurred to me. A simple and easy test of his basic > >theory can be performed by radiating a piece of Phosphorescence > >plastic (my daughter has in her bedroom four inch plastic stars that > >she had placed around about) with light and measure the gravitational > >mass change with a balance or scale. This would prove his basic > >premises and it would be easy to do. I took three plastic stars from > >her bedroom and stacked them on top of each other, placing them on a > >Ohaus "Cent O Gram" , hanging pan balance with a 0.01 gram > >readability. Once the balance was stable I switched on the famous > >black-light ( UV ) and the sample instantly became lighter. The weight > >change is undeniable and inexplicable without Aquino's theory. The > >effect last only as long as the light is on and disappears quickly > >when switched off. This effect I have dubbed "The Aquino/ Hardeman > >Photo-gravity effect" in honor of its discovery." > > > >Best Regards- > >Chris Hardeman > > From vortex-l-request eskimo.com Mon Feb 26 05:47:00 2001 Received: (from smartlst localhost) by mx1.eskimo.com (8.9.1a/8.8.8) id FAA17399; Mon, 26 Feb 2001 05:45:45 -0800 Resent-Date: Mon, 26 Feb 2001 05:45:45 -0800 Message-ID: <3A9A5FBC.4EAC1A4 bellsouth.net> Date: Mon, 26 Feb 2001 08:53:00 -0500 From: Terry Blanton X-Mailer: Mozilla 4.73 [en] (WinNT; U) X-Accept-Language: en MIME-Version: 1.0 To: vortex-l eskimo.com Subject: Re: Now antigravity's everywhere!/ Name for the Peltier force effect References: <3A99A9C9.423 suite224.net> <000001c09fe8$f0f522c0$513dee3f@default> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Resent-Message-ID: <"h836e3.0.nF4.9ubcw" mx1> Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/41027 X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com Status: RO X-Status: Nick Reiter wrote: > > Well, this one is certainly an easy one to test! Chris Hardeman is the > fellow who built the microwave powered simulacrum of the Barbury (sp) crop > circle design that supposedly loses some weight when it is powered up. > > In truth, there could be many approaches to fiddling with gravity, > inertia, and space/aether/vacuum. Maybe there is a large enough influx of > people thinking out of the box now, that some of these will come to light. > > On that note, I suppose I should jump on the wagon and think of a clever but > elegant name for the Peltier force effect. I'm normally pretty humble about > such things, but I guess in the event that it survives artifact gauntlet, it > deserves a name. I also suppose I have the right to claim it's discovery, > although like other odd effects, someone somewhere has always seen it > before... > > I propose: The Peltier - Reiter Effect (I think someone on the list > tagged it with that at one point already) I kinda like the "Reiter Lighter Effect". :) Terry From vortex-l-request eskimo.com Mon Feb 26 05:55:22 2001 Received: (from smartlst localhost) by mx1.eskimo.com (8.9.1a/8.8.8) id FAA20118; Mon, 26 Feb 2001 05:54:26 -0800 Resent-Date: Mon, 26 Feb 2001 05:54:26 -0800 Message-Id: <200102261354.IAA21212 mercury.mv.net> Subject: Dean Kamen at New Hydrogen and Space Drive Conf. Date: Mon, 26 Feb 2001 08:49:32 -0400 x-sender: zeropoint-ed pop.mv.net x-mailer: Claris Emailer 2.0v3, January 22, 1998 From: "Eugene F. Mallove" To: "VORTEX" Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit X-MIME-Autoconverted: from quoted-printable to 8bit by mx1.eskimo.com id FAA20010 Resent-Message-ID: <"k3iTU1.0.9w4.I0ccw" mx1> Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/41028 X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com Status: RO X-Status: New Hydrogen Technologies and Space Drives Saturday, June 23, and Sunday, June 24, 2001 Congress Center Thurgauerhof, CH-8570 Weinfelden/Switzerland Organizer: Institute for New Energy Technologies (INET), Jupiter-Publishers and German Association for Space Energy (GASE) 01.00 p.m. Welcome adress: Adolf and Inge Schneider (INET) 01.15 p.m. Innovations in Science and Technology New Sustainable Energy Sources and Transportation Systems Dean Kamen, President DEKA Research & Development Corporation,Manchester, New Hampshire/USA 02.00 p.m. Advanced Concepts for Wireless Energy Transfer High Efficient Power Engineering with Scalar Waves Prof. Dr.-Ing. Konstantin Meyl, Transfer Centre of the Steinbeis-Foundation for Economical Assistance, TZA, St.Georgen/Black Forest, Germany 02.45 p.m. On the Variability of the Gravitational Constant Discussion of possible Interactions between EM-Fields and Gravity Lida Lemons, Goede Scientific Foundation, Waldaschaff, Germany 03.30 p.m. Fran De Aquino's Gravitational Spacecraft Report and Test Results of the System-G Experimental Setup Jean-Louis Naudin, System-Engineer, Sanmoreau/Fontainebleau, France (expected) 04.15 p.m. Coffee break and demonstrations 04.45 p.m. The Motionless Electromagnetic Generator (MEG) Theory and Test of an Advanced Free Energy Device Tom Bearden, President Magnetics Energy Limited, USA (expected) 05.30 p.m. The Secret of Zero-Point Energy Can the Vacuum be engineered for Space-Flight Applications? Dr. Harold Puthoff, Institute for Advanced Studies, Austin/Texas/USA 06.30 p.m. Break for Dinner and Discussions 08.00 p.m. Generator with Energy Conversion and Anti-Gravity- Effects An Experimental Investigation of the Physical effects in a Dynamic Magnetic System V.V. Roschin and S.M. Godin, Institute for High Temperatures, Russian Academy od Science, Moscow, Russia 08.45 p.m. The Searl Effect Generator and the Levity Disc Energy Generation and Gravity Control for Space Flight Systems John R.R. Searl, Inventor, Great-Britain Sunday, June 24, 2001 09.30 a.m. "Space Energy Technologies" and the Society Effects of New Energy Systems on Politics, Economy and Science Prof. Dr.Dr.Dr.h.c. Josef Gruber, President of the German Association of Space Energy, Hagen, Germany 10.15 a.m. Energetic-Dynamic Background of the World The Resonance Principle and the Space Quanta Medium Dr. rer.nat. Dietrich Schuster, Prien, Deutschland 11.00 a.m. Water as a new Source of Energy Theory and Experiments with a High Efficient Plasma- Electrolytic Reactor Ph. M. Kanarev, Kuban State Agrarian University, Krasnodar, Russia 12.00 a.m. Lunch 01.30 p.m. Hydrogen Technologies for Emission-free Vehicles Strategies for the Introduction of a new Car Technology Gustav Grob, President ICEC (International Clean Energy Consortium), Daniel Dingel, Inventor, Manila/Philippines 02.30 p.m. High Efficient Thermolytic Water-Splitting Systems Theory and Experiments on the Basis of Benjamin Hofers` Invention Dr. sc.nat. Hans Weber, TransAltec Inc., Spreitenbach/Schweiz Rene Stoll, Restola AG, Beggingen, Schweiz 03.30 p.m. The Neutrino-Diffusor - a new efficient Energy Source Gas and Electricity Production with Space Resonance Coupling Shad, Inventor, Croatia 04.00 p.m. Coffee break 04.30 p.m. The Dynamics of Space Technologies Strategies for the Marketing of New Energy Products Adolf and Inge Schneider, TransAltec Inc., Egerkingen, Switzerland 05.00 p.m. Vision for an enjoyable Future Concepts for the Harmony in Engineering, Science and Society Dr. iur. Hansjörg Landolt, Brione, Switzerland 05.45 p.m. Closing adress of the organizers Congress registration: INET / Jupiter Publishers, P.O.Box, CH 4622 Egerkingen, Phone/Fax. 062 38898 50/1 email: adolf.schneider datacomm.ch ----------------- End Forwarded Message ----------------- From vortex-l-request eskimo.com Mon Feb 26 05:59:07 2001 Received: (from smartlst localhost) by mx1.eskimo.com (8.9.1a/8.8.8) id FAA20999; Mon, 26 Feb 2001 05:58:05 -0800 Resent-Date: Mon, 26 Feb 2001 05:58:05 -0800 Message-ID: <3A9A62A2.695F7D22 bellsouth.net> Date: Mon, 26 Feb 2001 09:05:22 -0500 From: Terry Blanton X-Mailer: Mozilla 4.73 [en] (WinNT; U) X-Accept-Language: en MIME-Version: 1.0 To: vortex-l eskimo.com Subject: Re: The Time's (U.K.) news of Iraq's atomic bombS References: Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Resent-Message-ID: <"wFsPX1.0.185.i3ccw" mx1> Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/41029 X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com Status: O X-Status: Horace Heffner wrote: > > At 11:09 PM 2/25/1, Akira Kawasaki wrote: > > >Drudge's link to Britain's The Times shows... > > What is Drudge? Do you have a URL? http://www.drudgereport.com But, I posted the Sunday Times story URL on VortexB, to which you're probably not subscribed. Try: http://www.escribe.com/science/vortexB/m149.html Another story says that we came close to a nuclear exchange between Israel/Iraq last Thursday: http://www.sightings.com/general8/warr.htm However, some believe these stories are less than accurate: http://www.sightings.com/general8/boimb.htm (yes, that's spelled right) Terry From vortex-l-request eskimo.com Mon Feb 26 06:08:01 2001 Received: (from smartlst localhost) by mx1.eskimo.com (8.9.1a/8.8.8) id GAA23375; Mon, 26 Feb 2001 06:05:48 -0800 Resent-Date: Mon, 26 Feb 2001 06:05:48 -0800 Message-ID: <3A9A646F.8A558CA6 bellsouth.net> Date: Mon, 26 Feb 2001 09:13:03 -0500 From: Terry Blanton X-Mailer: Mozilla 4.73 [en] (WinNT; U) X-Accept-Language: en MIME-Version: 1.0 To: vortex-l eskimo.com Subject: Re: The Time's (U.K.) news of Iraq's atomic bombS References: <3A9A0131.FF37D88C ix.netcom.com> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Resent-Message-ID: <"y8Fsy1.0.8j5.yAccw" mx1> Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/41030 X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com Status: O X-Status: Akira Kawasaki wrote: > > Feb 25, 2001 > > Vortex, > > Drudge's link to Britain's The Times shows a report that science > defectors from Iraq claims that Iraq had tested an atomic bomb before > the petroleum conflict in Kuwait. It seems Iraq now has several bombs > ready. Israel may make preemptive strikes. There is another link on the > Times' web page that has another link to a report related to the the > bomb item. You might recall that our Ambassador (a woman, forgot her name) implied to Saddam that it was okay for him to invade Kuwait. Did we allow this to happen because we knew of the test? Was the entire war an attempt to thwart completion of more bombs? It never really made sense to me until now (possibly). > It did not take too long for the United States to develop the Hydrogen > (er, Deuterium?) Bomb using an atomic bomb design as trigger. So I would > expect those nations having developed and tested their own atomic bombs > to be advancing, if not already having a fusion bomb. For them, > developing a 'pure fusion bomb' is a far off third project. Clancy's 'Sum of All Fears' about a terrorist nuclear weapon exploding at the Denver SuperBowl is being made into a movie with Ben Affleck as Jack Ryan (ugh!). The book has a good description of how to turn a pure fission device into one which can ignite fusion. > Proliferation, proliferation! MAD is alive and well. We may yet beat > crashing asteroids in minimizing life. Yeah, and maybe all these UFOs people are seeing really are visitors watching the endgame. I don't think assured destruction is much of a deterrent to fanatics. Terry From vortex-l-request eskimo.com Mon Feb 26 06:51:28 2001 Received: (from smartlst localhost) by mx1.eskimo.com (8.9.1a/8.8.8) id GAA07619; Mon, 26 Feb 2001 06:44:39 -0800 Resent-Date: Mon, 26 Feb 2001 06:44:39 -0800 Message-ID: <3A9A6D85.19D462DE bellsouth.net> Date: Mon, 26 Feb 2001 09:51:49 -0500 From: Terry Blanton X-Mailer: Mozilla 4.73 [en] (WinNT; U) X-Accept-Language: en MIME-Version: 1.0 To: vortex-l eskimo.com Subject: Re: [FG]: Peltier Effect thermo-gravity experiments References: <4.2.0.58.20010224232500.00b85940 postoffice.swbell.net> <4.2.0.58.20010225231108.00b82380@postoffice.swbell.net> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Resent-Message-ID: <"A6BAq1.0.zs1.Nlccw" mx1> Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/41031 X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com Status: O X-Status: Charles Ford wrote: > > Terry: > > On the contrary.. IF the effect was electromagnetic then AC would have > worked. My point is that there is no thermal effect until the Seebeck effect is overcome. You could be right if the effect is stricly electromagnetic. Terry From vortex-l-request eskimo.com Mon Feb 26 07:47:25 2001 Received: (from smartlst localhost) by mx1.eskimo.com (8.9.1a/8.8.8) id HAA20259; Mon, 26 Feb 2001 07:42:59 -0800 Resent-Date: Mon, 26 Feb 2001 07:42:59 -0800 Message-ID: <3A9A78AA.F6C18326 ix.netcom.com> Date: Mon, 26 Feb 2001 07:39:22 -0800 From: Akira Kawasaki X-Mailer: Mozilla 4.72 [en]C-CCK-MCD NSCPCD472 (Win95; U) X-Accept-Language: en MIME-Version: 1.0 To: vortex-l eskimo.com Subject: Re: Dean Kamen at New Hydrogen and Space Drive Conf. References: <200102261354.IAA21212 mercury.mv.net> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=iso-8859-1 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit Resent-Message-ID: <"KMA7g2.0.Oy4.2cdcw" mx1> Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/41032 X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com Status: O X-Status: Feb. 26, 2001 Vortex, Will Infinite Energy, alias Eugene Mallove or Jed Rothwell, be covering and reporting on this Switzerland event? -ak- "Eugene F. Mallove" wrote: > New Hydrogen Technologies and Space Drives > Saturday, June 23, and Sunday, June 24, 2001 > Congress Center Thurgauerhof, CH-8570 Weinfelden/Switzerland > > Organizer: > Institute for New Energy Technologies (INET), Jupiter-Publishers and > German Association for Space Energy (GASE) > > 01.00 p.m. Welcome adress: Adolf and Inge Schneider (INET) > > 01.15 p.m. Innovations in Science and Technology > New Sustainable Energy Sources and Transportation > Systems > Dean Kamen, President DEKA Research & Development > Corporation,Manchester, New Hampshire/USA > > 02.00 p.m. Advanced Concepts for Wireless Energy Transfer > High Efficient Power Engineering with Scalar > Waves > Prof. Dr.-Ing. Konstantin Meyl, Transfer Centre of > the Steinbeis-Foundation for Economical > Assistance, > TZA, St.Georgen/Black Forest, Germany > > 02.45 p.m. On the Variability of the Gravitational Constant > Discussion of possible Interactions between EM-Fields > and Gravity Lida Lemons, Goede Scientific Foundation, > Waldaschaff, Germany > > 03.30 p.m. Fran De Aquino's Gravitational Spacecraft > Report and Test Results of the System-G Experimental > Setup > Jean-Louis Naudin, System-Engineer, > Sanmoreau/Fontainebleau, France (expected) > > 04.15 p.m. Coffee break and demonstrations > > 04.45 p.m. The Motionless Electromagnetic Generator (MEG) > Theory and Test of an Advanced Free Energy Device > Tom Bearden, President Magnetics Energy Limited, USA > (expected) > > 05.30 p.m. The Secret of Zero-Point Energy > Can the Vacuum be engineered for Space-Flight > Applications? > Dr. Harold Puthoff, Institute for Advanced Studies, > Austin/Texas/USA > > 06.30 p.m. Break for Dinner and Discussions > > 08.00 p.m. Generator with Energy Conversion and Anti-Gravity- > Effects > An Experimental Investigation of the Physical effects > in a Dynamic Magnetic System > V.V. Roschin and S.M. Godin, Institute for High > Temperatures, Russian Academy od Science, > Moscow, Russia > > 08.45 p.m. The Searl Effect Generator and the Levity Disc > Energy Generation and Gravity Control for Space > Flight Systems > John R.R. Searl, Inventor, Great-Britain > > Sunday, June 24, 2001 > > 09.30 a.m. "Space Energy Technologies" and the Society > Effects of New Energy Systems on Politics, Economy > and Science > Prof. Dr.Dr.Dr.h.c. Josef Gruber, President of the > German Association of Space Energy, Hagen, Germany > > 10.15 a.m. Energetic-Dynamic Background of the World > The Resonance Principle and the Space Quanta Medium > Dr. rer.nat. Dietrich Schuster, Prien, > Deutschland > > 11.00 a.m. Water as a new Source of Energy > Theory and Experiments with a High Efficient Plasma- > Electrolytic Reactor > Ph. M. Kanarev, Kuban State Agrarian University, > Krasnodar, Russia > > 12.00 a.m. Lunch > > 01.30 p.m. Hydrogen Technologies for Emission-free Vehicles > Strategies for the Introduction of a new Car > Technology > Gustav Grob, President ICEC (International Clean > Energy Consortium), Daniel Dingel, Inventor, > Manila/Philippines > > 02.30 p.m. High Efficient Thermolytic Water-Splitting Systems > Theory and Experiments on the Basis of Benjamin > Hofers` Invention > Dr. sc.nat. Hans Weber, TransAltec Inc., > Spreitenbach/Schweiz > Rene Stoll, Restola AG, Beggingen, Schweiz > > 03.30 p.m. The Neutrino-Diffusor - a new efficient Energy Source > Gas and Electricity Production with Space Resonance > Coupling > Shad, Inventor, Croatia > > 04.00 p.m. Coffee break > > 04.30 p.m. The Dynamics of Space Technologies > Strategies for the Marketing of New Energy Products > Adolf and Inge Schneider, TransAltec Inc., > Egerkingen, Switzerland > > 05.00 p.m. Vision for an enjoyable Future > Concepts for the Harmony in Engineering, Science and > Society > Dr. iur. Hansjörg Landolt, Brione, Switzerland > > 05.45 p.m. Closing adress of the organizers > > Congress registration: > INET / Jupiter Publishers, P.O.Box, CH 4622 Egerkingen, > Phone/Fax. 062 38898 50/1 email: adolf.schneider datacomm.ch > > ----------------- End Forwarded Message ----------------- From vortex-l-request eskimo.com Mon Feb 26 11:14:35 2001 Received: (from smartlst localhost) by mx1.eskimo.com (8.9.1a/8.8.8) id LAA27905; Mon, 26 Feb 2001 11:09:56 -0800 Resent-Date: Mon, 26 Feb 2001 11:09:56 -0800 Message-Id: <5.0.2.1.2.20010226140758.028511f8 pop.mindspring.com> X-Sender: jedrothwell pop.mindspring.com X-Mailer: QUALCOMM Windows Eudora Version 5.0.2 Date: Mon, 26 Feb 2001 14:09:41 -0500 To: vortex-l eskimo.com, vortex-l@eskimo.com From: Jed Rothwell Subject: Re: New work on cold fusion In-Reply-To: <3A982B7A.6219546E ix.netcom.com> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"; format=flowed Resent-Message-ID: <"R7cKL1.0.hp6.1egcw" mx1> Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/41033 X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com Status: RO X-Status: Edmund Storms wrote: >To all persons interested in cold fusion: > >I have just down loaded on my website >(http://home.netcom.com/~storms2/index.html) a paper that >will be presented at the APS meeting in March. . . . The direct address of this new paper is: http://home.netcom.com/~storms2/ways.html Everyone here should read this paper. It's required reading, as they say in college. - Jed From vortex-l-request eskimo.com Mon Feb 26 11:38:58 2001 Received: (from smartlst localhost) by mx2.eskimo.com (8.9.1a/8.8.8) id LAA08421; Mon, 26 Feb 2001 11:18:27 -0800 (PST) Resent-Date: Mon, 26 Feb 2001 11:18:27 -0800 (PST) Message-Id: <5.0.2.1.2.20010226141431.02863b40 pop.mindspring.com> X-Sender: jedrothwell pop.mindspring.com X-Mailer: QUALCOMM Windows Eudora Version 5.0.2 Date: Mon, 26 Feb 2001 14:17:39 -0500 To: vortex-l eskimo.com, vortex-l@eskimo.com From: Jed Rothwell Subject: Re: Dean Kamen at New Hydrogen and Space Drive Conf. In-Reply-To: <3A9A78AA.F6C18326 ix.netcom.com> References: <200102261354.IAA21212 mercury.mv.net> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"; format=flowed Resent-Message-ID: <"PQVl31.0.B32.ylgcw" mx2> Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/41035 X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com Status: O X-Status: Akira Kawasaki wrote: >Will Infinite Energy, alias Eugene Mallove or Jed Rothwell, be covering >and reporting on this Switzerland event? Not me. I don't know a thing about the subject matter. Here is the Kamen paper title: > > 01.15 p.m. Innovations in Science and Technology > > New Sustainable Energy Sources and Transportation > > Systems > > Dean Kamen, President DEKA Research & Development > > Corporation,Manchester, New Hampshire/USA I guess this lends some credence to the suspicion that Kamen has come up with something radical, and not simply a two-wheeled scooter. If it were a scooter I could probably write an intelligent review! - Jed From vortex-l-request eskimo.com Mon Feb 26 11:54:43 2001 Received: (from smartlst localhost) by mx2.eskimo.com (8.9.1a/8.8.8) id LAA08373; Mon, 26 Feb 2001 11:18:22 -0800 (PST) Resent-Date: Mon, 26 Feb 2001 11:18:22 -0800 (PST) Message-Id: <5.0.2.1.2.20010226140408.028203e8 pop.mindspring.com> X-Sender: jedrothwell pop.mindspring.com X-Mailer: QUALCOMM Windows Eudora Version 5.0.2 Date: Mon, 26 Feb 2001 14:07:34 -0500 To: vortex-L eskimo.com From: Jed Rothwell Subject: Technology Review: Fuel Cells Not Efficient Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"; format=flowed Resent-Message-ID: <"HJeTm2.0.E22.olgcw" mx2> Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/41034 X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com Status: O X-Status: Here are some quotes from the MIT journal Technology Review web site: http://www.techreview.com/magazine/mar01/innovation3.asp . . . Under growing pressure to improve energy efficiency, automakers around the world have already spent approximately $2 billion to develop electric cars powered by fuel cells. The technology involved, which uses hydrogen to generate electricity, has been heralded as the key to tomorrow's cleaner-running car. But is it really environmentally friendlier? In the short term, the answer is no, according to a recent MIT study. Over the next two decades, fuel cells will deliver an environmental performance only slightly better than advanced versions of the familiar internal-combustion gasoline engine, the study says. During that time, another technologyinternal combustion/electric hybrid cars like the Honda Insight and Toyota Prius . . . promise the lowest energy consumption and emissions. If every corner gas station sold hydrogen, fuel cells would be more efficient and competitive. . . . . . . Fuel cells have a better chance beyond 2020, when hydrogen may be more available, says Brendan Prebo of Ford, which is in partnership to sell a fuel-cell car in 2004. He said the findings "aren't that big a surprise." From vortex-l-request eskimo.com Mon Feb 26 12:36:00 2001 Received: (from smartlst localhost) by mx1.eskimo.com (8.9.1a/8.8.8) id MAA27148; Mon, 26 Feb 2001 12:25:53 -0800 Resent-Date: Mon, 26 Feb 2001 12:25:53 -0800 Mime-Version: 1.0 X-Sender: rick mail.highsurf.com Message-Id: In-Reply-To: <3A9A5FBC.4EAC1A4 bellsouth.net> References: <3A99A9C9.423 suite224.net> <000001c09fe8$f0f522c0$513dee3f default> <3A9A5FBC.4EAC1A4@bellsouth.net> Date: Mon, 26 Feb 2001 10:25:36 -1000 To: vortex-l eskimo.com From: Rick Monteverde Subject: Re: Now antigravity's everywhere!/ Name for the Peltier force effect Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" ; format="flowed" Resent-Message-ID: <"Uhgo93.0.sd6.Glhcw" mx1> Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/41036 X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com Status: RO X-Status: Terry - Well, there's no solid evidence yet that it's real and not an artifact, although I'd have to say (knock on wood) it looks good so far. So naming seems premature. But if it's real, it think it ought to be "Fred"-something, because Peter Fred has been carrying on for a long time about heat flow is involved with either gravity, or a gravity-like force. - Rick Monteverde Honolulu, HI >Nick Reiter wrote: >> >> Well, this one is certainly an easy one to test! Chris Hardeman is the >> fellow who built the microwave powered simulacrum of the Barbury (sp) crop >> circle design that supposedly loses some weight when it is powered up. >> >> In truth, there could be many approaches to fiddling with gravity, >> inertia, and space/aether/vacuum. Maybe there is a large enough influx of >> people thinking out of the box now, that some of these will come to light. >> >> On that note, I suppose I should jump on the wagon and think of a clever but >> elegant name for the Peltier force effect. I'm normally pretty humble about >> such things, but I guess in the event that it survives artifact gauntlet, it >> deserves a name. I also suppose I have the right to claim it's discovery, >> although like other odd effects, someone somewhere has always seen it >> before... >> >> I propose: The Peltier - Reiter Effect (I think someone on the list >> tagged it with that at one point already) > >I kinda like the "Reiter Lighter Effect". :) > >Terry From vortex-l-request eskimo.com Mon Feb 26 13:01:43 2001 Received: (from smartlst localhost) by mx1.eskimo.com (8.9.1a/8.8.8) id MAA05500; Mon, 26 Feb 2001 12:49:20 -0800 Resent-Date: Mon, 26 Feb 2001 12:49:20 -0800 Message-ID: <000f01c0a036$995cae40$0c6cd626 varisys.com> From: "George Holz" To: References: <3A96FB02.1050302 pacbell.net> Subject: Re: H/D magnetic and anapole moment Date: Mon, 26 Feb 2001 15:56:32 -0500 MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-Priority: 3 X-MSMail-Priority: Normal X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook Express 5.00.2314.1300 X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V5.00.2314.1300 Resent-Message-ID: <"-97rt1.0.iL1.F5icw" mx1> Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/41037 X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com Status: O X-Status: Jones Beene wrote: >After recently reading some of this anapole research with an >open mind as to ultimate implications, it now seems like the >experiment could have shown results at much higher field >strengths and/or using polarized rf stimulation. But intense >fields are not do-able with PMs, so lets hope a major lab picks >up on the idea sooner or later. - It is possible to achieve fields of over 2 Tesla in a small volume using NIB magnets by combining them with passive magnetic concentrators made of supermendur. Supermendur saturates around 2.4 T , so that is about as high as you can get without an additional air core electromagnet. Supermendur is used to make tape wound cores for high power transformers. Unfortunately I had to pay a $500 minimum order to get some made. George Holz george varisys.com Varitronics Systems 1924 US Hwy 22 East Bound Brook, NJ 08805 From vortex-l-request eskimo.com Mon Feb 26 13:28:45 2001 Received: (from smartlst localhost) by mx1.eskimo.com (8.9.1a/8.8.8) id NAA23911; Mon, 26 Feb 2001 13:24:49 -0800 Resent-Date: Mon, 26 Feb 2001 13:24:49 -0800 Message-Id: <5.0.1.4.0.20010226145648.04451350 earthtech.org> X-Sender: little earthtech.org X-Mailer: QUALCOMM Windows Eudora Version 5.0.1 Date: Mon, 26 Feb 2001 15:02:05 -0600 To: vortex-l eskimo.com From: Scott Little Subject: Peltier-Reiter effect Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"; format=flowed Resent-Message-ID: <"3fA0r3.0.Mr5.Ucicw" mx1> Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/41038 X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com Status: RO X-Status: Welcome to Vortex, Nick. You're the kind of participant this list needs...someone who does good work in the lab and isn't afraid to talk about it. Today, I fleshed out my discovery of last week...that the apparent weight change is a function of the stiffness of the leads...and it still holds. With the 0.0005" thick Cu foil leads, I can detect NO apparent change in weight....i.e. it is less than 1 milligram. With the original leads I was using I saw 5-10 milligrams. With new extra heavy leads (tested today) I can get a 20 milligram apparent change in weight. I put some photos together with a few supporting words at: http://www.earthtech.org/reiter/Peltier/pr.html The only reason I can figure that you're still getting the effect is that your 0.002" Cu foil is just not thin enough. Remember, 4 times thicker material is 64 times stiffer...it goes as the cube of the thickness. Scott Little, EarthTech Int'l, Inc. http://www.earthtech.org Suite 300, 4030 Braker Lane West, Austin TX 78759, USA 512-342-2185 (voice), 512-346-3017 (FAX), little earthtech.org (email) From vortex-l-request eskimo.com Mon Feb 26 15:16:44 2001 Received: (from smartlst localhost) by mx1.eskimo.com (8.9.1a/8.8.8) id PAA04448; Mon, 26 Feb 2001 15:10:50 -0800 Resent-Date: Mon, 26 Feb 2001 15:10:50 -0800 From: Keasy aol.com Message-ID: <6b.10620d11.27cc3c51 aol.com> Date: Mon, 26 Feb 2001 18:10:09 EST Subject: Re: [FG]: Peltier Effect thermo-gravity experiments To: vortex-l eskimo.com MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="US-ASCII" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-Mailer: AOL 5.0 for Windows sub 128 Resent-Message-ID: <"ZCEph3.0.D51.v9kcw" mx1> Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/41040 X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com Status: O X-Status: Hello all, As I mentioned last week, I have gottten a couple Peltier devices to experiment with. Mine are approximately 1"x1", rated at 15V, 2.1A. I thermally shorted the opposite sides with copper and found: 1. With the "hot" up there is a weight loss of about .05 g after the device is powered for a few seconds. 2. If the "cold" side is up, there is no weight change when the device is powered. 3. If I place the device in a small plastic bag with the "hot" side up, there is no weight change when I apply power. In short, I have seen nothing so far beyond the small weight loss I usually see (thermal air current, I think) when objects are heated on the scale. Ken From vortex-l-request eskimo.com Mon Feb 26 15:18:12 2001 Received: (from smartlst localhost) by mx2.eskimo.com (8.9.1a/8.8.8) id OAA13806; Mon, 26 Feb 2001 14:58:51 -0800 (PST) Resent-Date: Mon, 26 Feb 2001 14:58:51 -0800 (PST) Date: Mon, 26 Feb 2001 14:47:08 -0800 From: Jones Beene Subject: Re: H/D magnetic and anapole moment To: vortex-l eskimo.com Message-id: <3A9ADCEC.4000102 pacbell.net> MIME-version: 1.0 Content-type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii; format=flowed Content-transfer-encoding: 7bit User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (Windows; U; Win98; en-US; m18) Gecko/20001108 Netscape6/6.0 X-Accept-Language: en References: <3A96FB02.1050302 pacbell.net> <000f01c0a036$995cae40$0c6cd626 varisys.com> Resent-Message-ID: <"boZYa2.0.WN3.W-jcw" mx2> Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/41039 X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com Status: O X-Status: George Holz wrote: > It is possible to achieve fields of over 2 Tesla in a small volume > using NIB magnets by combining them with passive magnetic > concentrators made of supermendur. Supermendur saturates > around 2.4 T , This is very interesting, George. I had heard that a Japanese company had built an MRI machine using NIB PMs for the field - but I had no idea how they did it - as MRI scanning usually requires over 2t. They must have used supermendur also - and for an MRI machine that's a pretty decent-sized volume to polarize. I had been hoping that one of these days, Mark Goldes would have some of his room temp "ultraconductor" material available for this type of application, but even "bulk" HTSC material should work as a passive concentrator much better than supermendur. I'm pretty sure that it's going to take a significant boost in field/rf strength over MRI specs to dislodge many neutrons (if it is even possible at all). Otherwise someone would have already seen it happen in a hospital on a small scale - and they usually have neutron counters in the same lab as the MRI so it would have been noticed before now. They use very low intensity rf however. The new anapole magnet at U of Ill. cost nearly $3mm and probably gets up to 8-10 t. but that seems like overkill, particularly if one can figure out how to get a high power polarized rf input. They are using lower power rf also but polarized in that experiment. With Deuterium, a field of only 2 t. might work in a NMR power device under certain conditions because of a lovely coincidence that only happens once on the periodic table - i.e. the single electron of the D atom can operate as its own electromagnet - and I think if you figure out the field that the electron generates near the D nucleus its something like 12t. The bottom line is that if you polarize atomic D at only 2t. you can get the much higher field at the nucleus as a free bonus (maybe). I had all the relevant numbers handy a year ago and if memory serves, your NMR frequency for polarized D is about 350 Mhz. when you make the assumption that you are getting the big 12 t. bonus field. Of course, keeping your Deuterium atomic AND not ionic, instead of molecular, is another huge problem and I had formerly been assuming that in a metal matrix, i.e. Pd, it would be atomic, but lately I've heard from good authority that H/D stays paired even in the Pd matrix. Does anyone know for sure? That's probably another reason my device didn't work. > so that is about as high as you can get without > an additional air core electromagnet. I would consider upgrading the experiment if I thought it might be possible to get above 2 t. without going to great lengths (i.e. water cooled coils, kiloamp power supply, etc.) > Supermendur is used to make tape wound cores for high power > transformers. Unfortunately I had to pay a $500 minimum order > to get some made. Yikes. Were you able to get a field strength over 2 t ? Can you describe it, size, etc? Thanks in advance, Jones Beene From vortex-l-request eskimo.com Mon Feb 26 15:43:03 2001 Received: (from smartlst localhost) by mx1.eskimo.com (8.9.1a/8.8.8) id PAA15835; Mon, 26 Feb 2001 15:35:04 -0800 Resent-Date: Mon, 26 Feb 2001 15:35:04 -0800 Message-ID: <004801c0a04b$ecd5cd80$d73dee3f default> From: "Nick Reiter" To: References: <5.0.1.4.0.20010226145648.04451350 earthtech.org> Subject: Re: Peltier-Reiter effect Date: Mon, 26 Feb 2001 18:29:09 -0500 MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-Priority: 3 X-MSMail-Priority: Normal X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook Express 5.00.2919.6600 X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V5.00.2919.6600 Resent-Message-ID: <"bMebw2.0.Ct3.cWkcw" mx1> Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/41041 X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com Status: O X-Status: OK, fair enough- although I am still perplexed over the following: 1. The scale up with multiple Peltier units in series, in two different orientations. Still just two leads coming out of the assembly - why greater weight change? 2. Now that Charlie Ford has seen an effect with a suspended unit, how might this figure in? I have to order more Peltier modules anyway this week, all of the ones I started with are now toasted. I am getting a couple of high power ones - 170 watt units. We will get to the bottom of it. Thanks, Scott for on-going dialog and input. NR ----- Original Message ----- From: "Scott Little" To: Sent: Monday, February 26, 2001 4:02 PM Subject: Peltier-Reiter effect > Welcome to Vortex, Nick. You're the kind of participant this list > needs...someone who does good work in the lab and isn't afraid to talk > about it. > > Today, I fleshed out my discovery of last week...that the apparent weight > change is a function of the stiffness of the leads...and it still holds. > > With the 0.0005" thick Cu foil leads, I can detect NO apparent change in > weight....i.e. it is less than 1 milligram. With the original leads I was > using I saw 5-10 milligrams. With new extra heavy leads (tested today) I > can get a 20 milligram apparent change in weight. > > I put some photos together with a few supporting words at: > > http://www.earthtech.org/reiter/Peltier/pr.html > > The only reason I can figure that you're still getting the effect is that > your 0.002" Cu foil is just not thin enough. Remember, 4 times thicker > material is 64 times stiffer...it goes as the cube of the thickness. > > > > Scott Little, EarthTech Int'l, Inc. http://www.earthtech.org > Suite 300, 4030 Braker Lane West, Austin TX 78759, USA > 512-342-2185 (voice), 512-346-3017 (FAX), little earthtech.org (email) > > From vortex-l-request eskimo.com Mon Feb 26 18:11:44 2001 Received: (from smartlst localhost) by mx1.eskimo.com (8.9.1a/8.8.8) id SAA17148; Mon, 26 Feb 2001 18:06:47 -0800 Resent-Date: Mon, 26 Feb 2001 18:06:47 -0800 Message-ID: <022301c0a059$96434b60$09d5323f computer> From: "Frederick Sparber" To: Subject: Re: Radiometer-Type Thruster? Date: Mon, 26 Feb 2001 19:05:50 -0600 MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-Priority: 3 X-MSMail-Priority: Normal X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook Express 5.50.4133.2400 X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V5.50.4133.2400 Resent-Message-ID: <"x7mIx.0.nB4.skmcw" mx1> Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/41042 X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com Status: RO X-Status: Given the action of the gas molecules on a vane in the Crookes Radiometer (optimum at 60 millitorr because of drag on the rotating vanes) it would seem that a cylindrical tube filled with a gas at a higher pressure with a perforated blackened plate or or wire mesh (wirecloth) dividing the tube into heat absorbing and heat radiating sections each with a glass end plate would act the same as a single vane of the Radiometer and develop a thrust when heated with a heat lamp or such at one end, and allowed to radiate the heat at the other end? Thoughts? Regards, Frederick From vortex-l-request eskimo.com Mon Feb 26 18:17:54 2001 Received: (from smartlst localhost) by mx1.eskimo.com (8.9.1a/8.8.8) id SAA19651; Mon, 26 Feb 2001 18:15:07 -0800 Resent-Date: Mon, 26 Feb 2001 18:15:07 -0800 Date: Mon, 26 Feb 2001 20:01:52 -0600 From: Scott Little Subject: Re: Peltier-Reiter effect In-reply-to: <004801c0a04b$ecd5cd80$d73dee3f default> X-Sender: little earthtech.org To: vortex-l eskimo.com, vortex-l@eskimo.com Message-id: <5.0.2.1.0.20010226195514.03281a88 earthtech.org> MIME-version: 1.0 X-Mailer: QUALCOMM Windows Eudora Version 5.0.2 Content-type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"; format=flowed References: <5.0.1.4.0.20010226145648.04451350 earthtech.org> Resent-Message-ID: <"gk6aA.0.zo4.gsmcw" mx1> Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/41043 X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com Status: O X-Status: At 06:29 PM 2/26/2001 -0500, Nick Reiter wrote: >1. The scale up with multiple Peltier units in series, in two different >orientations. Still just two leads coming out of the assembly - why greater >weight change? This is indeed surprising. It does not fit, at least as I am imagining it. Could you describe (again) the physical configurations of the multiple devices? >2. Now that Charlie Ford has seen an effect with a suspended unit, how >might this figure in? Well, the lead-ceramic sandwich will still "curl" a little so exactly the same artifact should serve to move the device over a little when hung from relatively stiff wires. >I have to order more Peltier modules anyway this week, all of the ones I >started with are now toasted. I am getting a couple of high power ones - >170 watt units. We will get to the bottom of it. Get some 1/2 mil Cu foil, too. Or, if you can't find it readily, drop me your smail address and I'll send you a couple of strips of the stuff. Scott Little EarthTech International, Inc. 4030 Braker Lane West, Suite 300 Austin TX 78759 512-342-2185 512-346-3017 (FAX) http://www.earthtech.org From vortex-l-request eskimo.com Mon Feb 26 19:28:02 2001 Received: (from smartlst localhost) by mx1.eskimo.com (8.9.1a/8.8.8) id TAA17241; Mon, 26 Feb 2001 19:23:15 -0800 Resent-Date: Mon, 26 Feb 2001 19:23:15 -0800 Message-ID: <20010227032308.11194.qmail web2102.mail.yahoo.com> Date: Mon, 26 Feb 2001 19:23:08 -0800 (PST) From: Michael Schaffer Subject: Re: H/D magnetic and anapole moment To: vortex-l eskimo.com In-Reply-To: <3A9ADCEC.4000102 pacbell.net> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Resent-Message-ID: <"jh4Nl.0.ED4.Ysncw" mx1> Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/41044 X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com Status: O X-Status: Re: > It is possible to achieve fields of over 2 Tesla in a small volume > using NIB magnets by combining them with passive magnetic > concentrators made of supermendur. Supermendur saturates > around 2.4 T , It is also possible to achieve fields of about 2 T in a small gap in a conventional "iron" choke or transformer core. Chokes usually have a gap already built in and are thus easier to work with. Not all transformer cores can be readily modified to have an air gap. If g = sum of all air gaps in series(m), B = magnetic flux density in gap (T) NI = winding Amp turn product, mu0 = permeability of air = (4e-7)*pi then in the simple high-reluctance core approximation, which is beginning to break down at 2 T in steels (so the formula below is not very accurate) g = mu0*NI/B For example, if B = 2 T and NI = 10e4 Amp turn (a pretty hefty winding!), then you could ideally expect to sustain 2 T in a gap g up to about 6 mm. In practice, because most steels are at or near saturation at 2 T, I would not expect to approach 2 T with any more than a couple of mm gap. Shaped pole pieces help one get to a bit over 2 T and not have so much flux leaking out of the core all over the place. Good experiments are done in labs this way. ===== Michael J. Schaffer __________________________________________________ Do You Yahoo!? Get email at your own domain with Yahoo! Mail. http://personal.mail.yahoo.com/ From vortex-l-request eskimo.com Mon Feb 26 23:21:01 2001 Received: (from smartlst localhost) by mx2.eskimo.com (8.9.1a/8.8.8) id XAA17931; Mon, 26 Feb 2001 23:19:45 -0800 (PST) Resent-Date: Mon, 26 Feb 2001 23:19:45 -0800 (PST) Message-Id: Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Date: Mon, 26 Feb 2001 22:29:54 -0900 To: vortex-l eskimo.com From: hheffner mtaonline.net (Horace Heffner) Subject: Re: Peltier-Reiter effect Resent-Message-ID: <"XfBGK.0.2O4.DKrcw" mx2> Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/41045 X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com Status: O X-Status: At 6:29 PM 2/26/1, Nick Reiter wrote: >OK, fair enough- although I am still perplexed over the following: > >1. The scale up with multiple Peltier units in series, in two different >orientations. Still just two leads coming out of the assembly - why greater >weight change? > >2. Now that Charlie Ford has seen an effect with a suspended unit, how >might this figure in? The following is a synopsis and clarification of a number of posts I made earlier, some before you joined the list, Nick. Armchair comments to be sure, but based on some related experience, so hopefully useful. To be sure of your results you need to measure the ambient field, both during operation and otherwise. Torque on the magnetic field from the device by the ambient field might become significant at even 10 gauss ambient. (Calculations available if you need.) Control of the ambient field by Helmholtz coils may be a useful approach. A not as good alternative is rotating the scale (and the rest of the experiment) 90 degrees a few times and repeating the experiment to check that the force is unchanged. The Peltier need be tested face up and face down at each scale position of course. A better alternative to thin copper leads, if it is easily enough accomplished, is to power the device by batteries for the test. This further permits the very nice additional approach of using a torsion pendulum or better, a horizontal armature test - without the need for brushes. If torque is produced through multiple 360 degree turns, then it is not due to interaction with the ambient field, and it is not likely a gravitational effect, but rather an inirtial effect. The full turn torsion pendulum is also a superior test to the hanging pendulum test, which also has the characteristic of testing an inirtial effect as opposed to a gravitational effect, assuming the Peltier in the hanging pendulum is vertical and it is started from a standing stop. Another member of the list, Larry Wharton, has had some luck using fishing lure swivels as bearings for hanging armatures. I have found that 6' long extruded aluminum frame material for making window screens is light and strong and gives a long arm length, especially if the counter weight on the arm is heavier than the device under test. The following config is usefull: o Support | | | B Bearing | | Knot / \ / \ / \ Weight==================================Device Lastly, the force needs to be of long enough duration to ensure that it exists when the system is in equilibrium. For this reason it is important to be able to run the test at lower power levels. The device needs to be enlclosed in insulation, so some form of cooling, like ice, needs to be included inside the insulation warpper. It is also important, when using a torsion pendulum or horizontal armature approach, that the power be applied for full rotations of the armature, not selectively pulsed, otherwise the force might unwittingly be from torque from an ambient field at selected orientations (i.e. due to your inadvertantly acting as commutator.) Regards, Horace Heffner From vortex-l-request eskimo.com Tue Feb 27 01:27:51 2001 Received: (from smartlst localhost) by mx1.eskimo.com (8.9.1a/8.8.8) id BAA21589; Tue, 27 Feb 2001 01:23:46 -0800 Resent-Date: Tue, 27 Feb 2001 01:23:46 -0800 Message-ID: <3A9B71F6.885873A verisoft.com.tr> Date: Tue, 27 Feb 2001 11:23:02 +0200 From: hamdi ucar X-Mailer: Mozilla 4.7 [en] (Win98; I) X-Accept-Language: en-US MIME-Version: 1.0 To: vortex-l eskimo.com Subject: Re: Peltier-Reiter effect References: <5.0.1.4.0.20010226145648.04451350 earthtech.org> <004801c0a04b$ecd5cd80$d73dee3f@default> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Resent-Message-ID: <"96DbO1.0.FH5.Y8tcw" mx1> Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/41046 X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com Status: O X-Status: Hi, >From various experiment results, we can say that lead configurations are critical. They could cause artifact or the real effect. It also be shown that mechanical conditions should be precisely setup in order to prevent artifacts. I think it is better to design a setup that nullify mechanical functions of leads but leaving all other possible functions (apparent dependency to weight loss) intact. This can be done by securing leads ends be supported and fixed by the pane (balance pla te). This can be done the setup described at picture http://gravity.webhostme.com/images/fixations.jpg (a modified picture of Scott's setup) Attached wires to cell leads are first stabilized by isolated terminals fixed to the balance plate. These wires not needed be extreme soft like copper strips. Then soft strips can be used to link the fixed terminal at balance plate to the power supply. The terminals, (fixations) can be secured by glue directly to the plate, or better, to another base secured on the plate. Nick Reiter wrote: > > OK, fair enough- although I am still perplexed over the following: > > 1. The scale up with multiple Peltier units in series, in two different > orientations. Still just two leads coming out of the assembly - why greater > weight change? > > 2. Now that Charlie Ford has seen an effect with a suspended unit, how > might this figure in? > > I have to order more Peltier modules anyway this week, all of the ones I > started with are now toasted. I am getting a couple of high power ones - > 170 watt units. We will get to the bottom of it. > > Thanks, Scott for on-going dialog and input. > > NR > Regards, hamdi ucar From vortex-l-request eskimo.com Tue Feb 27 04:25:44 2001 Received: (from smartlst localhost) by mx1.eskimo.com (8.9.1a/8.8.8) id EAA03816; Tue, 27 Feb 2001 04:24:59 -0800 Resent-Date: Tue, 27 Feb 2001 04:24:59 -0800 Message-Id: <200102271224.HAA20183 mercury.mv.net> Subject: Re: Dean Kamen at New Hydrogen and Space Drive Conf. Date: Tue, 27 Feb 2001 07:20:10 -0400 x-sender: zeropoint-ed pop.mv.net x-mailer: Claris Emailer 2.0v3, January 22, 1998 From: "Eugene F. Mallove" To: "VORTEX" Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="US-ASCII" Resent-Message-ID: <"qKMwx.0.Yx.Qovcw" mx1> Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/41047 X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com Status: RO X-Status: >Feb. 26, 2001 > >Vortex, > >Will Infinite Energy, alias Eugene Mallove or Jed Rothwell, be covering >and reporting on this Switzerland event? > >-ak- > >"Eugene F. Mallove" wrote: It looks like an exciting meeting, but we may have to pass on it. Gene Mallove From vortex-l-request eskimo.com Tue Feb 27 07:58:08 2001 Received: (from smartlst localhost) by mx1.eskimo.com (8.9.1a/8.8.8) id HAA16543; Tue, 27 Feb 2001 07:54:48 -0800 Resent-Date: Tue, 27 Feb 2001 07:54:48 -0800 Message-Id: Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Date: Tue, 27 Feb 2001 07:04:54 -0900 To: vortex-l eskimo.com From: hheffner mtaonline.net (Horace Heffner) Subject: Re: Size of universe Resent-Message-ID: <"Riwfk1.0.K24.7tycw" mx1> Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/41048 X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com Status: O X-Status: At 9:29 AM 2/25/1, Robin van Spaandonk wrote: >[snip] >My previous post on this topic clearly needs a little further explanation. >In your post prior to my prior post, you introduced the concept of particle >mass equivalence with gravitational energy. Yes, for what it is worth, I am pretty sure I have seen arguments that increased gravitational potential is balanced by a corresponding increase in mass, according to the ratio (delta E_pot) = (delta m) c^2. However, I think that mass resides in the gravitational field itself - thus is "connected" to the particle mass over distance. >In my post, I took that one step >further, assuming that the mass of the resultant particle would depend on >exactly how far from the centre of the universe the particle was created. This part I took some issue with, because the gravitational potential is not dependent on the NET force on the object, thus it is not dependent on the distance to the center of the universe. To make that clearer, suppose the universe consists of three equal masses in a straight line: M1 M2 M3 separated by equal distances d1 and d2. The net force on M2 is zero. It is located at the center of the universe. However, if the distances d1 and d2 are increased then the gravtational potential between each of the particles is increased. If the particles are allowed to free accelerate towards each other, they will gain relativistic mass (delta E_kinetic) = (delta m) c^2. They will lose (delta E_pot) = (delta m) c^2. Since delta E_pot = delta E_kinetic, the total mass in the universe remains constant. [This is all complicated when charge is involved because EM fields have mass and force too, though if (electro-gravitational) field unification can be achieved then it is all the same thing. Let's ignore that complication.] However, the mass of the potential is located in the field itself, not at the mass point. It does not (instantatneously) affect the motion of the particles, but has a delayed reaction due to the speed of propigation of the gravitational field. However, and this part was not discussed, WHERE the extra kinetic mass appears is dependent upon the frame of reference and other things. If we are in the M2 frame, then the mass of M2 appears to be unaffected by its gravitational potential or its rleativistic kinetic mass (which is zero in its frame.) However, if we are in M1's fame, the mass of M2 and M3 both appear to be affected. From M1's perspective M2 and M3 mass have increased and thus they are red shifted. Same is true from each reference frame and the red shift increases with distance. However, this is if the masses approach each other. If their present state is departing, then their separation velocity is reduced by gravitation, and their apparent mass decreases. Note that the doppler shift opposes the frequency shift associated with (kinetic) mass change. The effect of the mass in the gravitatinal field is strange. From M1's perspective, M1 would be attracted to the M2-M3 system by the kinetic masses of M1 + M2 plus most all of the gravitational field surrounding M2 and M3. The force between M1 and M2-M3 would thus NOT change based on the relativistic kinetic mass increase of M2-M3. This would result in an apparent NEGATIVE gravitational force between M2-M3 (beacuse the force between them would not increase with apparent increase in kinetic mass) yet there would be UNSEEN distributed dark matter (consisting of the gravitational field itself.) Now that I have written this, it seems to me not credible that this is so, because if a gravitational field has mass then a black hole could not emit gravitons any more than it can emit light. However the relation of the mass of gravtational potential to dark matter and apparent anti-gravitational force is interesting. In any event, assuming the mass from the potential resides in the field itself, the distantly observed FORCE from any particles in the universe would tend to remain constant because both their point source kinetic mass and field mass would both tend to be in their direction, while their redshift would tend to be related to their ordinary observed relativisitc mass. >The next logical step was to assume that particles at any given radius >actually do have such masses. I.e. that the mass of subatomic particles >depends on their distance from the centre of the universe. I then made the case that if all red shift is related to distance from the center of the universe, then we would see a blue shift towards the center of the universe from ourselves. The effect, if there, must be much less than doppler. However, I pointed out that this is not necessarily the case with the GR space-time red shift. The red shift from that depends on the distibution of matter thoughout space. If we can assume the existence of unseen matter, then that distribution might be very different from what is expected from visible matter. >Since electrons form a subset thereof, they too would then have masses which >vary with radial distance. Since radiation frequencies depend a.o. on >electron mass (from the kinetic energy of the electron), radiation >frequencies would therefore also vary with radial distance. Yes, we are in synch here. >I don't think this is the same thing as gravitational red shift, though >perhaps that's just because I haven't thought it through far enough. I suspect this picture may take a lot more thinking in all quarters to get clear. As for me, I'm just stumbling around, thinking out loud more or less, and uncertain about any of this. Regards, Horace Heffner From vortex-l-request eskimo.com Tue Feb 27 11:18:05 2001 Received: (from smartlst localhost) by mx1.eskimo.com (8.9.1a/8.8.8) id LAA16069; Tue, 27 Feb 2001 11:14:11 -0800 Resent-Date: Tue, 27 Feb 2001 11:14:11 -0800 Mime-Version: 1.0 X-Sender: rick mail.highsurf.com Message-Id: In-Reply-To: <3A9B71F6.885873A verisoft.com.tr> References: <5.0.1.4.0.20010226145648.04451350 earthtech.org> <004801c0a04b$ecd5cd80$d73dee3f default> <3A9B71F6.885873A verisoft.com.tr> Date: Tue, 27 Feb 2001 09:13:59 -1000 To: vortex-l eskimo.com From: Rick Monteverde Subject: Re: Peltier-Reiter effect Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" ; format="flowed" Resent-Message-ID: <"IUBi6.0.-w3.2o_cw" mx1> Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/41049 X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com Status: O X-Status: Hi - More armchair musings, as if you haven't had enough: If the effect is the magnetic interactions around the leads causing them to flex, Nick's stacking of several devices would also scale the current and thus the magnetism too, wouldn't it? When I was playing around with wires and solder and so on with high currents, the forces trying to straighten out curves in wires were impressive and strong. I'd think (tragically non-quantitatively as usual) that a couple of amps would likely cause enough kick in even very flexible leads to cause a little bit of noticable effect, even more so with stiffer leads. I think Scott's on to it here, and Hamdi's suggestion of interconnections looks like a good idea, except that you still have the problem of leads going to the platform and the interactions along and between those leads. Too bad batteries are so heavy, I think that losing the offboard leads altogether is the only way to really isolate this for what it is - or isn't. - Rick Monteverde Honolulu, HI From vortex-l-request eskimo.com Tue Feb 27 12:01:57 2001 Received: (from smartlst localhost) by mx1.eskimo.com (8.9.1a/8.8.8) id MAA22258; Tue, 27 Feb 2001 12:00:17 -0800 Resent-Date: Tue, 27 Feb 2001 12:00:17 -0800 Message-ID: <3A9C0725.3297B927 verisoft.com.tr> Date: Tue, 27 Feb 2001 21:59:33 +0200 From: hamdi ucar X-Mailer: Mozilla 4.7 [en] (Win98; I) X-Accept-Language: en-US MIME-Version: 1.0 To: vortex-l eskimo.com Subject: Re: Peltier-Reiter effect References: <5.0.1.4.0.20010226145648.04451350 earthtech.org> <004801c0a04b$ecd5cd80$d73dee3f default> <3A9B71F6.885873A verisoft.com.tr> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Resent-Message-ID: <"kvkmP2.0.CR5.ET0dw" mx1> Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/41050 X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com Status: O X-Status: Rick Monteverde wrote: > [snip] > When I was playing > around with wires and solder and so on with high currents, the forces > trying to straighten out curves in wires were impressive and strong. > I'd think (tragically non-quantitatively as usual) that a couple of > amps would likely cause enough kick in even very flexible leads to > cause a little bit of noticable effect, even more so with stiffer > leads. > > I think Scott's on to it here, and Hamdi's suggestion of > interconnections looks like a good idea, except that you still have > the problem of leads going to the platform and the interactions along > and between those leads. Too bad batteries are so heavy, I think that > losing the offboard leads altogether is the only way to really > isolate this for what it is - or isn't. It would be easy, by a null experiment to find out whether straighten of wires by magnetic self interaction may cause disturbance, once the effect come back with full size cell leads and fixations that I described. Null experiment may be performed by simply shorting leads of the cell at cell ends. The equivalent resistor can be inserted at power supply side. No heat, no cell operation, only current passing trough wires. if no deviation will be detected, one should b e sure that magnetic and other artifacts belong wires can be rule out. > > - Rick Monteverde > Honolulu, HI Regards, hamdi ucar From vortex-l-request eskimo.com Tue Feb 27 12:16:20 2001 Received: (from smartlst localhost) by mx1.eskimo.com (8.9.1a/8.8.8) id MAA30448; Tue, 27 Feb 2001 12:12:48 -0800 Resent-Date: Tue, 27 Feb 2001 12:12:48 -0800 X-Authentication-Warning: eskimo.com: lajoie owned process doing -bs Date: Tue, 27 Feb 2001 12:12:46 -0800 (PST) From: Stephen Lajoie To: vortex-l eskimo.com Subject: Re: Now antigravity's everywhere! Why couldn't we find it before? In-Reply-To: Message-ID: MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: TEXT/PLAIN; charset=US-ASCII Resent-Message-ID: <"xDzyk2.0.cR7.0f0dw" mx1> Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/41051 X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com Status: O X-Status: On Sun, 25 Feb 2001, Rick Monteverde wrote: > Stolen from JLN's list: > > At 1:47 AM +0000 2/26/01, chrish icnet.net wrote: > > >Dear Members, > > > >While thinking about Fran de Aquino's equations in his paper , "The > >Correlation Between Gravitation and Electromagnetism, Inertia and > >Unification" found at; http://arxiv.org/abs/physics/9905003%20 the How did Dr. Fran De Aquino get the value of H' right before equation 2.04? I didn't follow that. Is that part of the Donoghue and Holstein paper? How did he get del mass beta to be delta Hamilitonian divided by c^2? It sort of makes sense from an E=m*c^2 but then again, it seems a leap of faith. > >following thought occurred to me. A simple and easy test of his basic > >theory can be performed by radiating a piece of Phosphorescence > >plastic (my daughter has in her bedroom four inch plastic stars that > >she had placed around about) with light and measure the gravitational > >mass change with a balance or scale. This would prove his basic > >premises and it would be easy to do. I took three plastic stars from > >her bedroom and stacked them on top of each other, placing them on a > >Ohaus "Cent O Gram" , hanging pan balance with a 0.01 gram > >readability. Once the balance was stable I switched on the famous > >black-light ( UV ) and the sample instantly became lighter. Judging from equation 2.05, with the energy of the black light, it seems to me that the magnitude of this would be very, very small. > > The weight > >change is undeniable and inexplicable without Aquino's theory. The > >effect last only as long as the light is on and disappears quickly > >when switched off. This effect I have dubbed "The Aquino/ Hardeman > >Photo-gravity effect" in honor of its discovery." > > > >Best Regards- > >Chris Hardeman > > From vortex-l-request eskimo.com Tue Feb 27 12:21:09 2001 Received: (from smartlst localhost) by mx1.eskimo.com (8.9.1a/8.8.8) id MAA03233; Tue, 27 Feb 2001 12:18:32 -0800 Resent-Date: Tue, 27 Feb 2001 12:18:32 -0800 Message-Id: <5.0.1.4.0.20010227140837.0325b050 earthtech.org> X-Sender: little earthtech.org X-Mailer: QUALCOMM Windows Eudora Version 5.0.1 Date: Tue, 27 Feb 2001 14:11:39 -0600 To: vortex-l eskimo.com, vortex-l@eskimo.com From: Scott Little Subject: Re: Peltier-Reiter effect In-Reply-To: <3A9C0725.3297B927 verisoft.com.tr> References: <5.0.1.4.0.20010226145648.04451350 earthtech.org> <004801c0a04b$ecd5cd80$d73dee3f default> <3A9B71F6.885873A verisoft.com.tr> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"; format=flowed Resent-Message-ID: <"IrBQZ.0.Co.Nk0dw" mx1> Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/41052 X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com Status: O X-Status: Maybe I'm just too callous. Please explain why it's worth pursuing this experiment further (other than Nick confirming my findings for himself) after I demonstrated that the effect disappears completely when ultra-flexible leads are employed. Scott Little, EarthTech Int'l, Inc. http://www.earthtech.org Suite 300, 4030 Braker Lane West, Austin TX 78759, USA 512-342-2185 (voice), 512-346-3017 (FAX), little earthtech.org (email) From vortex-l-request eskimo.com Tue Feb 27 12:38:15 2001 Received: (from smartlst localhost) by mx1.eskimo.com (8.9.1a/8.8.8) id MAA12789; Tue, 27 Feb 2001 12:29:23 -0800 Resent-Date: Tue, 27 Feb 2001 12:29:23 -0800 Mime-Version: 1.0 X-Sender: rick mail.highsurf.com Message-Id: In-Reply-To: References: Date: Tue, 27 Feb 2001 10:29:07 -1000 To: vortex-l eskimo.com From: Rick Monteverde Subject: Re: Now antigravity's everywhere! Why couldn't we find it before? Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" ; format="flowed" Resent-Message-ID: <"CqVnY3.0.k73.Zu0dw" mx1> Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/41053 X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com Status: RO X-Status: A Stephen - The post title was tongue in cheek, and follows from the recent peltier junction experiments. I have no idea what de Aquino's got going, let alone why or if it works. Personally I doubt it's anything but artifact or self-delusion. But there is this notion that there's a 'reactionless' momentum transfer or weight change when energy changes type or as it is stored in mass, as in Woodward's work. I actually think that's worth looking at with experiments. So in that sense it sort of "makes sense" that shining UV on a fluorescent panel, or energizing a peltier junction device involves a 'weight' change. Nick, Scott, and others are doing good work at getting to the bottom of the peltier question. I will remain hopeful but somewhat skeptical until experiments prove it one way or the other. - Rick Monteverde Honolulu, HI >How did Dr. Fran De Aquino get the value of H' right before equation 2.04? >I didn't follow that. Is that part of the Donoghue and Holstein paper? > >How did he get del mass beta to be delta Hamilitonian divided by c^2? It >sort of makes sense from an E=m*c^2 but then again, it seems a leap of >faith. From vortex-l-request eskimo.com Tue Feb 27 12:44:43 2001 Received: (from smartlst localhost) by mx1.eskimo.com (8.9.1a/8.8.8) id MAA21776; Tue, 27 Feb 2001 12:41:04 -0800 Resent-Date: Tue, 27 Feb 2001 12:41:04 -0800 Message-ID: <3A9C128B.812E5FF8 bellsouth.net> Date: Tue, 27 Feb 2001 15:48:11 -0500 From: Terry Blanton X-Mailer: Mozilla 4.73 [en] (WinNT; U) X-Accept-Language: en MIME-Version: 1.0 To: vortex-l eskimo.com Subject: New Superconductor - Nature Magazine Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Resent-Message-ID: <"QOaDR2.0.6K5.V31dw" mx1> Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/41054 X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com Status: RO X-Status: Magnesium Diboride! See: http://www.nature.com/nature/prepub/superconductor.html Terry From vortex-l-request eskimo.com Tue Feb 27 13:04:05 2001 Received: (from smartlst localhost) by mx1.eskimo.com (8.9.1a/8.8.8) id MAA29025; Tue, 27 Feb 2001 12:52:23 -0800 Resent-Date: Tue, 27 Feb 2001 12:52:23 -0800 Message-ID: <3A9C1383.CE7DD077 verisoft.com.tr> Date: Tue, 27 Feb 2001 22:52:19 +0200 From: hamdi ucar X-Mailer: Mozilla 4.7 [en] (Win98; I) X-Accept-Language: en-US MIME-Version: 1.0 To: vortex-l eskimo.com Subject: Re: Peltier-Reiter effect References: <5.0.1.4.0.20010226145648.04451350 earthtech.org> <004801c0a04b$ecd5cd80$d73dee3f default> <3A9B71F6.885873A verisoft.com.tr> <5.0.1.4.0.20010227140837.0325b050@earthtech.org> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Resent-Message-ID: <"FbEw23.0.I57.6E1dw" mx1> Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/41055 X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com Status: RO X-Status: Hi Scott, Still looking for a tiny possibility, frankly, after you discover the lead/wire problem. I'd better preferred you try an alternate method before cutting the leads. It would be very precious results if the effect was survived without the leads. But the eff ect was disappeared and the real role of the leads was not 100% clarified (by complementary experiment) despite you detailed the mechanism of lead movement by thermal stress. Even, the effect to be an artifact, this case would have excellent educational value, when artifact removal procedures are completely done. Scott Little wrote: > > > > Maybe I'm just too callous. Please explain why it's worth pursuing this > experiment further (other than Nick confirming my findings for himself) > after I demonstrated that the effect disappears completely when > ultra-flexible leads are employed. > Regards, hamdi ucar From vortex-l-request eskimo.com Tue Feb 27 14:00:04 2001 Received: (from smartlst localhost) by mx1.eskimo.com (8.9.1a/8.8.8) id NAA01920; Tue, 27 Feb 2001 13:55:35 -0800 Resent-Date: Tue, 27 Feb 2001 13:55:35 -0800 Message-ID: <3A9C2405.F30D9ED bellsouth.net> Date: Tue, 27 Feb 2001 17:02:45 -0500 From: Terry Blanton X-Mailer: Mozilla 4.73 [en] (WinNT; U) X-Accept-Language: en MIME-Version: 1.0 To: vortex-l eskimo.com Subject: Re: Peltier-Reiter effect References: <5.0.1.4.0.20010226145648.04451350 earthtech.org> <004801c0a04b$ecd5cd80$d73dee3f default> <3A9B71F6.885873A verisoft.com.tr> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Resent-Message-ID: <"btO-U2.0.nT.M92dw" mx1> Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/41056 X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com Status: RO X-Status: Rick Monteverde wrote: > > Hi - > > More armchair musings, as if you haven't had enough: > > If the effect is the magnetic interactions around the leads causing > them to flex, Nick's stacking of several devices would also scale the > current and thus the magnetism too, wouldn't it? When I was playing > around with wires and solder and so on with high currents, the forces > trying to straighten out curves in wires were impressive and strong. > I'd think (tragically non-quantitatively as usual) that a couple of > amps would likely cause enough kick in even very flexible leads to > cause a little bit of noticable effect, even more so with stiffer > leads. One of the more amusing tests we perform here is testing the shunt trip on the third rail (750 VDC). You'd never believe how much a 500 kcm can move when used to trip a 1,000 Amp breaker! Here is an unintentional shunt test by a "jackass". Enlarge the picture on the right and see how this conductor jumps: http://www.drmegavolt.com/underpages/warning.asp Terry From vortex-l-request eskimo.com Tue Feb 27 14:51:16 2001 Received: (from smartlst localhost) by mx1.eskimo.com (8.9.1a/8.8.8) id OAA29968; Tue, 27 Feb 2001 14:48:01 -0800 Resent-Date: Tue, 27 Feb 2001 14:48:01 -0800 Mime-Version: 1.0 X-Sender: rick mail.highsurf.com Message-Id: In-Reply-To: <3A9C0725.3297B927 verisoft.com.tr> References: <5.0.1.4.0.20010226145648.04451350 earthtech.org> <004801c0a04b$ecd5cd80$d73dee3f default> <3A9B71F6.885873A verisoft.com.tr> <3A9C0725.3297B927 verisoft.com.tr> Date: Tue, 27 Feb 2001 12:47:48 -1000 To: vortex-l eskimo.com From: Rick Monteverde Subject: Re: Peltier-Reiter effect Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" ; format="flowed" Resent-Message-ID: <"HX39K.0.8K7.Ww2dw" mx1> Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/41057 X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com Status: RO X-Status: Hamdi - At 9:59 PM +0200 2/27/01, hamdi ucar wrote: >It would be easy, by a null experiment to find out whether >straighten of wires by magnetic self interaction may cause >disturbance, once the effect come back with full size cell leads and >fixations that I described. > >Null experiment may be performed by simply shorting leads of the >cell at cell ends. The equivalent resistor can be inserted at power >supply side. No heat, no cell operation, only current passing trough >wires. if no deviation will be detected, one should be sure that >magnetic and other artifacts belong wires can be rule out. Yup. The resistor ought to show magnetic effects as well. I think Scott's right when he says it's for Nick now to use very flexible foil leads and try again. - Rick Monteverde Honolulu, HI From vortex-l-request eskimo.com Tue Feb 27 14:57:26 2001 Received: (from smartlst localhost) by mx1.eskimo.com (8.9.1a/8.8.8) id OAA01874; Tue, 27 Feb 2001 14:55:39 -0800 Resent-Date: Tue, 27 Feb 2001 14:55:39 -0800 Message-Id: Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Date: Tue, 27 Feb 2001 14:05:37 -0900 To: vortex-l eskimo.com From: hheffner mtaonline.net (Horace Heffner) Subject: Re: Peltier-Reiter effect Resent-Message-ID: <"gkFcz2.0.qS.e13dw" mx1> Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/41058 X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com Status: RO X-Status: At 2:11 PM 2/27/1, Scott Little wrote: > > >Maybe I'm just too callous. Please explain why it's worth pursuing this >experiment further (other than Nick confirming my findings for himself) >after I demonstrated that the effect disappears completely when >ultra-flexible leads are employed. One problem is that your excellent experimental resolution applies to only one experiment. Nick has objected to inconsistencies: At 6:29 PM 2/26/1, Nick Reiter wrote: >OK, fair enough- although I am still perplexed over the following: > >1. The scale up with multiple Peltier units in series, in two different >orientations. Still just two leads coming out of the assembly - why greater >weight change? > >2. Now that Charlie Ford has seen an effect with a suspended unit, how >might this figure in? Objection 1 might be answered that the wire displacement or tension increases with the number of Peltiers. However, this will take careful experimentation, preferably with controls, for Nick to confirm that your findings apply to that circumstance (stacked mode.) Hamdi has made an excellent suggestion (pin the thin copper leads to the structure being weighed) that fits in with your use of thin conductors, provides a control, and works even if the effect is purely gravtational. Objection 2 is based on a totally different experimental regime. The force in that regime must be inirtial, not gravitational, thus my repeat of some of the torsion pedulum - horizontal armature stuff. The use of batteries to make a self contained unit would also eliminate the objections, provided there is no accidental commutation or momentary inirtial efects, discussed a while back before Nick's arrival, that apply to gravity pendulums. It is important to achieve a steady state result, if possible, in any experiment relating to net (thus non-Newtonian) force. Nick might be expected to have trouble doing this, since he has burned out his Peltiers. I was making suggestions based on my experience in some of these matters in the hopes of helping Nick and others thoroughly convince themselves as to the existence or non-existence of such a non-Newtonian effect. I should also note that, if the effect only occurs in a pulsed mode, and thus can not be obtained in steady state, then much more arduous and rigorous testing will be required than has been discussed to date. Also, as Hamdi pointed out, it is important not to simply discredit an experiment by working at it until you remove an apparent artifact, for that can be accomplished by introducing other artifacts. I think it is helpful to prove out a result, positive or negative, in as many ways as people have an interest in doing so. It is just as important to criticallly examine a negative result as a positive result. This specific effect appears to have no basis in theory, and certainly no basis in standard Newtonian theory, so if there is any chance at all it is real in any mode, then it is well worth pursuing. That's my armchair opinon anyway, for what its worth. 8^) Since I am short of time and completely broke, that's about all I have to offer. Regards, Horace Heffner From vortex-l-request eskimo.com Tue Feb 27 15:45:30 2001 Received: (from smartlst localhost) by mx1.eskimo.com (8.9.1a/8.8.8) id PAA29848; Tue, 27 Feb 2001 15:43:37 -0800 Resent-Date: Tue, 27 Feb 2001 15:43:37 -0800 X-Authentication-Warning: eskimo.com: billb owned process doing -bs Date: Tue, 27 Feb 2001 15:43:28 -0800 (PST) From: William Beaty To: vortex-l eskimo.com Subject: mechanical antigravity not discredited? In-Reply-To: Message-ID: MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: TEXT/PLAIN; charset=US-ASCII Resent-Message-ID: <"otShV3.0.9I7.dk3dw" mx1> Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/41059 X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com Status: O X-Status: Here's a page that was on Sarfattii's list: MACHIAN GRAVITOELECTROMAGNETISM AND SINGULAR TRANSLATIONS http://www.mypage.bluewin.ch/Bizarre/MAX.htm exerpt: What is striking to most people watching a gyroscope precess in the horizontal plane, standing in the air with only one of its sides resting on a vertical tip, is that it seems to defy gravity. Enters the blase' physicist who explains away the phenomenon as a cancellation of the precessional torque with that between the gravity of the gyroscope and the vertical tip. Et voila'! What the blase' physicist failed to see is that as it precesses, the gyroscope is very little deported by the centrifuge force. It took an E. Laithwaite to ask why the dogs didn't bark. This phenomenon opens the way for genuine reactionless drives. Analyses of inertial thrust devices http://www.mypage.bluewin.ch/Bizarre/ ((((((((((((((((((((( ( ( ( ( (O) ) ) ) ) ))))))))))))))))))))) William J. Beaty SCIENCE HOBBYIST website billb eskimo.com http://www.amasci.com EE/programmer/sci-exhibits science projects, tesla, weird science Seattle, WA 206-789-0775 freenrg-L taoshum-L vortex-L webhead-L From vortex-l-request eskimo.com Tue Feb 27 17:53:35 2001 Received: (from smartlst localhost) by mx1.eskimo.com (8.9.1a/8.8.8) id RAA26381; Tue, 27 Feb 2001 17:51:42 -0800 Resent-Date: Tue, 27 Feb 2001 17:51:42 -0800 Date: Tue, 27 Feb 2001 19:36:27 -0600 From: Scott Little Subject: Re: Peltier-Reiter effect In-reply-to: X-Sender: little earthtech.org To: vortex-l eskimo.com, vortex-l@eskimo.com Message-id: <5.0.2.1.0.20010227192831.02a94b30 earthtech.org> MIME-version: 1.0 X-Mailer: QUALCOMM Windows Eudora Version 5.0.2 Content-type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"; format=flowed Resent-Message-ID: <"mIzpp2.0.6S6.kc5dw" mx1> Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/41060 X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com Status: O X-Status: At 02:05 PM 2/27/2001 -0900, Horace Heffner wrote: >Also, as Hamdi pointed out, it is important not to simply discredit an >experiment by working at it until you remove an apparent artifact, for that >can be accomplished by introducing other artifacts. I think it is helpful >to prove out a result, positive or negative, in as many ways as people have >an interest in doing so. I agree. That's why I have tried 3 different lead stiffnesses...to see if the effect is related to lead stiffness. It was. Here is the data again: 0.0005" Cu foil less than 1 milligram effect thin wires 5-10 milligram effect thicker wires 20 milligram effect Do you guys see some remaining loophole here? Is there some way I could be masking a real effect with these lead changes? How could I improve my demonstration that the effect is simply related to lead stiffness? Scott Little EarthTech International, Inc. 4030 Braker Lane West, Suite 300 Austin TX 78759 512-342-2185 512-346-3017 (FAX) http://www.earthtech.org From vortex-l-request eskimo.com Tue Feb 27 18:21:53 2001 Received: (from smartlst localhost) by mx1.eskimo.com (8.9.1a/8.8.8) id SAA07730; Tue, 27 Feb 2001 18:19:03 -0800 Resent-Date: Tue, 27 Feb 2001 18:19:03 -0800 X-Sender: rmuha mail Message-Id: In-Reply-To: <5.0.2.1.0.20010227192831.02a94b30 earthtech.org> References: Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Date: Tue, 27 Feb 2001 21:18:33 -0500 To: vortex-l eskimo.com From: ralph muha Subject: Re: Peltier-Reiter effect Resent-Message-ID: <"_Xoco1.0.gu1.M06dw" mx1> Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/41061 X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com Status: O X-Status: At 8:36 PM -0500 2/27/01, Scott Little wrote: >0.0005" Cu foil less than 1 milligram effect >thin wires 5-10 milligram effect >thicker wires 20 milligram effect > >Do you guys see some remaining loophole here? Is there some way I could be what was the lead resistance? what was the current flow? what was the actual voltage across the device? From vortex-l-request eskimo.com Tue Feb 27 18:25:09 2001 Received: (from smartlst localhost) by mx1.eskimo.com (8.9.1a/8.8.8) id SAA10467; Tue, 27 Feb 2001 18:23:11 -0800 Resent-Date: Tue, 27 Feb 2001 18:23:11 -0800 Message-ID: <001f01c0a12c$8f17aba0$723dee3f default> From: "Nick Reiter" To: References: <5.0.2.1.0.20010227192831.02a94b30 earthtech.org> Subject: Things to do while waiting on peltiers Date: Tue, 27 Feb 2001 21:17:06 -0500 MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-Priority: 3 X-MSMail-Priority: Normal X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook Express 5.00.2919.6600 X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V5.00.2919.6600 Resent-Message-ID: <"d3M-g.0.1Z2.E46dw" mx1> Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/41062 X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com Status: RO X-Status: Waiting to get a new set of Peltier modules in my hands...thin foil as well (all on order) In the meantime, I tried a variant of the reported phosphorescence/weight change effect. Not having any glow in the dark plastic goodies around the immediately accessible house or lab at the moment, I thought I would try some highly fluorescent material instead. I took a 10ml test tube, and filled it halfway with some rhodamine 6G in ethanol (dye laser solution) Stopper'd it well, then placed it on the balance pan of the Stanton milligram balance. Total weight 18.071g I then used a 150watt longwave UV inspection lamp to shine through the glass door of the balance and impinge upon the dye. Yow! Supernova bright yellow-orange emission. However, I saw no change in the balance reading. I am raiding the kid's old toys tonight to find a glow star, or ghost, or alien or something, to give a better whack at it. Stuff to do whilst waiting... NR ----- Original Message ----- From: "Scott Little" To: ; Sent: Tuesday, February 27, 2001 8:36 PM Subject: Re: Peltier-Reiter effect > At 02:05 PM 2/27/2001 -0900, Horace Heffner wrote: > > >Also, as Hamdi pointed out, it is important not to simply discredit an > >experiment by working at it until you remove an apparent artifact, for that > >can be accomplished by introducing other artifacts. I think it is helpful > >to prove out a result, positive or negative, in as many ways as people have > >an interest in doing so. > > I agree. That's why I have tried 3 different lead stiffnesses...to see if > the effect is related to lead stiffness. It was. Here is the data again: > > 0.0005" Cu foil less than 1 milligram effect > thin wires 5-10 milligram effect > thicker wires 20 milligram effect > > Do you guys see some remaining loophole here? Is there some way I could be > masking a real effect with these lead changes? How could I improve my > demonstration that the effect is simply related to lead stiffness? > > Scott Little > > EarthTech International, Inc. > 4030 Braker Lane West, Suite 300 > Austin TX 78759 > 512-342-2185 > 512-346-3017 (FAX) > http://www.earthtech.org > > From vortex-l-request eskimo.com Tue Feb 27 18:30:16 2001 Received: (from smartlst localhost) by mx1.eskimo.com (8.9.1a/8.8.8) id SAA13828; Tue, 27 Feb 2001 18:27:41 -0800 Resent-Date: Tue, 27 Feb 2001 18:27:41 -0800 Mime-Version: 1.0 X-Sender: rick mail.highsurf.com Message-Id: In-Reply-To: References: Date: Tue, 27 Feb 2001 16:27:26 -1000 To: vortex-l eskimo.com From: Rick Monteverde Subject: Re: mechanical antigravity not discredited? Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1" ; format="flowed" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit X-MIME-Autoconverted: from quoted-printable to 8bit by mx1.eskimo.com id SAA13795 Resent-Message-ID: <"U6B771.0.wN3.T86dw" mx1> Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/41063 X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com Status: RO X-Status: I just did experiments with precessing gyros on the end of a torsion armature. The centrifugal force "seemed" normal to me. It's easy to see this by hanging the precessing gyro from its tip by a string. As it revolves around, it displaces itself outwards due to the centrifugal force. It looks pretty weird, because no not only is the gyro hanging out sideways and not displacing the string so as to center its mass under the suspension point, it actually pulls out further in the 'other' direction due to the centrifugal force. I don't think it would be trivial to measure the centrifugal force in such a setup, but the gut sensation I got from playing with gyros is that it's definitely there and it's at least in the vicinity of normal, and certainly not "anomalously vanishing" in my experience. And I thought a Pfaff was a sewing machine and not a dimension, so there. :( Off the website: This is precisely what Prof. E. Laithwaite discovered in precessing gyroscopes ! The precession of a gyroscope at right angles to its own axis of spin not only occurs independently from the physical location of the axis of precession, which is expected from our using affine vector spaces, but with an anomalously vanishing centrifuge force, which also depends upon the radius to this axis. In terms of vector inertia and our Newtonian common wisdom, such a gyroscope should have Eg' *Bg' ‚ 0 and Pfaff dimension four. - Rick Monteverde Honolulu, HI >Here's a page that was on Sarfattii's list: > > MACHIAN GRAVITOELECTROMAGNETISM AND SINGULAR TRANSLATIONS > http://www.mypage.bluewin.ch/Bizarre/MAX.htm > >exerpt: >What is striking to most people watching a gyroscope precess in the >horizontal plane, standing in the air with only one of its sides resting >on a vertical tip, is that it seems to defy gravity. Enters the blase' >physicist who explains away the phenomenon as a cancellation of the >precessional torque with that between the gravity of the gyroscope and the >vertical tip. Et voila'! What the blase' physicist failed to see is that >as it precesses, the gyroscope is very little deported by the centrifuge >force. It took an E. Laithwaite to ask why the dogs didn't bark. >This phenomenon opens the way for genuine reactionless drives. > > > Analyses of inertial thrust devices > http://www.mypage.bluewin.ch/Bizarre/ > > >((((((((((((((((((((( ( ( ( ( (O) ) ) ) ) ))))))))))))))))))))) >William J. Beaty SCIENCE HOBBYIST website >billb eskimo.com http://www.amasci.com >EE/programmer/sci-exhibits science projects, tesla, weird science >Seattle, WA 206-789-0775 freenrg-L taoshum-L vortex-L webhead-L From vortex-l-request eskimo.com Tue Feb 27 18:58:35 2001 Received: (from smartlst localhost) by mx1.eskimo.com (8.9.1a/8.8.8) id SAA30631; Tue, 27 Feb 2001 18:56:58 -0800 Resent-Date: Tue, 27 Feb 2001 18:56:58 -0800 Date: Tue, 27 Feb 2001 20:50:48 -0600 From: Scott Little Subject: Re: Peltier-Reiter effect In-reply-to: X-Sender: little earthtech.org To: vortex-l eskimo.com, vortex-l@eskimo.com Message-id: <5.0.2.1.0.20010227203758.02a95ab0 earthtech.org> MIME-version: 1.0 X-Mailer: QUALCOMM Windows Eudora Version 5.0.2 Content-type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"; format=flowed References: <5.0.2.1.0.20010227192831.02a94b30 earthtech.org> Resent-Message-ID: <"6atGB3.0.MU7.uZ6dw" mx1> Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/41064 X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com Status: O X-Status: At 09:18 PM 2/27/2001 -0500, ralph muha wrote: >At 8:36 PM -0500 2/27/01, Scott Little wrote: > >0.0005" Cu foil less than 1 milligram effect > >thin wires 5-10 milligram effect > >thicker wires 20 milligram effect > > > >Do you guys see some remaining loophole here? Is there some way I could be > >what was the lead resistance? >what was the current flow? >what was the actual voltage across the device? For all tests, I used a constant current supply to deliver 2.5 amps to the device. I didn't pay much attention to the voltage but it was around 7 volts usually. I did notice that when the Peltier device gets real hot it's resistance increases considerably (I saw the voltage up at 10 or 12 one time!), which causes a runaway condition when being driven by a constant current supply. I therefore conducted my tests with relatively brief energization periods (~ 5 seconds) followed each time by a minute or two cool down period. Thus the actual voltage across the device was ~7 volts during my tests. The leads were typically 8" long. For the 0.0005" thick x 1 cm wide foil, the total lead R (for 16" of lead) calculates out to about 55 milliohms (0.14 volt drop at 2.5 amps). For the thin wires (~ 24 gauge), the R would be about 33 milliohms (0.083 volt drop at 2.5 amps). For the thick wires (~ 20 gauge), the R would be about 13 milliohms (0.033 volt drop at 2.5 amps). Scott Little EarthTech International, Inc. 4030 Braker Lane West, Suite 300 Austin TX 78759 512-342-2185 512-346-3017 (FAX) http://www.earthtech.org From vortex-l-request eskimo.com Tue Feb 27 19:49:48 2001 Received: (from smartlst localhost) by mx1.eskimo.com (8.9.1a/8.8.8) id TAA25179; Tue, 27 Feb 2001 19:45:33 -0800 Resent-Date: Tue, 27 Feb 2001 19:45:33 -0800 X-Apparently-From: Message-Id: <4.2.0.58.20010227214639.00962ba0 postoffice.swbell.net> X-Sender: cjford1 pop.mail.yahoo.com X-Mailer: QUALCOMM Windows Eudora Pro Version 4.2.0.58 Date: Tue, 27 Feb 2001 21:56:47 -0600 To: vortex-l eskimo.com From: Charles Ford Subject: Re: Peltier-Reiter effect In-Reply-To: <5.0.2.1.0.20010226195514.03281a88 earthtech.org> References: <004801c0a04b$ecd5cd80$d73dee3f default> <5.0.1.4.0.20010226145648.04451350 earthtech.org> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"; format=flowed Resent-Message-ID: <"0TLuK1.0.L96.TH7dw" mx1> Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/41065 X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com Status: O X-Status: At 08:01 PM 2/26/01 -0600, you wrote: >Well, the lead-ceramic sandwich will still "curl" a little so exactly the >same artifact should serve to move the device over a little when hung from >relatively stiff wires. Um. Actually the whole damn thing will curl a bit as one side cools and shrinks the other will heat and expand. I am at a loss as to imagine a solution to this beyond the remote control. I think we will have to produce a deltaT some other way. _________________________________________________________ Do You Yahoo!? Get your free yahoo.com address at http://mail.yahoo.com From vortex-l-request eskimo.com Tue Feb 27 20:18:48 2001 Received: (from smartlst localhost) by mx1.eskimo.com (8.9.1a/8.8.8) id UAA09557; Tue, 27 Feb 2001 20:17:49 -0800 Resent-Date: Tue, 27 Feb 2001 20:17:49 -0800 X-Apparently-From: Message-Id: <4.2.0.58.20010227220014.00b7fc20 postoffice.swbell.net> X-Sender: cjford1 pop.mail.yahoo.com X-Mailer: QUALCOMM Windows Eudora Pro Version 4.2.0.58 Date: Tue, 27 Feb 2001 22:29:02 -0600 To: vortex-l eskimo.com From: Charles Ford Subject: Re: Peltier-Reiter effect In-Reply-To: Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"; format=flowed Resent-Message-ID: <"HJ5h41.0.FL2.jl7dw" mx1> Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/41066 X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com Status: O X-Status: At 10:29 PM 2/26/01 -0900, you wrote: >The Peltier need be tested face up and face down at each scale >position of course. Horace: This is a problem. The lead configuration carries the leads both to the same edge of the device. This is the case with absolutely every Peltier device I have ever used or seen. In this case if you turn the device over and maintain the same lead positioning you automatically reverse the polarity along with the orientation. So if the hot side was on top then when you flip the thing over the hot side is still on top. "Drat!!" A possible solution. If you connect rigid leads to the connecting taps and form a bow so that the hard leads extend from opposite sides of the assembly then you can flip the device on an axes retaining the original external lead configuration. I would be necessary to shape the leads pryer to connecting them so that you do not accidently crack the chip or tare off the tabs. _____ ___ | | ___ | |_____| | \ __| |___/ Also the balance depicted in your post is a good idea. I can easy convert my string and pointer to this configuration. Thanks! I think the leads can be run parallel up the length of the balance arm and a flexible connection can be used close to the fulcrum. The parallel leads should cancel each others force. Connecting close to the fulcrum should minimize the effect of any torque at the connecting point. _________________________________________________________ Do You Yahoo!? Get your free yahoo.com address at http://mail.yahoo.com From vortex-l-request eskimo.com Wed Feb 28 00:01:46 2001 Received: (from smartlst localhost) by mx1.eskimo.com (8.9.1a/8.8.8) id AAA08206; Wed, 28 Feb 2001 00:01:06 -0800 Resent-Date: Wed, 28 Feb 2001 00:01:06 -0800 Message-Id: Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Date: Tue, 27 Feb 2001 23:11:27 -0900 To: vortex-l eskimo.com From: hheffner mtaonline.net (Horace Heffner) Subject: Re: Peltier-Reiter effect Resent-Message-ID: <"oSe3D1.0.802.01Bdw" mx1> Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/41067 X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com Status: O X-Status: At 10:29 PM 2/27/1, Charles Ford wrote: >At 10:29 PM 2/26/01 -0900, you wrote: >>The Peltier need be tested face up and face down at each scale >>position of course. > >Horace: > >This is a problem. The lead configuration carries the leads both to the >same edge of the device. This is the case with absolutely every Peltier >device I have ever used or seen. In this case if you turn the device over >and maintain the same lead positioning you automatically reverse the >polarity along with the orientation. So if the hot side was on top then >when you flip the thing over the hot side is still on top. "Drat!!" I don't understand the problem. If you use flexible leads to the power supply then you can just flip everything over. Or ... you can flip over the power supply. > >A possible solution. If you connect rigid leads to the connecting taps and >form a bow so that the hard leads extend from opposite sides of the >assembly then you can flip the device on an axes retaining the original >external lead configuration. I would be necessary to shape the leads pryer >to connecting them so that you do not accidently crack the chip or tare off >the tabs. > > _____ > ___ | | ___ > | |_____| | > \ __| |___/ I am not sure what the above represents. Are you using a proportional font? Courier is best for email ascii diagram viewing. > >Also the balance depicted in your post is a good idea. That was meant to be horizontal armature or torsion pendulum. >I can easy convert >my string and pointer to this configuration. Thanks! I think the leads >can be run parallel up the length of the balance arm and a flexible >connection can be used close to the fulcrum. The parallel leads should >cancel each others force. Connecting close to the fulcrum should minimize >the effect of any torque at the connecting point. Wires are bad news for torsion pendulums. A battery used on the opposite end of the torsion pendulum as a counterweight should work well. A 6V drycell from Ace Hardware ($12.99 here in Alaska) should work OK, based on Scott's 7V number. They will put out about 7A when shorted and weigh about a pound. Regards, Horace Heffner From vortex-l-request eskimo.com Wed Feb 28 02:14:24 2001 Received: (from smartlst localhost) by mx1.eskimo.com (8.9.1a/8.8.8) id CAA18232; Wed, 28 Feb 2001 02:13:43 -0800 Resent-Date: Wed, 28 Feb 2001 02:13:43 -0800 Message-Id: Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Date: Wed, 28 Feb 2001 01:23:55 -0900 To: vortex-l eskimo.com From: hheffner mtaonline.net (Horace Heffner) Subject: Re: Peltier-Reiter effect Resent-Message-ID: <"2mhSS1.0.hS4.MzCdw" mx1> Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/41068 X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com Status: O X-Status: At 7:36 PM 2/27/1, Scott Little wrote: >At 02:05 PM 2/27/2001 -0900, Horace Heffner wrote: > >>Also, as Hamdi pointed out, it is important not to simply discredit an >>experiment by working at it until you remove an apparent artifact, for that >>can be accomplished by introducing other artifacts. I think it is helpful >>to prove out a result, positive or negative, in as many ways as people have >>an interest in doing so. > >I agree. That's why I have tried 3 different lead stiffnesses...to see if >the effect is related to lead stiffness. It was. Here is the data again: > >0.0005" Cu foil less than 1 milligram effect >thin wires 5-10 milligram effect >thicker wires 20 milligram effect > >Do you guys see some remaining loophole here? Is there some way I could be >masking a real effect with these lead changes? Did you do any soldering? Might have ruined the Peltier. Maybe it overheated in one of the tests? Did you actually measure the current through the device? (I assume your power supply has a current meter, but it can't hurt to ask.) Did you measure or check the temperature difference on the peltier to make sure it was working the same? Did you try it flipped over while using the flexible leads? Did you try orienting the scale in differing N or E directions? (Was that a balance type scale or strain guage type electronic scale? A balance type scale would be sensitive to magnetic torque from any local magnets. I suppose a strain guage scale would too, if the leads were not very flexible. Did you check your control again? >How could I improve my >demonstration that the effect is simply related to lead stiffness? I think you did a great job, as usual and likely found the true artifact. You seem to have convinced yourself, so maybe, as you said, it is now more up to others to convince themselves, or at least kick it around a bit. Regards, Horace Heffner From vortex-l-request eskimo.com Wed Feb 28 06:44:25 2001 Received: (from smartlst localhost) by mx1.eskimo.com (8.9.1a/8.8.8) id GAA10908; Wed, 28 Feb 2001 06:41:11 -0800 Resent-Date: Wed, 28 Feb 2001 06:41:11 -0800 Message-Id: <5.0.1.4.0.20010228083356.03cd9240 earthtech.org> X-Sender: little earthtech.org X-Mailer: QUALCOMM Windows Eudora Version 5.0.1 Date: Wed, 28 Feb 2001 08:41:50 -0600 To: vortex-l eskimo.com, vortex-l@eskimo.com From: Scott Little Subject: Re: Peltier-Reiter effect In-Reply-To: Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"; format=flowed Resent-Message-ID: <"455d52.0.Lg2.6uGdw" mx1> Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/41069 X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com Status: O X-Status: At 01:23 AM 2/28/01 -0900, Horace Heffner wrote: >Did you do any soldering? Might have ruined the Peltier. Maybe it >overheated in one of the tests? Yes, I soldered...but not right at the device. I checked the operation of the device after every lead change with the "two fingers" test. Hold the room temp device between thumb and forefinger and energize. The hot-cold effect is immediate and dramatic...IF the device is still working. >Did you actually measure the current through the device? (I assume your >power supply has a current meter, but it can't hurt to ask.) Yes, just looked at the meter each time to see that the current was correct. >Did you measure or check the temperature difference on the peltier to make >sure it was working the same? No measurements...just the feel test. >Did you try it flipped over while using the flexible leads? No.... I guess I assumed -0 would be pretty close to +0....:) >Did you try orienting the scale in differing N or E directions? No....didn't occur to me to try that. >(Was that >a balance type scale or strain guage type electronic scale? A balance type >scale would be sensitive to magnetic torque from any local magnets. I >suppose a strain guage scale would too, if the leads were not very >flexible. It's a balance type...with internal weights that are placed on the beam by an incredible system of cams and levers as you dial the front knobs. >Did you check your control again? The order of testing was: thin leads (5-10 mg effect) resistor (<1 mg effect) thin leads (5-10 mg effect) foil leads (<1 mg effect) thick leads (20 mg effect) I haven't tried the resistor again...if that's what you mean. >I think you did a great job, as usual and likely found the true artifact. >You seem to have convinced yourself, so maybe, as you said, it is now more >up to others to convince themselves, or at least kick it around a bit. Thanks. A good portion of the credit goes to Michael Ibison, our resident mathematician/theoretician. Frankly, I was stumped so I called him in to kibitz. It was his suggestion to try the ultraflexible leads. Scott Little, EarthTech Int'l, Inc. http://www.earthtech.org Suite 300, 4030 Braker Lane West, Austin TX 78759, USA 512-342-2185 (voice), 512-346-3017 (FAX), little earthtech.org (email) From vortex-l-request eskimo.com Wed Feb 28 07:55:11 2001 Received: (from smartlst localhost) by mx1.eskimo.com (8.9.1a/8.8.8) id HAA11142; Wed, 28 Feb 2001 07:54:17 -0800 Resent-Date: Wed, 28 Feb 2001 07:54:17 -0800 From: "xplorer" To: Subject: RE: Peltier-Reiter effect Date: Wed, 28 Feb 2001 22:53:44 +0700 Message-ID: MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-Priority: 3 (Normal) X-MSMail-Priority: Normal X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook IMO, Build 9.0.2416 (9.0.2910.0) In-reply-to: <5.0.1.4.0.20010228083356.03cd9240 earthtech.org> X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V4.72.3110.3 Importance: Normal Resent-Message-ID: <"2eFH22.0.0k2.fyHdw" mx1> Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/41070 X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com Status: O X-Status: Wonder how large you can scale this force up to ...? And what kind of efficency... > -----Original Message----- > From: Scott Little [mailto:little earthtech.org] > Sent: 2001 February 28, Wednesday 21:42 > To: vortex-l eskimo.com; vortex-l@eskimo.com > Subject: Re: Peltier-Reiter effect > >x< > > The order of testing was: > > thin leads (5-10 mg effect) > resistor (<1 mg effect) > thin leads (5-10 mg effect) > foil leads (<1 mg effect) > thick leads (20 mg effect) > > I haven't tried the resistor again...if that's what you mean. > From vortex-l-request eskimo.com Wed Feb 28 08:05:30 2001 Received: (from smartlst localhost) by mx1.eskimo.com (8.9.1a/8.8.8) id IAA15854; Wed, 28 Feb 2001 08:04:06 -0800 Resent-Date: Wed, 28 Feb 2001 08:04:06 -0800 From: "xplorer" To: Subject: RE: Things to do while waiting on peltiers Date: Wed, 28 Feb 2001 23:03:54 +0700 Message-ID: MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-Priority: 3 (Normal) X-MSMail-Priority: Normal X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook IMO, Build 9.0.2416 (9.0.2910.0) In-reply-to: <001f01c0a12c$8f17aba0$723dee3f default> X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V4.72.3110.3 Importance: Normal Resent-Message-ID: <"7Vzrt3.0.et3.s5Idw" mx1> Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/41071 X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com Status: O X-Status: > -----Original Message----- > From: Nick Reiter [mailto:reit ezworks.net] > Sent: 2001 February 28, Wednesday 09:17 > To: vortex-l eskimo.com > Subject: Things to do while waiting on peltiers > > > Waiting to get a new set of Peltier modules in my hands...thin > foil as well > (all on order) > > In the meantime, I tried a variant of the reported phosphorescence/weight > change effect. > > Not having any glow in the dark plastic goodies around the immediately > accessible house or lab at the moment, I thought I would try some highly > fluorescent material instead. > I took a 10ml test tube, and filled it halfway with some > rhodamine 6G in > ethanol (dye laser solution) Stopper'd it well, then placed it on the > balance pan of the Stanton milligram balance. Total weight 18.071g > I then used a 150watt longwave UV inspection lamp to shine through the > glass door of the balance and impinge upon the dye. Yow! > Supernova bright > yellow-orange emission. However, I saw no change in the balance reading. > I am raiding the kid's old toys tonight to find a glow star, > or ghost, or I have some of these, and I tried it as well, but I got nothing to show for it. Perhaps I needed more stars, and a stronger blacklight, but looking at what it takes to perform it, I would be tempted to say it looks like more thermal/capacitive effects might be more likely. My balance would have showed this, but instead all I saw was air current. I do wonder that there might need to be some way to make this directional in order to see any forces, however. Not that it can't work, it's just something I can't make work here... cheers From vortex-l-request eskimo.com Wed Feb 28 08:24:34 2001 Received: (from smartlst localhost) by mx1.eskimo.com (8.9.1a/8.8.8) id IAA27904; Wed, 28 Feb 2001 08:22:59 -0800 Resent-Date: Wed, 28 Feb 2001 08:22:59 -0800 Message-ID: <002601c0a1a3$65e017a0$c3c01d18 pestilence.ce.mediaone.net> From: "Scott Stephens" To: Subject: Re: Peltier-Reiter effect Date: Wed, 28 Feb 2001 10:27:49 -0600 MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-Priority: 3 X-MSMail-Priority: Normal X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook Express 4.72.3155.0 X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V4.72.3155.0 Resent-Message-ID: <"KekTT1.0.sp6.ZNIdw" mx1> Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/41072 X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com Status: O X-Status: -----Original Message----- From: Scott Little >I have tried 3 different lead stiffnesses...to see if >the effect is related to lead stiffness. It was. Here is the data again: > >0.0005" Cu foil less than 1 milligram effect >thin wires 5-10 milligram effect >thicker wires 20 milligram effect > >Do you guys see some remaining loophole here? Is there some way I could be >masking a real effect with these lead changes? How could I improve my >demonstration that the effect is simply related to lead stiffness? Yes - the thermal resistance of the leads. Find lead material with the same thermal resistance, but different stiffness, such as copper plated soft steel and hardened or spring steel. Scott **************************************************************************** Freedom is pursuing your carrot, not running from somebody's stick Does society make you enthusiastic, or fearful? The mob rules only what its members achieve. **************************************************************************** From vortex-l-request eskimo.com Wed Feb 28 10:03:53 2001 Received: (from smartlst localhost) by mx1.eskimo.com (8.9.1a/8.8.8) id JAA22742; Wed, 28 Feb 2001 09:58:02 -0800 Resent-Date: Wed, 28 Feb 2001 09:58:02 -0800 Message-Id: <5.0.2.1.2.20010228125518.026875d0 pop.mindspring.com> X-Sender: jedrothwell pop.mindspring.com X-Mailer: QUALCOMM Windows Eudora Version 5.0.2 Date: Wed, 28 Feb 2001 12:57:57 -0500 To: vortex-L eskimo.com From: Jed Rothwell Subject: Cryptography advance at Harvard Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"; format=flowed Resent-Message-ID: <"T5lkU3.0.FZ5.fmJdw" mx1> Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/41073 X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com Status: O X-Status: The New York Times reports: "Two Harvard researchers say they have devised a provably unbreakable code, one based on both sender and receiver simultaneously coding and decoding a message by sampling a continuous stream of random numbers. The stream of numbers would be too large to store in any computer and would have vanished by the time the message had been sent. A leading method of coding messages at present can be made unbreakable in practice but not in theory. Experts differ as to whether the new method would be practical." They want to use a satellite transmitting a stream of random numbers. Some months ago on this forum, I proposed a similar scheme using stars. - Jed From vortex-l-request eskimo.com Wed Feb 28 11:06:03 2001 Received: (from smartlst localhost) by mx1.eskimo.com (8.9.1a/8.8.8) id LAA17633; Wed, 28 Feb 2001 11:04:51 -0800 Resent-Date: Wed, 28 Feb 2001 11:04:51 -0800 X-Apparently-From: Message-Id: <4.2.0.58.20010228125445.0095c7c0 postoffice.swbell.net> X-Sender: cjford1 pop.mail.yahoo.com X-Mailer: QUALCOMM Windows Eudora Pro Version 4.2.0.58 Date: Wed, 28 Feb 2001 12:58:01 -0600 To: vortex-l eskimo.com From: Charles Ford Subject: Re: Peltier-Reiter effect In-Reply-To: Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"; format=flowed Resent-Message-ID: <"1dmKR3.0.3J4.GlKdw" mx1> Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/41074 X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com Status: O X-Status: Horace: I was thinking of putting together a GIF with a picture of the assembly but I think it is pointless now as we all seem to agree that there will be no accurate test done with lead wires attached. I vote remote :-) At 11:11 PM 2/27/01 -0900, you wrote: > > > > _____ > > ___ | | ___ > > | |_____| | > > \ __| |___/ > > >I am not sure what the above represents. Are you using a proportional >font? Courier is best for email ascii diagram viewing. > > Charlie Ford KC5-OWZ cjford1 yahoo.com cjford1 swbell.net _________________________________________________________ Do You Yahoo!? Get your free yahoo.com address at http://mail.yahoo.com From vortex-l-request eskimo.com Wed Feb 28 11:23:53 2001 Received: (from smartlst localhost) by mx1.eskimo.com (8.9.1a/8.8.8) id LAA32659; Wed, 28 Feb 2001 11:20:35 -0800 Resent-Date: Wed, 28 Feb 2001 11:20:35 -0800 Message-ID: <000201c0a1b8$1e871ec0$0300a8c0 rockcast> From: "Standing Bear" To: References: <5.0.2.1.2.20010228125518.026875d0 pop.mindspring.com> Subject: Re: Cryptography advance at Harvard Date: Wed, 28 Feb 2001 13:56:09 -0500 MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-Priority: 3 X-MSMail-Priority: Normal X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook Express 5.50.4133.2400 X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V5.50.4133.2400 Resent-Message-ID: <"Xufg9.0.Vz7.1-Kdw" mx1> Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/41075 X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com Status: O X-Status: you probably could not make the numbers sufficiently random Standing Bear From vortex-l-request eskimo.com Wed Feb 28 12:01:30 2001 Received: (from smartlst localhost) by mx2.eskimo.com (8.9.1a/8.8.8) id LAA29847; Wed, 28 Feb 2001 11:45:02 -0800 (PST) Resent-Date: Wed, 28 Feb 2001 11:45:02 -0800 (PST) X-Authentication-Warning: eskimo.com: billb owned process doing -bs Date: Wed, 28 Feb 2001 11:44:25 -0800 (PST) From: William Beaty To: Robert Dinse Subject: Seattle Earthquake a few mintues ago In-Reply-To: Message-ID: MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: TEXT/PLAIN; charset=US-ASCII Resent-Message-ID: <"oyDmH1.0.EI7.vKLdw" mx2> Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/41076 X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com Status: O X-Status: On Wed, 28 Feb 2001, Robert Dinse wrote: > We just had an earthquake here, 6.2 magnitude is the preliminary > estimate. Not too much apparent damage here, but news is reporting > substantial damage in industrial south seattle. I'm near the epicenter. The motions here in Renton were pretty impressive, but they seemed to be just under the threshold where REAL damage would start. A stack of copier paper fell over. A couple of books fell off the shelf. (The epicenter was somewhere nearby, we're about 20mi south of Seattle.) I wrote an algorithm for a large earthquake simulator back in 1991 while working for Dinamation (science museum exhibits,) and this quake was really eerie, since the motions felt EXACTLY the same as riding on the simulator with the waveform sequence I used. I'd basically picked it out of the air, but kept it vaguely correct as far as smooth low-freq initial P-wave wiggles followed by a more random "ride" caused by sequences of higher-freq S-waves reflecting off the topography. No earthquake sounds that I could hear, just the building squeaking. ((((((((((((((((((((( ( ( ( ( (O) ) ) ) ) ))))))))))))))))))))) William J. Beaty SCIENCE HOBBYIST website billb eskimo.com http://www.amasci.com EE/programmer/sci-exhibits science projects, tesla, weird science Seattle, WA 206-789-0775 freenrg-L taoshum-L vortex-L webhead-L From vortex-l-request eskimo.com Wed Feb 28 12:33:12 2001 Received: (from smartlst localhost) by mx1.eskimo.com (8.9.1a/8.8.8) id MAA15449; Wed, 28 Feb 2001 12:32:07 -0800 Resent-Date: Wed, 28 Feb 2001 12:32:07 -0800 Message-ID: <000d01c0a1c5$08d0ba20$0200a8c0 enterprise> From: "Steve Lajoie" To: References: Subject: Re: Seattle Earthquake a few mintues ago Date: Wed, 28 Feb 2001 12:24:47 -0800 MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-Priority: 3 X-MSMail-Priority: Normal X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook Express 5.00.2615.200 X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V5.00.2615.200 Resent-Message-ID: <"_4uLs2.0.Fn3.61Mdw" mx1> Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/41077 X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com Status: RO X-Status: Yes. I was in this earthquake, also in Renton, Washington. At first I thought "Hey, they don't have earthquakes here!" (I'm from California). Then as the building shook and the ceiling tiles came down and I could hear the cement crack, I thought "Hey, these Washington people don't know how to BUILD for earthquakes!" I was worried that it was centered on Mt. Rainer. It is a funny feeling, wondering if the building is going to fall on you or not. This quake seemed to last a LONG time. There was one point where I thought it was going to let up, but no, it shook some more. As we evacuated the building where I work, there were HUGE cracks in the wall where the 2nd floor was separating from the first floor. I had lots of plaster bits on my bald head, too. There was some damage and road blocks around a small city close to Mount Rainer. All in all a pretty good quake, even by California standards. ----- Original Message ----- From: William Beaty To: Robert Dinse Sent: Wednesday, February 28, 2001 11:44 AM Subject: Seattle Earthquake a few mintues ago > On Wed, 28 Feb 2001, Robert Dinse wrote: > > We just had an earthquake here, 6.2 magnitude is the preliminary > > estimate. Not too much apparent damage here, but news is reporting > > substantial damage in industrial south seattle. > > I'm near the epicenter. The motions here in Renton were pretty > impressive, but they seemed to be just under the threshold where REAL > damage would start. A stack of copier paper fell over. A couple of books > fell off the shelf. (The epicenter was somewhere nearby, we're about 20mi > south of Seattle.) > > I wrote an algorithm for a large earthquake simulator back in 1991 while > working for Dinamation (science museum exhibits,) and this quake was > really eerie, since the motions felt EXACTLY the same as riding on the > simulator with the waveform sequence I used. I'd basically picked it out > of the air, but kept it vaguely correct as far as smooth low-freq initial > P-wave wiggles followed by a more random "ride" caused by sequences of > higher-freq S-waves reflecting off the topography. No earthquake sounds > that I could hear, just the building squeaking. > > > ((((((((((((((((((((( ( ( ( ( (O) ) ) ) ) ))))))))))))))))))))) > William J. Beaty SCIENCE HOBBYIST website > billb eskimo.com http://www.amasci.com > EE/programmer/sci-exhibits science projects, tesla, weird science > Seattle, WA 206-789-0775 freenrg-L taoshum-L vortex-L webhead-L > > From vortex-l-request eskimo.com Wed Feb 28 12:39:46 2001 Received: (from smartlst localhost) by mx1.eskimo.com (8.9.1a/8.8.8) id MAA18558; Wed, 28 Feb 2001 12:36:23 -0800 Resent-Date: Wed, 28 Feb 2001 12:36:23 -0800 Date: Wed, 28 Feb 2001 20:35:44 +0000 From: Josef Karthauser To: vortex-l eskimo.com Subject: Re: Cryptography advance at Harvard Message-ID: <20010228203544.B891 tao.org.uk> References: <5.0.2.1.2.20010228125518.026875d0 pop.mindspring.com> <000201c0a1b8$1e871ec0$0300a8c0@rockcast> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: multipart/signed; micalg=pgp-md5; protocol="application/pgp-signature"; boundary="NDin8bjvE/0mNLFQ" Content-Disposition: inline User-Agent: Mutt/1.2.5i In-Reply-To: <000201c0a1b8$1e871ec0$0300a8c0 rockcast>; from rockcast@net-link.net on Wed, Feb 28, 2001 at 01:56:09PM -0500 Resent-Message-ID: <"AMCM91.0.pX4.65Mdw" mx1> Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/41078 X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com Status: O X-Status: --NDin8bjvE/0mNLFQ Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable On Wed, Feb 28, 2001 at 01:56:09PM -0500, Standing Bear wrote: > you probably could not make the numbers sufficiently random >=20 > Standing Bear I don't see why not. There's an algorithm devised by Yarrow that gives cryptographically random numbers :) We've got an implementation of it in FreeBSD. Joe --NDin8bjvE/0mNLFQ Content-Type: application/pgp-signature Content-Disposition: inline -----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE----- Version: GnuPG v1.0.4 (FreeBSD) Comment: For info see http://www.gnupg.org iEYEARECAAYFAjqdYR8ACgkQXVIcjOaxUBY1CwCeNDzZdPBTv6ij65MAWYMv2Pnd 1egAn3oi1Bb1D3y9AVDwev2NIXhJWRml =eELr -----END PGP SIGNATURE----- --NDin8bjvE/0mNLFQ-- From vortex-l-request eskimo.com Wed Feb 28 12:47:43 2001 Received: (from smartlst localhost) by mx1.eskimo.com (8.9.1a/8.8.8) id MAA21231; Wed, 28 Feb 2001 12:42:04 -0800 Resent-Date: Wed, 28 Feb 2001 12:42:04 -0800 From: Keasy aol.com Message-ID: Date: Wed, 28 Feb 2001 15:41:20 EST Subject: Amazing magnetic false alarm? To: energy21 listbot.com CC: vortex-l eskimo.com MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="US-ASCII" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-Mailer: AOL 5.0 for Windows sub 128 Resent-Message-ID: <"uA7Nk2.0.bB5.SAMdw" mx1> Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/41079 X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com Status: RO X-Status: Hello All, Regarding the twisting of a metal loop as it approaches a magnet, it was pointed out to me that the effect does not seem to work with a single strand wire or fishing line filament. I decided to try some small fishing line. With a 2 lb test fishing line the effect did not appear to work, but it worked well with a common sewing thread. I tied the fishing line to a door knob and the other end to a key chain ring. Then I tied the thread to the other side of the ring. After making sure there was no twist in either the fishing line or the thread I pulled on the thread. Tke ring began to spin like a top, CCW looking down the thread. This very convincing looking effect thus appears to be an artifact of the way the thread, dental floss, or whatever is drawn twisted with small filaments. I was convinced that was not the case, but looks as if I was wrong about that. Ken From vortex-l-request eskimo.com Wed Feb 28 12:54:06 2001 Received: (from smartlst localhost) by mx1.eskimo.com (8.9.1a/8.8.8) id MAA27721; Wed, 28 Feb 2001 12:51:55 -0800 Resent-Date: Wed, 28 Feb 2001 12:51:55 -0800 Mime-Version: 1.0 X-Sender: rick mail.highsurf.com Message-Id: In-Reply-To: References: Date: Wed, 28 Feb 2001 10:51:24 -1000 To: vortex-l eskimo.com From: Rick Monteverde Subject: Lifting body planes (again) Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" ; format="flowed" Resent-Message-ID: <"hPZeI1.0.2n6.gJMdw" mx1> Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/41081 X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com Status: RO X-Status: Here's the link: http://www.aeronautics.ru/ekipgal.htm Check out that Myasishchev GP-60/D Katun. - Rick Monteverde Honolulu, HI From vortex-l-request eskimo.com Wed Feb 28 12:54:28 2001 Received: (from smartlst localhost) by mx1.eskimo.com (8.9.1a/8.8.8) id MAA26077; Wed, 28 Feb 2001 12:48:55 -0800 Resent-Date: Wed, 28 Feb 2001 12:48:55 -0800 Message-ID: <02e401c0a1bf$82e5d620$09d5323f computer> From: "Frederick Sparber" To: Subject: Re: Pickle-Jar Thruster Engine Date: Wed, 28 Feb 2001 13:47:55 -0600 MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-Priority: 3 X-MSMail-Priority: Normal X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook Express 5.50.4133.2400 X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V5.50.4133.2400 Resent-Message-ID: <"2qH483.0.NN6.sGMdw" mx1> Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/41080 X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com Status: RO X-Status: While the folks are preoccupied with the Peltier phenomena. A wide mouthed jar with a perforated "plate" divider blackened on both sides so that light from a heat lamp (or such) can heat one end, and T^4 radiation can radiatively cool the other side, the gas molecules (air) Might develop some thrust due to radiometer type effects, even at ~ atmospheric pressure. A gas molecule in the vibrational/rotational state in the cold side should radiate energy/momentum in ~ 10^-8 seconds or less thus each molecule "donates" energy/momentum as photons while on the hot side, collision of molecules with the hotter (blackened) surface should exert a "kick" on it, and thus there should be a net thrust on the device. The "perforations" or a large area hole (or holes) in the low thermal conductivity plate should tend to equalize the pressure of the chambers, yet maintain a decent temperature difference on the plate surfaces. This ought to keep Horace busy for a spell. :-) Regards, Frederick From vortex-l-request eskimo.com Wed Feb 28 13:09:40 2001 Received: (from smartlst localhost) by mx2.eskimo.com (8.9.1a/8.8.8) id MAA07087; Wed, 28 Feb 2001 12:52:50 -0800 (PST) Resent-Date: Wed, 28 Feb 2001 12:52:50 -0800 (PST) Message-Id: <5.0.2.1.2.20010228155046.00a897e0 pop.mindspring.com> X-Sender: jedrothwell pop.mindspring.com X-Mailer: QUALCOMM Windows Eudora Version 5.0.2 Date: Wed, 28 Feb 2001 15:52:24 -0500 To: vortex-l eskimo.com, From: Jed Rothwell Subject: Re: Cryptography advance at Harvard In-Reply-To: <000201c0a1b8$1e871ec0$0300a8c0 rockcast> References: <5.0.2.1.2.20010228125518.026875d0 pop.mindspring.com> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"; format=flowed Resent-Message-ID: <"8MuZg3.0.ak1.PKMdw" mx2> Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/41082 X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com Status: O X-Status: Standing Bear wrote: >you probably could not make the numbers sufficiently random In military cryptography, perfectly random numbers are generated by monitoring radioactive samples. - Jed From vortex-l-request eskimo.com Wed Feb 28 13:30:30 2001 Received: (from smartlst localhost) by mx2.eskimo.com (8.9.1a/8.8.8) id MAA07912; Wed, 28 Feb 2001 12:55:52 -0800 (PST) Resent-Date: Wed, 28 Feb 2001 12:55:52 -0800 (PST) Message-Id: <5.0.2.1.2.20010228155246.026853f8 pop.mindspring.com> X-Sender: jedrothwell pop.mindspring.com X-Mailer: QUALCOMM Windows Eudora Version 5.0.2 Date: Wed, 28 Feb 2001 15:55:27 -0500 To: vortex-l eskimo.com, From: Jed Rothwell Subject: Re: Cryptography advance at Harvard Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"; format=flowed Resent-Message-ID: <"iFuNh2.0.Sx1.FNMdw" mx2> Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/41083 X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com Status: O X-Status: I wrote: "In military cryptography, perfectly random numbers are generated by monitoring radioactive samples." I meant to add that Dr. Rabin at Harvard must have a similar scheme in mind for his satellite. If they can afford a satellite, they can afford a little Am or U! - Jed From vortex-l-request eskimo.com Wed Feb 28 14:21:37 2001 Received: (from smartlst localhost) by mx1.eskimo.com (8.9.1a/8.8.8) id OAA05120; Wed, 28 Feb 2001 14:13:29 -0800 Resent-Date: Wed, 28 Feb 2001 14:13:29 -0800 Message-ID: <3A9D6A73.4A675A25 ix.netcom.com> Date: Wed, 28 Feb 2001 15:15:51 -0600 From: Edmund Storms X-Mailer: Mozilla 4.5 (Macintosh; U; PPC) X-Accept-Language: en,pdf MIME-Version: 1.0 To: vortex-l eskimo.com Subject: a new virus Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii; x-mac-type="54455854"; x-mac-creator="4D4F5353" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Resent-Message-ID: <"ce2Ug1.0.oF1.9WNdw" mx1> Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/41084 X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com Status: RO X-Status: Once again the PC is under attack. Thank heavens for the Mac. Ed Storms ----Original Message----- From: Arthur G. Foster [mailto:arthurgf iopener.net] Sent: Monday, February 26, 2001 5:13 PM To: ken ucomm.utah.edu; wsf@ak.net; russell@avalon.net; Subject: Fwd: For your information VIRUS ALERT Take the necessary precautions as suggested below, everyone. agf ----------- Original Message ----------- From: "Katy Huff" Just in from a reliable source: Subject: A new virus warning A new virus has just been discovered that has been classified by Microsoft and by McAfee as the most destructive virus ever! This virus was discovered yesterday afternoon by McAfee and No vaccine has yet been developed. This virus simply destroys Sector Zero from the hard disk, where vital information for its functioning are stored. This virus acts in the following manner: It sends itself automatically to all contacts on your list with the title "A Virtual Card for You". As soon as the supposed virtual card is opened, the computer freezes so that the user has to reboot. When the ctrl+alt+del keys or the reset button are pressed, the virus destroys Sector Zero, thus permanently destroying the hard disk. Yesterday, in just a few hours, this virus caused panic in New York, according to news broadcast by CNN (www.cnn.com). An employee of Microsoft itself received this alert. So don't open any mails with the subject "AVirtual Card for You". As soon as you get the mail, delete it. Please pass on this mail to all your friends. Forward this to everyone in your address book. I would rather receive this 25 times than not at all. Also, Intel announced that a new and very destructive virus as discovered recently. If you receive an e-mail called "An Internet Flower For You" do not open it. Delete it right away! This virus removes all dynamic link libraries (.dll files) from your comp John G JGENOVESI NEO.RR.COM From vortex-l-request eskimo.com Wed Feb 28 14:31:29 2001 Received: (from smartlst localhost) by mx1.eskimo.com (8.9.1a/8.8.8) id OAA13256; Wed, 28 Feb 2001 14:28:27 -0800 Resent-Date: Wed, 28 Feb 2001 14:28:27 -0800 Message-ID: <3A9D7D36.4992AD60 bellsouth.net> Date: Wed, 28 Feb 2001 17:35:34 -0500 From: Terry Blanton X-Mailer: Mozilla 4.73 [en] (WinNT; U) X-Accept-Language: en MIME-Version: 1.0 To: vortex-l eskimo.com Subject: Re: Seattle Earthquake a few mintues ago References: <000d01c0a1c5$08d0ba20$0200a8c0@enterprise> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Resent-Message-ID: <"KAAiO2.0.1F3.BkNdw" mx1> Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/41085 X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com Status: RO X-Status: Steve Lajoie wrote: > > Yes. I was in this earthquake, also in Renton, Washington. > > At first I thought "Hey, they don't have earthquakes here!" (I'm from > California). > > Then as the building shook and the ceiling tiles came down and I could hear > the cement crack, I thought "Hey, these Washington people don't know how > to BUILD for earthquakes!" > > I was worried that it was centered on Mt. Rainer. Yes, that would have given Gordon Michael Scallion a thrill! If you don't know: http://www.newage.com.au/library/scallion.html Terry From vortex-l-request eskimo.com Wed Feb 28 14:42:38 2001 Received: (from smartlst localhost) by mx1.eskimo.com (8.9.1a/8.8.8) id OAA17771; Wed, 28 Feb 2001 14:37:00 -0800 Resent-Date: Wed, 28 Feb 2001 14:37:00 -0800 Message-Id: <5.0.2.1.2.20010228172725.02678bd0 pop.mindspring.com> X-Sender: jedrothwell pop.mindspring.com X-Mailer: QUALCOMM Windows Eudora Version 5.0.2 Date: Wed, 28 Feb 2001 17:36:55 -0500 To: vortex-l eskimo.com From: Jed Rothwell Subject: Re: a new virus In-Reply-To: <3A9D6A73.4A675A25 ix.netcom.com> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"; format=flowed Resent-Message-ID: <"lbU9B1.0.WL4.BsNdw" mx1> Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/41087 X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com Status: O X-Status: Edmund Storms wrote: >Once again the PC is under attack. Thank heavens for the >Mac. Increased use of Linux and other PC platform operating systems will also curb computer viruses. They do this by increasing cybernetic biodiversity, as it were, and also because they are open-source, so many people can look for weaknesses in the code. Within the confines of the Windows OS, the use of different mail programs other Microsoft Outlook will help prevent virus propagation. Microsoft and Intel's dominance has left computers vulnerable to computer viruses. That isn't Microsoft's fault, and as far as I know the issue was not raised at the anti-trust trial. I expect that Microsoft's hegemony will decline in the coming years, reducing the threat of viruses. - Jed From vortex-l-request eskimo.com Wed Feb 28 14:43:17 2001 Received: (from smartlst localhost) by mx1.eskimo.com (8.9.1a/8.8.8) id OAA17547; Wed, 28 Feb 2001 14:36:34 -0800 Resent-Date: Wed, 28 Feb 2001 14:36:34 -0800 Mime-Version: 1.0 X-Sender: rick mail.highsurf.com Message-Id: In-Reply-To: References: Date: Wed, 28 Feb 2001 12:35:54 -1000 To: vortex-l eskimo.com From: Rick Monteverde Subject: Re: Amazing magnetic false alarm? Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" ; format="flowed" Resent-Message-ID: <"S4H3t.0._H4.lrNdw" mx1> Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/41086 X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com Status: O X-Status: Hi Ken - Previously you had written: > I am personally convinced this is NOT a result of torsion in the >suspension string, and if you do the experiment I think you will be too. >Also, I did the experiment with a stiff wire suspending the ring and floated >the magnet on a small "raft' in water -- the magnet/raft turned CW. Twist in a string can't account for the action of the magnet on a raft. What's up with that? - Rick Monteverde Honolulu, HI >Hello All, > Regarding the twisting of a metal loop as it approaches a magnet, it was >pointed out to me that the effect does not seem to work with a single strand >wire or fishing line filament. I decided to try some small fishing line. > With a 2 lb test fishing line the effect did not appear to work, but it >worked well with a common sewing thread. > I tied the fishing line to a door knob and the other end to a key chain >ring. Then I tied the thread to the other side of the ring. > After making sure there was no twist in either the fishing line or the >thread I pulled on the thread. Tke ring began to spin like a top, CCW >looking down the thread. > This very convincing looking effect thus appears to be an artifact of >the way the thread, dental floss, or whatever is drawn twisted with small >filaments. I was convinced that was not the case, but looks as if I was >wrong about that. > > > Ken From vortex-l-request eskimo.com Wed Feb 28 15:13:47 2001 Received: (from smartlst localhost) by mx1.eskimo.com (8.9.1a/8.8.8) id PAA02276; Wed, 28 Feb 2001 15:08:45 -0800 Resent-Date: Wed, 28 Feb 2001 15:08:45 -0800 X-Authentication-Warning: eskimo.com: billb owned process doing -bs Date: Wed, 28 Feb 2001 15:07:08 -0800 (PST) From: William Beaty Reply-To: William Beaty To: vortex-l eskimo.com Subject: Re: a new virus, VIRUS HOAX! In-Reply-To: <3A9D6A73.4A675A25 ix.netcom.com> Message-ID: MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: TEXT/PLAIN; charset=US-ASCII Resent-Message-ID: <"8FrdE1.0.NZ.yJOdw" mx1> Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/41088 X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com Status: O X-Status: On Wed, 28 Feb 2001, ES wrote: > Once again the PC is under attack. Thank heavens for the > Mac. > Ed Storms Nope. Fake virus warnings. You can't endanger your computer by simply opening an email message. You have to open a message attachment in order to become infected. Fake virus warnings are such a problem that there are many websites devoted to fighting against them. You might want to send these URLS to whoever is sending these fake "crying wolf" messages to you: Norton antivirus: virus hoaxes http://www.symantec.com/avcenter/hoax.html Hoax Warnings http://www.datafellows.com/virus-info/hoax/ Virus Myths http://vmyths.com/hoax.cfm Urban legends: "email memes" http://www.snopes2.com/inboxer/ Thought Virus Note that the warning message *IS* the virus. It infected your brain, and it forced you to send copies of itself to many other people. Fake virus warnings are infectious "memes" which make you do things that you shouldn't. How to recognize a fake warning? Well, it's not the business of any individual to distribute virus warnings in the first place, especially if they do it thoughtlessly without knowing if the warning is even real. Therefore you can't go wrong in assuming that ALL of these warnings are hoaxes and rumors, and are caused by people who have a bad case of the "false authority syndrome." Unless the warning comes from your ISP or your company IT department, assume it's a galloping delusion being spread by internet newbies who don't know any better. Second, does the received message refer to a website? It's easy for people to construct hoaxes, and other people are willing to spread these "dire warnings" far and wide, but it's much harder to construct a false website, since this lets authorities know who started the rumor. So, if the warning message doesn't refer to real websites, just delete the stupid thing. Third, does the message say "don't open these emails"? That's what the false warnings usually say (ever since the venerable "good times virus" hoax of 1996.) It's still safe to open emails, just be careful about opening attachments. ((((((((((((((((((((( ( ( ( ( (O) ) ) ) ) ))))))))))))))))))))) William J. Beaty SCIENCE HOBBYIST website billb eskimo.com http://www.amasci.com EE/programmer/sci-exhibits science projects, tesla, weird science Seattle, WA 206-789-0775 freenrg-L taoshum-L vortex-L webhead-L From vortex-l-request eskimo.com Wed Feb 28 15:48:03 2001 Received: (from smartlst localhost) by mx1.eskimo.com (8.9.1a/8.8.8) id PAA20670; Wed, 28 Feb 2001 15:42:21 -0800 Resent-Date: Wed, 28 Feb 2001 15:42:21 -0800 Date: Wed, 28 Feb 2001 18:42:08 -0500 (EST) From: Jim Uban Message-Id: <200102282342.SAA20848 world.std.com> To: vortex-l eskimo.com Subject: Re: mechanical antigravity not discredited? Resent-Message-ID: <"i-jut3.0.u25.TpOdw" mx1> Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/41089 X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com Status: RO X-Status: Hi Rick, If you go to the referenced paper by Prof. Laithwaite on that page, here is what he (and associate) say they found experimentally: "To get an impressive reduction in centrifugal force you need a large heavy wheel with a very thin rim, virtually no spokes or middle, running very fast and being precessed slowly round a small radius." "Experimentally, with a high quality wheel, precessing on a radius about twice that of the wheel, with a spin in excess of 100 times the rate of precession, we have recorded centrifugal forces of less than one tenth of that anticipated from calculation." So, the required parameters may not have been present in your experiment.. Jim .............................. > Date: Tue, 27 Feb 2001 16:27:26 -1000 > From: Rick Monteverde > > I just did experiments with precessing gyros on the end of a torsion > armature. The centrifugal force "seemed" normal to me. It's easy to > see this by hanging the precessing gyro from its tip by a string. As > it revolves around, it displaces itself outwards due to the > centrifugal force. It looks pretty weird, because no not only is the > gyro hanging out sideways and not displacing the string so as to > center its mass under the suspension point, it actually pulls out > further in the 'other' direction due to the centrifugal force. I > don't think it would be trivial to measure the centrifugal force in > such a setup, but the gut sensation I got from playing with gyros is > that it's definitely there and it's at least in the vicinity of > normal, and certainly not "anomalously vanishing" in my experience. > . . . > > Off the website: > > This is precisely what Prof. E. Laithwaite discovered in precessing > gyroscopes ! The precession of a gyroscope at right angles to its own > axis of spin not only occurs independently from the physical location > of the axis of precession, which is expected from our using affine > vector spaces, but with an anomalously vanishing centrifuge force, > which also depends upon the radius to this axis. > . . . > > - Rick Monteverde > Honolulu, HI > > From vortex-l-request eskimo.com Wed Feb 28 16:35:12 2001 Received: (from smartlst localhost) by mx1.eskimo.com (8.9.1a/8.8.8) id QAA15716; Wed, 28 Feb 2001 16:31:56 -0800 Resent-Date: Wed, 28 Feb 2001 16:31:56 -0800 Message-ID: <3A9D985D.6CAC91BC verisoft.com.tr> Date: Thu, 01 Mar 2001 02:31:25 +0200 From: hamdi ucar X-Mailer: Mozilla 4.7 [en] (Win98; I) X-Accept-Language: en-US MIME-Version: 1.0 To: vortex Subject: Re: a new virus, VIRUS HOAX! References: Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Resent-Message-ID: <"jbs1M.0.Jr3.xXPdw" mx1> Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/41091 X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com Status: RO X-Status: William Beaty wrote: > [snip] > You can't endanger your computer by simply opening an email message. You > have to open a message attachment in order to become infected. > Most of time, yes, but it is possible to embed some malicious script code(i.e.virus) directly in the mail (not the attachment) which circumvents email security measures and only depends to "low" security settings belong web pages stored on the computer. In this case, browser may ask you or not ask at all (if lower security set by user) to run the script having so called ActiveX components. These vulnerabilities are known by Microsoft but still ignored. Some of these tricks are discovered and shown at www .guninski.com Regards, hamdi ucar From vortex-l-request eskimo.com Wed Feb 28 17:00:47 2001 Received: (from smartlst localhost) by mx1.eskimo.com (8.9.1a/8.8.8) id QAA30212; Wed, 28 Feb 2001 16:56:35 -0800 Resent-Date: Wed, 28 Feb 2001 16:56:35 -0800 From: Keasy aol.com Message-ID: <4f.80fc953.27cef81d aol.com> Date: Wed, 28 Feb 2001 19:55:57 EST Subject: Re: Amazing magnetic false alarm? To: vortex-l eskimo.com MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="US-ASCII" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-Mailer: AOL 5.0 for Windows sub 128 Resent-Message-ID: <"GgT2C1.0.yN7.2vPdw" mx1> Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/41093 X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com Status: RO X-Status: In a message dated 2/28/01 4:16:58 PM Pacific Standard Time, rick highsurf.com writes: > > I am personally convinced this is NOT a result of torsion in the > >suspension string, and if you do the experiment I think you will be too. > >Also, I did the experiment with a stiff wire suspending the ring and > floated > >the magnet on a small "raft' in water -- the magnet/raft turned CW. > > Twist in a string can't account for the action of the magnet on a > raft. What's up with that? > Rick, Good question. I was using a fairly stiff single wire to suspend the ring over the magnet on a raft. When I had the ring approach the magnet, the raft turned CW some 10 to 20 degrees. Because the mass of the magnet/raft, it is much more difficult to turn with a given torque (compared to the ring), so a few degrees of turn in the CW direction seemed to me a confirmation of the effect. It did the same thing twice, but in retrospect it likely was just a little random turning that was unfortunately in the direction I was expecting. Ken From vortex-l-request eskimo.com Wed Feb 28 17:01:25 2001 Received: (from smartlst localhost) by mx2.eskimo.com (8.9.1a/8.8.8) id QAA10375; Wed, 28 Feb 2001 16:28:59 -0800 (PST) Resent-Date: Wed, 28 Feb 2001 16:28:59 -0800 (PST) Mime-Version: 1.0 X-Sender: rick mail.highsurf.com Message-Id: In-Reply-To: <5.0.2.1.2.20010228172725.02678bd0 pop.mindspring.com> References: <5.0.2.1.2.20010228172725.02678bd0 pop.mindspring.com> Date: Wed, 28 Feb 2001 14:27:28 -1000 To: vortex-l eskimo.com From: Rick Monteverde Subject: Re: a new virus <- HOAX, ignore Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" ; format="flowed" Resent-Message-ID: <"erIql2.0.kX2.4VPdw" mx2> Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/41090 X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com Status: RO X-Status: From the "virus warning" letter: >Please pass on this mail to all your friends. >Forward this to everyone in your address book. Those lines right there are a dead giveaway that this is a hoax. Also, the lack of any *links* to any virus sites is also a giveaway. Please folks, think first, check the antivirus folks second, and do NOT propagate these hoaxes. Now here's a real link to Symantec listing this "virus" as a hoax: http://service1.symantec.com/sarc/sarc.nsf/html/Virtual.Card.for.You.html - Rick Monteverde Honolulu, HI From vortex-l-request eskimo.com Wed Feb 28 17:04:47 2001 Received: (from smartlst localhost) by mx1.eskimo.com (8.9.1a/8.8.8) id QAA30023; Wed, 28 Feb 2001 16:56:20 -0800 Resent-Date: Wed, 28 Feb 2001 16:56:20 -0800 X-Authentication-Warning: smtp1.ihug.co.nz: Host 203-173-204-188.akl.ihugultra.co.nz [203.173.204.188] claimed to be ihug.co.nz Message-ID: <3A9D9E02.6F41D8FC ihug.co.nz> Date: Thu, 01 Mar 2001 13:55:30 +1300 From: John Berry X-Mailer: Mozilla 4.75 [en] (Win98; U) X-Accept-Language: en MIME-Version: 1.0 To: vortex-l eskimo.com Subject: Re: a new virus, VIRUS HOAX! References: Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Resent-Message-ID: <"9soYX.0.oK7.puPdw" mx1> Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/41092 X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com Status: RO X-Status: Yeah, it is a hoax, if it was real there would be something on symantecs site about it. Though your wrong about attachments. You would be right if microsoft weren't so stupid See: http://service1.symantec.com/sarc/sarc.nsf/html/WScript.KakWorm.B.html KAK worm: The worm utilizes a known Microsoft Outlook Express security hole so that a viral file is created on the system without having to run any attachment. Simply reading the received email message will cause the virus to be placed on the system. William Beaty wrote: > On Wed, 28 Feb 2001, ES wrote: > > > Once again the PC is under attack. Thank heavens for the > > Mac. > > Ed Storms > > Nope. Fake virus warnings. > > You can't endanger your computer by simply opening an email message. You > have to open a message attachment in order to become infected. > > Fake virus warnings are such a problem that there are many websites > devoted to fighting against them. You might want to send these URLS to > whoever is sending these fake "crying wolf" messages to you: > > Norton antivirus: virus hoaxes > http://www.symantec.com/avcenter/hoax.html > > Hoax Warnings > http://www.datafellows.com/virus-info/hoax/ > > Virus Myths > http://vmyths.com/hoax.cfm > > Urban legends: "email memes" > http://www.snopes2.com/inboxer/ > > Thought Virus > > > Note that the warning message *IS* the virus. It infected your brain, and > it forced you to send copies of itself to many other people. Fake virus > warnings are infectious "memes" which make you do things that you > shouldn't. > > How to recognize a fake warning? Well, it's not the business of any > individual to distribute virus warnings in the first place, especially if > they do it thoughtlessly without knowing if the warning is even real. > Therefore you can't go wrong in assuming that ALL of these warnings are > hoaxes and rumors, and are caused by people who have a bad case of the > "false authority syndrome." Unless the warning comes from your ISP or your > company IT department, assume it's a galloping delusion being spread by > internet newbies who don't know any better. > > Second, does the received message refer to a website? It's easy for > people to construct hoaxes, and other people are willing to spread these > "dire warnings" far and wide, but it's much harder to construct a false > website, since this lets authorities know who started the rumor. So, if > the warning message doesn't refer to real websites, just delete the stupid > thing. Third, does the message say "don't open these emails"? That's > what the false warnings usually say (ever since the venerable "good times > virus" hoax of 1996.) It's still safe to open emails, just be careful > about opening attachments. > > ((((((((((((((((((((( ( ( ( ( (O) ) ) ) ) ))))))))))))))))))))) > William J. Beaty SCIENCE HOBBYIST website > billb eskimo.com http://www.amasci.com > EE/programmer/sci-exhibits science projects, tesla, weird science > Seattle, WA 206-789-0775 freenrg-L taoshum-L vortex-L webhead-L From vortex-l-request eskimo.com Wed Feb 28 17:54:25 2001 Received: (from smartlst localhost) by mx1.eskimo.com (8.9.1a/8.8.8) id RAA28988; Wed, 28 Feb 2001 17:52:04 -0800 Resent-Date: Wed, 28 Feb 2001 17:52:04 -0800 X-Apparently-From: Message-Id: <4.2.0.58.20010228200118.00c0cc80 postoffice.swbell.net> X-Sender: cjford1 pop.mail.yahoo.com X-Mailer: QUALCOMM Windows Eudora Pro Version 4.2.0.58 Date: Wed, 28 Feb 2001 20:03:00 -0600 To: vortex-l eskimo.com From: Charles Ford Subject: Re: Cryptography advance at Harvard In-Reply-To: <5.0.2.1.2.20010228155046.00a897e0 pop.mindspring.com> References: <000201c0a1b8$1e871ec0$0300a8c0 rockcast> <5.0.2.1.2.20010228125518.026875d0 pop.mindspring.com> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"; format=flowed Resent-Message-ID: <"CHgjJ2.0.i47.2jQdw" mx1> Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/41094 X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com Status: O X-Status: True random noise can also be achieved with a diode and a transistor and a couple of resistors. It is a lot cheaper and has a near infinite half life :-) At 03:52 PM 2/28/01 -0500, you wrote: >Standing Bear wrote: > >>you probably could not make the numbers sufficiently random > >In military cryptography, perfectly random numbers are generated by >monitoring radioactive samples. > >- Jed _________________________________________________________ Do You Yahoo!? Get your free yahoo.com address at http://mail.yahoo.com From vortex-l-request eskimo.com Wed Feb 28 18:23:11 2001 Received: (from smartlst localhost) by mx1.eskimo.com (8.9.1a/8.8.8) id SAA11744; Wed, 28 Feb 2001 18:19:05 -0800 Resent-Date: Wed, 28 Feb 2001 18:19:05 -0800 Message-ID: <005001c0a1f5$20fa2de0$b43dee3f default> From: "Nick Reiter" To: References: <5.0.1.4.0.20010228083356.03cd9240 earthtech.org> Subject: Re: Peltier-Reiter effect/ remote control Date: Wed, 28 Feb 2001 21:12:52 -0500 MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-Priority: 3 X-MSMail-Priority: Normal X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook Express 5.00.2919.6600 X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V5.00.2919.6600 Resent-Message-ID: <"ni0bn2.0.Ot2.O6Rdw" mx1> Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/41095 X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com Status: O X-Status: Scott, Horace, Charlie, Rick, Pete; et al et al I ordered a little IR remote relay and transmitter along with some other parts needed to put together the "lead-less" ultimate issue answerer (remote controlled battery pack powered Peltier). Peltiers should be in from Melcor next week. Memo to Scott L; Under closer inspection, the copper foil I placed an order for is still not .0005" thick, but .001". My oops. I searched for thinner through some of the standards, McMaster Carr, etc. No cigar. Would it be possible to snail mail me a little bit for strips? I will pay for postage and whatever it may have cost your lab to partition me off some. Mailing address: 412 N. Main St. Gibsonburg, Ohio 43431 Also for Scott L. - The only other (remotely) feasible notion I have is the possibility that the ultrathin foil deadens the motion of the balance pan by its sag. If it would be possible, could you check the following: With your Peltier and thin foil lead assembly in place on the pan, place upon the Peltier a very small (perhaps 5 to 10 mg) pre-measured mass. Then see if the balance pan registers the full pre-measured weight increase, or if it is now dead-locked by the foil sag. Just a long shot, but if you don't have a chance, I understand, and will try it when I get some foil strips from you. I do appreciate the diligent effort from Scott, Charlie, Ken, and all others who have participated in this little adventure. Thanks and kudos all around. NR From vortex-l-request eskimo.com Wed Feb 28 19:18:06 2001 Received: (from smartlst localhost) by mx1.eskimo.com (8.9.1a/8.8.8) id TAA06549; Wed, 28 Feb 2001 19:14:39 -0800 Resent-Date: Wed, 28 Feb 2001 19:14:39 -0800 Message-ID: <386124848.983416465045.JavaMail.root web569-mc> Date: Wed, 28 Feb 2001 22:14:25 -0500 (EST) From: Mark Goldes To: vortex-l eskimo.com Subject: Pickle-Jars to the Stars! Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain X-Mailer: mail.com X-Originating-IP: 209.249.70.189 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit X-MIME-Autoconverted: from quoted-printable to 8bit by mx1.eskimo.com id TAA06501 Resent-Message-ID: <"Uq5Zw1.0.Bc1.UwRdw" mx1> Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/41096 X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com Status: RO X-Status: Published by the Coalition for Plasma Science, Vol.3, No.1 March, 2000 For more information: Call Toll Free 1–877–752–7627 E-mail us at CPS plasmacoalition.org Visit our website at: http://www.plasmacoalition.org Plasma Page Plasma Page University of Washington Researches Plasmas for Outer and Inner Space It sounds like a “droid” straight out of Star Wars. That’s not a coincidence because a new plasma propulsion system dubbed M2P2 can greatly boost spacecraft speeds, perhaps to 10 times the velocity of the space shuttle, University of Washing-ton scientists believe. NASA’s Institute for Advanced Con-cepts last week awarded a two-year, $500,000 grant to a UW team headed by geophysicist Robert Winglee to continue research on Mini-Magnetospheric Plasma Propulsion. If laboratory work and tests in space succeed, he hopes in 10 years to launch an M2P2-equipped spacecraft that would become the first from Earth to leave the solar system. That would be quite a feat, considering the craft would have to overtake Voyager I, launched in 1977 and now about 6.8 billion miles away, but still within the solar system. Their system would use a plasma chamber about the size of a large pickle jar, perhaps 10 inches by 10 inches, attached to a spacecraft. Solar cells and solenoid coils would power the creation of a dense magnetized plasma that would create an electromagnetic field 10 to 12 miles in radius around the spacecraft. The field would interact with and be dragged by the solar wind. Creating a field would be akin to raising a giant sail and harnessing the solar wind, which moves at 780,000 to 1.8 million miles an hour - or “here to Washington D.C. in 10 seconds,” Winglee said. If tests on M2P2 succeed, Winglee expects the system’s first use in space will come on a mission NASA has already scheduled. “If it works, we’ll have some real fun then,” he said. For further information please contact Robert Winglee at winglee geophys.washington.edu. The University of Washington is also using plasmas in biomedical research to coat medical implants in a way that will prevent the body from rejecting them as foreign material. More than half a billion medical devices, ranging from simple catheters to heart valves and artificial hips, are implanted in patients every year. Often these devices deliver only temporary fixes. The body’s natural response to foreign material - whether it’s a medical implant or a bullet - is to wall it off with scar-like tissue. Frequently this reaction disrupts the device’s performance and necessitates further medical intervention. The M2P2 design mimics nature. The sun creates mini-magnetospheres or ‘magnetic clouds’ during coronal mass ejections, as seen in the figure. A team lead by University of Washing-ton bioengineer Buddy Ratner has devised a complex plasma-based process for coating artificial materials so their surfaces can attract and bind specific proteins, which trigger the body’s natural healing processes, aiding acceptance of the foreign material. The final coating of a Teflon-like flouropolymer is applied through a gas-phase plasma deposition process. For further information on this process please contact Buddy Ratner at ratner uweb.engr.washington.edu. Air Monitor Uses Plasmas to Detect Hazardous Elements Researchers at the Department of Energy’s Los Alamos National Laboratory have developed a portable, ultrasensitive air particulate monitor that uses plasma to instantly and continuously identify virtually all known constituent elements in the periodic table and their relative concentrations. “I’ve no doubt that this portable instrument will greatly reduce, or in some cases eliminate, the risk of worker expo-sure to hazards related to operating processes,” said principal investigator Yixian Duan of Los Alamos’ Analytical Chemistry Sciences Group. “The instru-ment is ideal for work sites that handle hazardous materials.” The inexpensive device, which can be used indoors or outdoors, takes advantage of the fact that all elements in the periodic table have well-characterized atomic energy levels. A miniature microwave plasma source in the device excites the atoms, permitting quick, easy identifica-tion of air particulate samples based on the energy levels of those elements. With a minor modification, the device also can identify elements in solution. The monitor is ideal for facilities that handle highly hazardous materials such as beryllium, Duan said. Exposure of workers who are sensitized to beryllium can lead to chronic beryllium disease, which scars the lungs and can be fatal. The real-time feedback this monitor provides allows workers to avoid overex-posure. Contact: Ternel Martinez, 505-665- 7778 http://www.lanl.gov/worldview/ ______________________________________________ FREE Personalized Email at Mail.com Sign up at http://www.mail.com/?sr=signup From vortex-l-request eskimo.com Wed Feb 28 19:58:32 2001 Received: (from smartlst localhost) by mx1.eskimo.com (8.9.1a/8.8.8) id TAA24841; Wed, 28 Feb 2001 19:53:53 -0800 Resent-Date: Wed, 28 Feb 2001 19:53:53 -0800 Date: Wed, 28 Feb 2001 21:55:11 -0600 From: Scott Little Subject: Re: Peltier-Reiter effect/ remote control In-reply-to: <005001c0a1f5$20fa2de0$b43dee3f default> X-Sender: little earthtech.org To: vortex-l eskimo.com Message-id: <5.0.2.1.0.20010228215255.03c82988 earthtech.org> MIME-version: 1.0 X-Mailer: QUALCOMM Windows Eudora Version 5.0.2 Content-type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"; format=flowed References: <5.0.1.4.0.20010228083356.03cd9240 earthtech.org> Resent-Message-ID: <"mX_nV1.0.z36.GVSdw" mx1> Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/41097 X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com Status: O X-Status: At 09:12 PM 2/28/2001 -0500, you wrote: the standards, McMaster Carr, etc. No cigar. Would it be possible to snail >mail me a little bit for strips? I will pay for postage and whatever it may >have cost your lab to partition me off some. > >Mailing address: > >412 N. Main St. >Gibsonburg, Ohio >43431 Will go out tomorrow...no charge! > With your Peltier and thin foil lead assembly in place on the pan, place >upon the Peltier a very small (perhaps 5 to 10 mg) pre-measured mass. Then >see if the balance pan registers the full pre-measured weight increase... Seems rather unlikely that the foil would somehow retard the balance motion...but it's easy to do the test. Will report back tomorrow. Glad to see you're doing the onboard battery test. That should clinch it. Scott Little EarthTech International, Inc. 4030 Braker Lane West, Suite 300 Austin TX 78759 512-342-2185 512-346-3017 (FAX) http://www.earthtech.org From vortex-l-request eskimo.com Wed Feb 28 20:54:39 2001 Received: (from smartlst localhost) by mx1.eskimo.com (8.9.1a/8.8.8) id UAA25610; Wed, 28 Feb 2001 20:54:01 -0800 Resent-Date: Wed, 28 Feb 2001 20:54:01 -0800 Message-ID: <20010301045357.17270.qmail web2104.mail.yahoo.com> Date: Wed, 28 Feb 2001 20:53:57 -0800 (PST) From: Michael Schaffer Subject: Re: mechanical antigravity not discredited? To: vortex-l eskimo.com In-Reply-To: MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Resent-Message-ID: <"1-NgE3.0.-F6.fNTdw" mx1> Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/41098 X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com Status: O X-Status: > What is striking to most people watching a gyroscope precess in the > horizontal plane, standing in the air with only one of its sides resting > on a vertical tip, is that it seems to defy gravity. Enters the blase' > physicist who explains away the phenomenon as a cancellation of the > precessional torque with that between the gravity of the gyroscope and the > vertical tip. Et voila'! What the blase' physicist failed to see is that The belief that gyroscopic action and angular momentum are unexplained phenomena recurrs on Vortex. Quite the contrary. In my first year college physics course the relation between angular momentum and torque was all derived starting from F = ma and a single particle. It's a bit tedious, but this didactic technique certainly demystified the subject for me. ===== Michael J. Schaffer __________________________________________________ Do You Yahoo!? Get email at your own domain with Yahoo! Mail. http://personal.mail.yahoo.com/ From vortex-l-request eskimo.com Wed Feb 28 21:58:26 2001 Received: (from smartlst localhost) by mx1.eskimo.com (8.9.1a/8.8.8) id VAA09139; Wed, 28 Feb 2001 21:56:57 -0800 Resent-Date: Wed, 28 Feb 2001 21:56:57 -0800 From: Robin van Spaandonk To: vortex-l eskimo.com Subject: Re: mechanical antigravity not discredited? Date: Thu, 01 Mar 2001 16:56:38 +1100 Organization: Improving Message-ID: <2vor9tkrdor6l6r22m5fp9a5ihdkt7oohv 4ax.com> References: <20010301045357.17270.qmail@web2104.mail.yahoo.com> In-Reply-To: <20010301045357.17270.qmail web2104.mail.yahoo.com> X-Mailer: Forte Agent 1.8/32.548 MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit X-MIME-Autoconverted: from quoted-printable to 8bit by mx1.eskimo.com id VAA09091 Resent-Message-ID: <"h4IjM1.0.fE2.eIUdw" mx1> Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/41099 X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com In reply to Michael Schaffer's message of Wed, 28 Feb 2001 20:53:57 -0800 (PST): [snip] >The belief that gyroscopic action and angular momentum are unexplained >phenomena recurrs on Vortex. Quite the contrary. In my first year college >physics course the relation between angular momentum and torque was all derived >starting from F = ma and a single particle. It's a bit tedious, but this >didactic technique certainly demystified the subject for me. [snip] I hope it didn't involve use of the mathematical cross product. (This mathematical function was clearly invented to describe existing physical phenomena, so if used to "explain" those phenomena, then the person doing the explaining is guilty of circular reasoning). (Ok, now I'm out on a limb, you might as well saw it off ;). Regards, Robin van Spaandonk A Future For Humanity see: http://users.bigpond.net.au/rvanspaa/ From vortex-l-request eskimo.com Wed Feb 28 22:30:18 2001 Received: (from smartlst localhost) by mx1.eskimo.com (8.9.1a/8.8.8) id WAA26984; Wed, 28 Feb 2001 22:28:02 -0800 Resent-Date: Wed, 28 Feb 2001 22:28:02 -0800 Message-ID: <037701c0a210$6a31d100$09d5323f computer> From: "Frederick Sparber" To: Subject: Re: Bubble-Wrap Radiometer-Type Propulsion Sail Date: Wed, 28 Feb 2001 23:27:04 -0600 MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-Priority: 3 X-MSMail-Priority: Normal X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook Express 5.50.4133.2400 X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V5.50.4133.2400 Resent-Message-ID: <"szCJG3.0.Sb6.nlUdw" mx1> Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/41100 X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com If I interpret the action of the Crookes Radiometer correctly, sheets of "Bubble Wrap" made of clear Teflon blackened on one side should function as a Propulsion Sail pushed by Solar or other light/photon sources. This "waffle" type construction will allow for isolating puncture caused by high energy particles/dust in space. In Space thrusts of several Pascals/Meter^2 should be possible with Solar or other photon sources. Regards, Frederick